 | |
List Price: $9.98 | | Label: Paramount
Salesrank: 22737
Released: March 18, 2003 |
| Our Price: $3.08 |
| Used Price: $0.01 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
Katie holmes is a beautiful college student haunted by the mysterious disappearance of embry a former boyfriend. Benjamin brat is a struggling detective. Someone tied to embrys past starts leaving clues & they are drawn into a world of mystery & plunged into a web of desire deceit and murder. Studio: Paramount Home Video Release Date: 01/04/2005 Starring: Katie Holmes Tony Goldwyn Run time: 99 minutes Rating: Pg13 Director: Stephen Gaghan
Description of Abandon:
You can admire Abandon more for what it attempts, as opposed to what it actually achieves. Making his directorial debut after winning an Oscar® for scripting Traffic, screenwriter Stephen Gaghan emphasizes character dynamics and time-shifting structure over action and plotting, and the results are intelligent but oddly detached. As a recovering alcoholic detective (Benjamin Bratt) is assigned to reopen the two-year-old disappearance of an arrogant college student, we're drawn into the thoughts and emotions of the missing person's former girlfriend (Katie Holmes), whose behavior--especially when her volatile ex-boyfriend suddenly reappears--is key to the slowly unfolding mystery. Abandon is all about mood and atmosphere--shadowy gloom is dominant throughout--and viewers may grow impatient as the tissue-thin plot leads to an anticlimactic revelation. Still, Gaghan's sharp dialogue draws fine work from Holmes, and his supporting cast (especially Zooey Deschanel and Melanie Lynskey, as fellow students) adds much-needed energy on the fringes of this lugubrious psychological thriller. --Jeff Shannon
Abandon Reviews:
A GOOD SMALL PICTURE 
2009-01-03 - Previous reviews have provided an outline of the film and a variety of opinions. My only comment is that if one takes this film without expectations based on previous work of the production staff or featured players, it will provide entertainment sufficient for the hour and a half or so which watching it consumes. Whatever may be the pretentions which the creators may or may not have possessed, it is a small film, itself unpretentious, and well within the parameters of the genre of small films (often called "B" pictures in the 30's and 40's, more often "made for TV" pictures thereafter)which so often have proved to be sources of pleasure with no deeper meaning for which to probe (or to be disturbed by). What you see is what there is; not, perhaps, Hamlet ( a mystery as you will recall, but a diversion from the heavier things in life. The performers did what there was to do while script and director kept things moving with only a moderate degree of unnecessary repetition of the main story points.
Looking at this to see Charlie Hunnam? 
2008-04-15 - In the director's commentary, (director, screenwriter) Gaghan and (cinematographer) Libatique spend A LOT of time talking about the lighting and tones and colors... Don't be fooled. It's Mr. Hunnam's presence that lights up the screen here. He has a tendency to do this in everything he's in and I rented this purely to see him. I'm sure I won't be the last person to do so. He is mesmerizing.
It's a real shame his character (Embry, the missing boyfriend) couldn't be the main focus of this one (and that he wasn't discussed more on the commentary track or interviewed longer on the Making Of featurette). It would have been a more compelling film and I would have given it another star or two, I'm sure. It's definitely worth renting though to see him, if that's what you're after.
It's a good film overall though I think perhaps skipping any sort of explanation of why the villain was the villain might have served it better, as the one given was a bit lame (or "undeveloped", as reviewers say). I don't find Katie Holmes or Benjamin Bratt compelling enough to rent or buy a movie just to see either of them, but I wouldn't say they are bad actors either. The supporting cast is solidly quirky with Zooey Deschanel as a bit of a scene stealer, as usual. Any flaws are down to the screenwriter really.
That said, I didn't fast forward just to get to Charlie Hunnam's scenes. I think in this case, considering he was my only motivation for watching in the first place, that's actually a positive review. Enjoy.
Much more than you may think...
2008-02-12 - I remember when I went and saw this for the first time and everyone I was with thought it was terrible. I remember being in shock because I thought it was quite good. Granted, at the time of its release I was in love with Katie Holmes and thought she could do no wrong. Now, years later I decided to watch this again to see if it holds up now that my fascination with Holmes has diminished due to her insanely strange new outlook on life. Well, it does. I don't know what to say to all these people who find this film horrendous. I actually really like it. It works, it's solid and it impresses me to this day. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's so much better than many make it out to be.
