Very Cool!!!

A different way of telling a story

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

The Lost Son (1999)All the elements are here for a classic noir-inspired investigation movie where no one is to be trusted and our leading man is a likable, steady, world weary paradigm. If you are familiar with "The Big Sleep" with Bogart and crew, you might actually get a sense of what this movie is trying to do. Not only does the plot begin in a similar way, with a rich family saying one of their members (the son) is missing and with the daughter being a steamy and somewhat unreliable secondary force (played by Nastassja Kinski), but then the rest of the movie proceeds to get increasingly confusing.In "The Big Sleep" this is almost a positive thing, making it fast, visual, and experiential (meaning you get sucked into the world and can't stop looking and trying to keep up). Here, in "The Lost Son," it isn't what anyone would call fast, which hurts it because the complexity builds and the suspicions fester with lots of lulls, either whole short scenes that don't seem quite necessary or with an editing that makes every little cut one or two seconds too long. Which adds up to a kind of pace some people might like, a loitering and inhabiting this strange little nether world the movie creates. But for me it just made me fuzz out a little.The leading detective, Xavier Lombard, is played by the really compelling French actor, Daniel Auteuil. He carries the movie even through it's pauses. Besides Kinski, whose role is small (and thankfully, really--she doesn't really "act" so much as say her lines), there is a second male lead, the Irish actor Ciaran Hinds, who is quite good. (He had a terrific role in the peculiar and enjoyable "Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day.") And the filming is rather nice, with a huge range of scenes and moods, held together not only by the camera-work, but the solid directing by Chris Menges.There will be an odd feel to this film for some American viewers, because it's an increasingly common hybrid of French and British filmmaking--language, crew, cast, and locations all spread out from one side of the Channel to the other. It's nicely European, but less of that familiar "British" film that many people know (or know without knowing they know it, looking vaguely like Hollywood). In short, this has a slightly fresh look. It does not however feel as new or odd or wonderful as some of the detective crime films coming out of, say, Scandinavia, among the European types.This matters only in that half of the film is its atmosphere. The plot and some of the core acting could use a bolstering and maybe even a sense of necessity at times (the movie just keeps going through its attractive paces), but in all, it might even be a film you'd enjoy more the second time. Which says a lot.

Daniel Auteuil has so often blessed us with his shrewd, canny and ultimately modern version of what a typically French man is like today. Not the guachely bombastic Depardieu or the suavity of the leading men of the New Wave era. Unfortunately, Xavier (Auteuil), playing a private eye doesn't really fit into any particular type and neither the script nor he, is individual enough to make him stand out. At least we had Morse, or Wallander to make us want to watch it, when it ran a little slow.The Lost Son, to my mind, plays more like a TV crime drama; gritty, topical but covering too much ground, and a cast with too much variety for the script to flesh out their characters. There's been a fair few French thrillers recently (though this was released 11 years ago) that seem to be basic thrillers. The story is wholesome enough, even if the subject of it isn't and is told in a workmanlike fashion. As the film ended, I couldn't help thinking that as a taster, some inkling of the outcome should be in the opening scene and then it all be told in flashback. As it is, the unfolding is quite slow and laborious, especially for a modern audience.

First off, you need to know this is NOT a movie you should let your kids see. The subject matter of the movie is the child sex trade and there is a considerable amount of intense violence in the film. I think all but a mature audience would be pretty traumatized by the film--I know I was a bit put off by the disgusting plot initially.Second, this film was a lot of fun for me to watch because I have seen Daniel Auteuil in many films and this was the first time I saw him acting in English and he did an excellent job. In addition, the character he played was a lot different than I was used to seeing. In Hollywood, this role might have been played by a more traditionally "macho" star--but I really think it helped to have a shorter, middle-aged and not particularly hunky guy play the role. It helped to make the plot seem more real.As mentioned above, the plot involves child sexual abuse and the sick soul-less people who profit from buying and selling children. Auteuil plays a private detective who stumbles into this industry when searching for a missing man. But how he resolves this will either totally put you off or offer a great reward depending on your sensibilities. If you can't accept him becoming a vigilante and killing or maiming these evil people, then I suggest you don't watch the film. I admit was totally repulsed by the sexual deviants and found it very satisfying to watch them get killed--particularly the last guy. The film really manages to tap into your visceral disgust for sexual predators--and some may feel disturbed that they can ENJOY watching these men die.About the only negative is the role played by Nastasia Kinski. Her character, at times, seems a little too shrill and annoying--almost more of a caricature than a 3-dimensional woman. Later the movie explains, in part, her over-reactions but I just felt she was a poorly developed character. However, considering she is NOT really that important to the plot, this can be overlooked.The writing, direction and most of the acting is first-rate. Give it a try.

I really, really didn't expect this type of a film outside of America. How anyone can take the subject of sexually abusing children and turn it into a "thriller" is just sick. Auteuil (whom I had previously admired) going around like some sort of child-saving Rambo was ignorant and insulting to all the children being sexually exploited around the world.What's doubly depressing is that the stunning and ground-breaking film "Happiness" came out the year BEFORE this film. Menges and his cohorts should be ashamed of themselves. It's admirable to read some of the comments by the more intelligent viewers out there. They were able to see the shoddy and ridiculous handling of this topic. Those of you who think this is great cinema display a disgusting amount of ignorance and you need to watch "Happiness" to open your minds to the true horrors of pedophilia.Do you think your child is more likely to be kidnapped and sold into sexual slavery or be molested by a neighbor, teacher, friend or even a relative? Hmm...I wonder. If they are going to make a film about international child slavery of whatever kind they owe it to everyone to make it realistic and emotionally involving instead of this button-pushing crap. 1/10