The Lost Angel (2005) User Reviews

Dull cop thriller.

[poolandrews · 4/10 · 26 June 2007]

The Lost Angel starts as police inspector's Billie Palmer (Allison Eastwood) & her partner Julian (screenwriter & producer Nicholas Celozzi) shoot Brian Walls (Darcy Laurie), a suspect in two brutal homicides. All seems well with Billie & Julian feeling very pleased with themselves, however all is not well as the killer strikes again & since Brian was in jail he couldn't possibly have done it. The killings seem to have some religious connotation as the victims are crucified & strange ancient writings decorate the walls of each crime scene, the FBI send in Father Brian (Judd Nelson) to help the investigation. The trial leads to St. Rita's church which all the victims attended or had links too, they soon realise they are up against a killer who is performing the ancient rite of sacrificing someone everyday for twenty days & they face a race against time before more innocent lives are lost...

This American Canadian co-production was co-written, produced & directed by Dimitri Logothetis & this is a pretty routine, sub standard & throughly dull cop thriller. The script by star Celozzi & director Logthetis which takes itself very seriously is as bland & workman like as they come, basically the film revolves around a series of murders with a religious slant & the cops who are trying to solve them. Seriously if I was giving points out for originality then The Lost Angel would get minus 10, not much focus is given to the murders or the religious significance other than it's some sort of rite, the character's are terrible especially the lead cop Billie Palmer who I really wanted to die & as a result it was impossible for me to get into the story or care about what was happening. I was pretty much on autopilot, sure I was watching it but it wasn't making any impression on me at all. Then there's the fact The Lost Angel tries to be many things, it wants to be a scary horror, a tense thriller, a teenage coming of age story, a heartfelt tale of cops finding redemption for earlier problems, a romance & it also tries to be clever with a lame twist ending which doesn't work.

Director Logthetis turns in an OK looking film but it feels more like a cheap made-for-TV detective show with slightly more swearing & a bit more blood. I have to mention the opening credits here which are of a CGI computer animated drain, the camera speeds along the pipes with the cast & crews names dotted around the place before the camera emerges from a plug hole & into the film proper, it's a nice idea I suppose but the animation looks terrible & it's just so at odds with the rest of the film which is as bland & forgettable as they come it's frankly bizarre. Forget about any decent gore, there are a couple of bodies with some blood on them & a few gunshot wounds but nothing to get excited about.

Technically the film is OK even if it doesn't have any sort of style or visual flair, it has average production values & is competent but nothing more. Allison Eastwood if you didn't know happens to be the daughter of Clint so it's surprising to see her in junk like this, couldn't her dad fix her up with a good role in a big budget Hollywood flick? John Rhys-Davies plays a deaf priest & C. Thomas Howell is here somewhere.

The Lost Angel is one of those films which tries to be several things but ends up as nothing in particular, a below average cop thriller that really isn't worth wasting your time on.

The ending ruined it all for me

[sth_Weird · 5/10 · 5 June 2007]

This movie has a really low rating and I only got it because Judd Nelson is in it. I very much value him as a gorgeous character actor, who unfortunately usually ends up in crappy movies. This is not his best performance, either, but it's believable and definitely better than those of some of the other cast (which wasn't brilliant but also not as bad as other people here say in my opinion). So I expected a bad movie. Surprise surprise! I liked it a lot. Yeah there are certain elements you have already seen in other movies. Which movie today does not have elements already been used? It's unavoidable. I found the movie very exciting and not predictable at all. As a matter of fact, I suspected many of the characters to be the murderer. I was looking for the clues in everything they said and did, and I enjoyed it a lot (except for this stupid and over-long love scene, it's not that love scenes bother me I actually like them when they fit in, but this one did not fit in at all it was simply pointless)! But then there came the end. I don't know how one of the other people who wrote a comment was able to predict the ending. Because I did not see it coming at all. For me, it was simply unexpected and pointless. It ruined the movie for me. I would have given it a 8/10 if somebody else did it. But this way...5/10, and I'm being very grateful here!

This movie could have been better.

[matsbjork · 2/10 · 1 January 2005]

I'm glad i saw this movie since it broadened my view on how to judge a good movie. This movie has all the right elements of being a good movie. Quite good actors (but not good in this movie), quite good budget, a good script pitch and so on.

It does however fail in the script section as well as in building the story. It takes unlikely turns and doesn't create the important trust between the storyteller and the viewer.

POSITIVE: The picture and environment was occasionally good. The main story pitch is good. The actors are usually good.

NEGATIVE: All the rest.

I found this movie a sad use of time and money so my advice is to invest your time otherwise.

this movie should have taken lessons from said Angel

[movieman_kev · 2/10 · 10 May 2005]

Slight off-balance police inspector Palmer (Alison Eastwood) works with Father Brian (Judd Nelson) to solve for a religion-based killer, while she deals with her teen-aged goth sister. Huge plot holes, faulty logic, an un-likable 'heroin' and the fact that the movie just trudges on make this crime thriller awful.It's one of those direct to video flicks that you'd likely find early in the morning on cable, but even if you do stumble across it don't bother watching.

My Grade: D-

Eye Candy: Alison Eastwood gets topless, Andrea Runge gets full frontal (yea she's dead at the time, but what ya gonna do,ya know?)

Crazily Taped Together Movie

[ark30inf · 1/10 · 2 February 2007]

The lead guy wrote it. I guess thats why the jarring switch to an unnecessary and unexplained sex scene with Allison Eastwood occurred. I would rewrite to drop that in also if I was him.