The film revolves around Katie Burke, a young college student who is haunted by the memory of her ex-boyfriend Embry. Embry has been out of her life for two years now, just up and disappearing, but suddenly he seems to be returning. This begins to take its toll on Katie when Wade, a police detective battling his own demons, begins investigating Embry's disappearance. Katie is struggling to complete her thesis and land a good job but the sudden reappearance of Embry is throwing a wrench in everything. As her relationship with Wade begins to flourish her own demons come to the surface and soon we realize that Katie is not who we think she is and that Embry's reappearance may have more meaning than we could ever imagine.
`Abandon' plays out like a B-movie, but a very good one at that. It's not as polished as most Hollywood fare; it's gritty and dark, and I think this does the film a huge service (thought I was gonna say `disservice' didn't you). `Abandon' is at moments chilling and this is thanks in large part to Holmes performance. Katie has always had potential but it wasn't until just before she went cuckoo for Tom Cruise that she actually began to tap into it. Her performances in this film as well as 2003's `Pieces of April' are among her finest to date. It's a shame she has thrown it all away.
The rest of the cast does a fine job as well. Benjamin Bratt does his best to stand out but doesn't fare so well. His scenes are smothered with Katie's commanding presence. Zooey Daschanel is funny and witty as Katie's friend Samantha and the beautiful Gabriel Union delivers as Amanda (although I really wish she had more screen time). Melanie Lynskey manages to make me remember her (as she always does) but it's Charlie Hunnam who really grabbed my attention. As the mysterious Embry he really gets under the skin and makes a lasting impression.
Stephen Gaghan's script is tightly woven and, while not exactly mind blowing and or original it manages to strike fresh blood; creeping us out as well as making us think. `Abandon' is surely misunderstood and underappreciated. Don't let the negative press keep you away from this one.
Three Misused Stars 
2008-01-16 - Oh Charlie! You are so great in UNDECLARED and here, in ABANDON, they must have pulled you off the set of UNDECLARED, not even giving you a moment to change your hairdo by a single curl, and wearing the same outfits you wear as the egotistical British roommate in the sitcom, and they ask you to adopt an American accent and play a driven, high modernist composer of all things, so ludicrous. No one who watches the movie believes that Katie Holmes' character could fall for you because you're so pretentious and shallow. And the name of your character--"Embry Larkin"! We have a Larkin Street here in San Francisco... but mostly every time I heard the name Embry I wondered if they call you "Embryo" as a pet name.
And Katie? Why take a part in which your character's name is the same as your own? Is this supposed to be a Robert Altman sort of Pirandello exercise? You're on the screen, looking earnest, and a voice interrupts you saying, "Katie?" And you look up, blush, and say, "Yes"? Is it acting or is it real life?
And watching those scenes now where Katie meets with her understanding, lecherous psychiatrist are just mindblowing now that everyone knows you and Tom are totally against psychiatrists and want to crush them! Katie delivers a "crushing" putdown to Tony Goldwyn, the poor actor playing the psychiatrist, that ties right in with Hubbard's dismissal of psychiatry--was it planned that way? Weren't you still with Chris Klein when you filmed ABANDON? Or was this some sort of psychic pipeline into the future--a future in which the bodies of psychiatrists lie mangled, or dripping blood from lampposts? And Tony Goldwyn of all people! Of course I thought it was "him" was who the killer. Nobody who saw GHOST with Demi Moore and Patrick Swayze could ever fully trust him again. Good casting! Except for you and Charlie. And Benjamin Bratt, you look so bruised and puffy in this film it's like you got out of three rounds with Rocky Marciano and then bobbed up in front of the film cameras--get him a bag of ice to put on his poor face!
So-so mystery!
2007-07-28 - If this movie was a final exam, it would get about a C-. Try as I might, I just couldn't understand why every man in the movie was infatuated by Katie Holmes. The flashback scenes got really old really fast. The one part of the movie I really enjoyed was the party they went to, they got the college party scene down pat. Rent this movie before you buy, for sure.
