Wordiezett So much average

SpuffyWeb Sadly Over-hyped

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Nayan Gough A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Myriam Nys There is a disconnect between the gravity and violence of the events depicted and the sleek, shiny, over-stylish packaging. Moreover, the story is so complicated that it becomes difficult to understand. It is one thing to expect the viewer to pay attention, it is another to pour a bottle of champagne in the viewer and let him loose in a maze-shaped hall of mirrors.The story concerns the disappearance of an unusually ominous painting by Goya called "Witches in flight". There is a rich vein of symbolism here that might have been better mined than is the case. (But then, I suppose that the makers of the movie realized that the stark horror of the painting would not go well with the glossy, stylish look.) At one point in the movie - I'm trying to avoid spoilers - it becomes clear that the Goya has been kept hidden under tragic circumstances. These circumstances were also deeply deleterious to the painting. As a result one would expect the painting to be damaged, possibly even damaged beyond recognition. But no, it remains just as beautiful as ever. And to think that there are crown jewellers, art historians, restorers,... etc who would only approach such a masterwork according to a strict protocol. The fools !All of the above is pretty sad, since the movie also boasts some fine performances, especially from the two protagonists. There are also moments of whimsy and (very dry) wit. So. Did I ever tell you how I forgot my Rubens at the tobacconist's ?

FilmFanDaveB I saw this was going to be on TV, great names involved. Vincent Cassell! Danny Boyle! how can it go wrong?Unfortunately, in many ways.It started well but halfway through I just wanted it to be over. Confusing plot, waste of talent, style over content.I was going to say that at least it is visually impressive. It has the gloss and pace of an ad for a shiny new car. 100 minutes of fast moving colourful camera work. 100 minutes too much.Very poor. Watch Crimson Rivers instead.

Asif Khan (asifahsankhan) Four semi-naked figures are writhing in thin air. Three of them wear thin, pointed hats, and are holding the fourth against his will. His face is twisted into an agonised grimace as his captors suck and gnaw at his flesh. Beneath this gruesome foursome, a fifth man cowers under a blanket, his fists extended in a vain attempt to ward off the torment hovering above – or perhaps inside – his head. No, this isn't a scene from Trance, the cheerfully discombobulated new thriller from Danny Boyle: it is in fact the scene depicted in Witches in the Air, a painting by the Spanish artist Francisco Goya, which is the target of the art heist around which the film revolves. At around the halfway point, however, you may well be able to sympathise with the chap who has the sheet over his head. I think it's worth mentioning that Boyle was hanging on to this script since he made "Shallow Grave" and at filming he was also pulling off the Olympics Opening Ceremony. Not to detract from the reviewer's critical observances and Boyle certainly applies his style to his movies. It was a fun movie that you can enjoy once, like Christopher Nolan's Memento. Every so many years someone pulls off a heavy plot twist film really well. I think this one counts.It has the sort of manic energy that makes Boyle's movies so interesting; unfortunately, it also has many of the flaws that make them so frustrating. It's no coincidence that most iconic moments in Boyle's work — the "Choose life…" monologue from "Trainspotting" (1996), the zombie attacks from "28 Days Later" — involve the characters running. Boyle is a sprinter: His movies start out fast and energetic, but can't sustain the pace for too long. His career is full of films that are great for the first hour and then devolve into generic blandness ("Sunshine" (2007) and "The Beach" are two of the most obvious examples).While "Trance" never falls apart, its closing stretch involves several shifts in emotional perspective that the movie doesn't really pull off. To make matters worse, Boyle ends the whole thing on a sentimental note which doesn't jibe with the nihilist tone of the final act (this is also a common Boyle problem). The awkward shoehorning of Big, Serious Themes into the pulp premise doesn't help, either. However, if you can look past the sputtering conclusion — or the pseudo-intellectual banter about memory, modern art, and other assorted nonsense — what you'll find is a brisk, breezy, style-heavy crime flick that happens to be one of the most purely entertaining movies Boyle has made in a long time.

Bryan Kluger Danny Boyle is one of my favorite and one of the great modern filmmakers of the last twenty years. His unique style and ability to make a film in a different genre each time he gets in the director's seat has not only proved successful and earned him critical praise and awards, but it shows that he has limitless talent to entertain a wide variety of audiences across the globe. With his latest film, 'Trance', Boyle shows he still has what it takes to make a modern noir movie with so many twists and turns, that eventually you will give up trying to figure what's going on in the story, and fall into Boyle's "trance" of betrayal, thievery, and sex in this art heist thriller.The main focus here is on an auction house employee Simon (Jame McAvoy), who is cahoots with three criminals to steal a painting from the 1700s by Goya, which in the film was auctioned off for over $41 million. In an elaborate scheme to pull off this heist, Simon's partner in crime Francis (Vincent Cassel) hit him with a shotgun in the head, leaving Simon in the hospital for a few days with a case of amnesia. What we find out is, Simon hid the painting before making the handoff and now cannot remember where he stashed it.After a bit of brutal torture on Simon, Francis and his two thugs believe he has no idea where he hid the painting and thus tell him to seek hypnosis therapy to see if he can trigger his memory loss. He seems to choose random name out of the phone book of American therapist Dr. Elizabeth Lamb (Rosario Dawson), who is smarter than she thinks and figures out quickly that Simon is in trouble and that his cohorts are listening in to their sessions secretly. Dr. Lamb convinces the group to join for hypnosis sessions and after she realizes what's at stake, she insists on an equal cut of the prize.From here, things spiral out of control into a frenzy of betrayal, lies, sex, and regaining painful memories that seem to advance the story on who really is in charge of this whole set up. For the most part, it seems that Dr. Lamb is in charge as she is the one conducting the therapy sessions with everyone, and things get a bit comical when Francis' thugs are hypnotized in a therapy session, which is to showcase their biggest fears. Dawson's performance of Dr. Lamb might be her greatest role to date as she exudes so much confidence and commands a very powerful performance, that we fall under her spell and are never cured.McAvoy turns in some brilliant work as does Cassel in their very flawed but emotional characters. Particularly Cassel, as at first he seems to be just a basic criminal out for money, but there is more to him than just greed, and we really sympathize with him. And that is what Boyle does so well here. He captures the very human side of an epic crime, one of which we are thrown into a maze of deceit and blood, to which we may never come out of. The camera tricks and use of stylized colors here make every character pop and show their very different sides and motivations from Dawson's full frontal nude scene to McAvoy's descent into madness.There has never been a heist movie told quite like this before, and even though we might not know what the hell is going on until the final moments of the film, it's a gut wrenching visceral experience. One that you won't soon forget.