Sadly Over-hyped

Highly Overrated But Still Good

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Synopsis: A Bored billionaire decides to entertain himself by stealing a Monet from a museum, an investigator from the museum's insurance company takes an interest in him and a complicated back-and-forth game with romantic undertones begins between them.Review: I just finished streaming this film on Netflix for the first time, and the title of my review says it all. This remake is boring, it has poor-pacing, and the overall story is just drab and stale. This romantic heist drama or whatever it's supposed to be is an hour and forty minutes too long. I did not enjoy this movie, the first 25 minutes or so is the only halfway decent part, the rest of the film is just plain awful. This cine has a rubbish plot, i have not seen the original, and after seeing this remake i don't want to see the original, hopefully the upcoming second remake will be better than this 90s version, but i doubt it.

Significantly worse than the original. Russo's character in this was incredibly ditzy and came off as stupid. The other detective character played by Dunaway in the original was very smartly written and well acted. Russo has strange emphasis on certain words made no sense at all, but I couldn't tell if it was the director's choice or hers. She also resembled agent Scully from The X-Files, from her hair to her wardrobe-even some of the detectives called her spooky at one point, similar to 'spooky' Mulder. Not only that but Brosnan was James Bond at this point so it was pretty obvious that the filmmakers here were cashing in on already popular media.The romance between them didn't feel at all believable, they had no chemistry, apart form their hollywoods-status attractive looks. Russo's character was overly sexualized and seemed like she was trying to seduce every single man she walked by. It got exhausting. The sex scene went on for way too long and felt like soft core porn. Don't get me wrong, I think sex scenes can work, as they have in the past, but this got obnoxious. The score is probably the worst I've heard in my life. None of it was played at appropriate parts and it was, yet again, incredibly obnoxious when it did play, which was probably 90% of the runtime (or at least that's what it felt like).As a whole, the original was very smartly written with small ques as to what is going on in dilute for the audience to piece together, this spells everything out bluntly, making the audience feel like idiots, including countless filler scenes to pad the runtime.

I'm a sucker for Pierce Brosnan. Hence I could not let this movie be unseen. In addition, it would be about a rich playboy who steals art, which provoked my interest. A 6.8 on IMDb, I just dared it.In retrospect a good choice. You'll be back in the 90s with this smooth movie. Simple tension, sincere love, cuddly humor and more of those concepts that have totally disappeared from the contemporary film industry. Nowadays everything is complex and complicated. In the nineties you could still enjoy the genius of a wealthy businessman.I was not really attracted to the screen every moment of the movie so I cannot call the story extremely good. Yet, the quasi-nonchalant act of Pierce Brosnan - Thomas Crown in this story - combined with a fascinating image, forms the quality of this film. Think of tropical holiday homes, luxurious dinners and exciting nightly scenes.Should you see this movie or not? Watch this movie if you like to watch nineties movies. If you do not feel the urge to see The Thomas Crown Affair based on this description, I have to confess that you probably do not miss anything. This is not a must-see, but a want-to-see.

My Quick recommendation: Go see it. It's a great movie. It's fun. It's (in a good way) complicate. The main cast does a great job. The direction of John McTiernan is excellent....You wanna wish for more......but...that was back in 1999. Now 15 years later and the long awaited sequel (rumored to be called Topkapi at some point) is nowhere to be seen.Well there is a complicate explanation. Thomas Crown complicate. John McTiernan was accused with criminal charges and end up in prison. He fought for years in courts, so any future project of his got frozen. Brosnan said in 2009 that Paul Verhoeven was attached to direct the new film. Seems like a great choice to me to replace McTiernan but unfortunately he left because of creative differences.The good news are that a few months ago John McTiernan revealed he had written a script for the sequel whilst in prison, called Thomas Crown And The Missing Lioness!!! So there must be hope after all for a good sequel!In the meantime DON'T MISS this movie. It has everything, and the consensus is that is far better than the original..