I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

First, to our reviewer popkiss66 from Chicago, just how seriously can we take your "review" when you mention that it was "filmed on location (why spend the extra cash!?) in like kathmandu or something". It was filmed on location in CAMBODIA, which isn't even close to Kathmandu...or something.Now, back to our film: This is not a great film, but it brought something to my mind. While I've ever been a fan, I'm realizing that Matt Dillon is a rather dependable actor, and has been now for a good many years. Although he's not top rank, he also hasn't been a one hit wonder. I may need to reassess his status in American cinema.I have spent several years in Thailand, first visiting often and then living there, as well as some time in Burma, Malaysia, Singapore, and Jakarta. I've never been to Cambodia, but the depiction of the criminal element in Southeast Asia rings true. And that really is the basis of the plot in this story. You have the Westerners (here exemplified by James Caan's character) who think they are smarter than the natives, but end up living a cesspool life. And you have the natives who think they're smarter than the Westerners, not even realizing they are living a cesspool life. There are no winners, only different types of losers. Rather pathetic actually. And it is real.This is not a perfect film, by any means. There are some loose ends as the story unfolds. Some situations that don't quite work. But overall, it's a pretty good story, albeit imperfect. Dillon wrote it, so I give some credit to him.Matt Dillon's acting is dependable (as I mentioned earlier). His characterization is believable. I've always disliked James Caan as an actor, but he is satisfactory here as the main Westerner-crook. Natascha McElhone as the love interest is also acceptable. Gérard Depardieu as a bar owner is interesting, but I fail to see the brilliance alluded to by some reviewers. Kem Sereyvuth does nicely as the Cambodian companion to Dillon's character. Perhaps the best acting is done by Stellan Skarsgård, here another crook.Will I want to watch this again? No. But it is a decent film, and Matt Dillon deserves some kudos for his project.

Cambodia and Thailand, the old colonial streets still give a foreigner a dread. As one of the characters in this monsoon thriller said, "the whole country could use a coat of paint." Matt Dillon is the insurance executive caught up in a scandal that he needs to rectify, maybe, if he can locate the company chief executive, the mysterious and shifty Marvin. On the way to rain forests, Dillon meets up with pretty Natacha McEthone, a member of group of antiquity restorers. Then the usual seedy characters show up at the rancid hotel. James Caan as Marvin and Gerard Deprardieu as the indo-chin innkeeper fill out the cast. Then Dillon's passport is stolen and on and on for two hours we take a tour of the countryside, the natives, and the brothels.Dillon directed and co-wrote the script and I think that is a problem. City of Ghosts is too long and the Dillon-McElhone romance is forced. I mean if you're afraid for your life, are you going to take the time to ask a girl out on a date? Hmmm, maybe not, so Dillon loved his directorial takes so much, he could not cut them, and some studio guy insisted on a love interest. In addition, it's weird, but Dillon as an adventurer, Bogart type in Cambodia: he still delivers some lines as though he were still in a teen rumble.

The story of City of Ghosts is decent but clichéd. There is a well assembled international cast of competent actors with veteran actor Matt Dillon handling directing honors. The real pull of the movie is the backdrop on locations in Cambodia and Thailand. This immersion generously brings authenticity and color. On top of that, the director wisely opts for local languages instead of dumbing-down for audiences with English everywhere. The result is a solid movie with exotic backdrops, palpable atmospheres, and decent acting. The realism of the story is fused together with the respect for the location and people as it stands. The movie is worth it just to see that much. It, although not as good, is reminiscent of The Year of Living Dangerously which has superior performances and story; both flicks capture the sensational atmosphere though. One other thing of note - thought the music/soundtrack suffered at times not really lifting the experience as much as it could of - a missed opportunity.

I've seen the movie "blindly" (citing one of the comments) and the feeling was for story not so good but having excellent "screen life" – the picture was not boring, with VERY good camera (do you remember how the camera was jumping intriguingly just for a part of second on various objects, over tiny details and fugitive images suggesting the plot). The song of Marvin was impressive and highlighting. Depardieu is notable as usual. The love thread is banal. For Cambodia - yet its tragedy remains unrevealed for the screen and stories like this remain only amusing except the real scenery and original faces. It's worth to see and to think.