I am guessing they also found out that Judd Nelson was coming onboard after the script was written and had to duct tape him in. That would explain him dropping out of the sky for no apparent reason as an FBI Priest. FBI Priest? It would also explain why his character was clueless each time he appeared and seemed purposefully written to have no impact on the plot at all, he was like the ghost of a dead career haunting this movie.

This movie has an almost artistic way of leading you on to think its going to get better. A secret ancient ritual with a nude killing each day? Let's stick around! Is the ritual ever mentioned again? No. Weird cuneiform writing? Must be something weird! Lets stick around. Was it? No. Start out with babe victims and then move to old friars and old ladies. Blah. Why are these bad guys mutating into some other guy? Must be supernatural lets stick around. Was it? No. It's weird, but its a fairly watchable pointless mess.

Need to explain why the Priest heard nothing...lets make him deaf. Need to have the Friar not say what he knows....lets make him a mute. Need the sister grabbed at school but the bad guy can't do it because he would be recognized....have a random guy do it who is never seen again. Need a way into a building.....create a secret tunnel and give a lame one-off explanation that has nothing to do with the plot.

The acting was not that bad except at the start. In fact, the movie was starting to drag me in a little until Judd Nelson suddenly dropped out of the ceiling into the movie and jarred me back to my senses. If you want to see a watchable exposition of bad writing this will do.

Why is there snow in one part of town and not elsewhere? The secret tunnel goes to the "East Forest".....but this church is downtown is it not? Why is the first bad guy washing out bloody cloth with gasoline?

In one word - BORING

[guilfisher-1 · 4 May 2007]

To begin with this is one movie when I wanted the lead to be the next victim. Alison Eastwood, unfortunately didn't inherit any of her dad's talent. A completely unbelievable performance. I can accept anything in these bad made for TV movies on LMN, but not this one. I couldn't believe how this inept detective gets away with what she does. Taking on a man twice her size in one punch; tripping a guy with a gun. C'mon gimme a break. She plays the role with the emotional level of a minus 10. Monotone voice, blank facial expressions and absolutely no sex appeal, this was a mistake. I guess when your father's a star you get all the breaks. Everyone else in this loser I won't embarrass them by mentioning their names. I'll give them a break to help them forget this experience with Eastwood's bad acting. She can't be serious about a career. Please.

Happy, when it finally ends!

[PolarMarco · 1/10 · 18 December 2006]

Dear Readers,

to make it short and plain for the ones in a hurry: 'Beware!'

This is probably one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I never waited for an end of a movie so much, that's why it was a happy end at least for me, when it was finally over.

I am quite convinced that nobody with only a little bit of an artistic approach or a soft spot for a good story or nice pictures or a solid camera or anything is able to like this movie at all. None of that was in the movie.

The direction was totally miserable, the acting much worse and even the camera work was just appearing semi-artistic to me. The storyline was supposed to be a 'nightmare', and it really turned out to be one, but not as intended by the tended viewer. I found it to be boring and uninspired, there was no red-line visible due to weird and unconnected turns of the story and also a lot of dead end plots.

Since the story and characters did not work out, there was not even a little bit of tension noticeable. What was e.g. all that talking about all these weird symbols at the site of crime about? Why was (it in) the movie at all? Just to give this silly, intransparent and unnecessary hint to the murderer? How dull can it get?

It really looks like somebody has been trying to take 'all the cool content' from other movies, but surprise, it did not fit together and nobody wanted to play it with a 'soul'.

Allison Eastwood in fact was acting so badly, that every little bit of atmosphere was immediately destroyed with the first word of hers. She was not into her character at all, trying play that tough woman. Is Clints daughter supposed to be like that? If so, it certainly did not work out at all. She would be good as a newsreader though, keeping her voice that neutral and unemotional. Sorry Allison, no movie with you again. Even John Rhys-Davies was surprisingly bad, but with a set of so boring and flat characters, even good actors are only able to fail.

I am willingly to forgive that the movie was totally unrealistic, since I personally don't expect that necessarily from a Hollywood making. But at least good cinematic handicraft and some passion of the actors I would have expected, besides that uninteresting story.

Stay away from this movie, it is a waste of money and a shame in my eyes. You will watch your clock more than the movie, in the hope that it will run faster so you can do something nice instead. It was a total waste of time for me.

This movie deserves the bad rating and rep it has

[hannoverfisk · 2/10 · 16 November 2005]

I totally disagree with the other user comment that totally disagreed with everyone else. Besides the BAD acting, and the BAD directing (for cinematic effects, it would slow-mo the drama... a lot), this movie at it's end just made no sense.

I have to say that you know it's bad within the first five minutes, but the majority of the criticism I can give comes having seen the ending, waiting to "tie loose ends up." So the majority of my critique will be listed under SPOILER! I will give Kudos for the fact that the movie keeps you guessing as a whodunit. Unfortunately, the end result is cockamamie.

AS WELL, I thought C. Thomas Howell's character, though over the top, was actually quite entertaining. For just a few minutes, I was entertained.

So onto the Spoiler... the culprit was someone who at no point in the movie even seems capable of being the killer. He never shows signs of oddness or mental illness at any time. Nor does he seem capable of having the necessary knowledge of cuneiform. The two people with star power have a total of 10 minutes of film time between them. There is no explanation of why there is a priest FBI guy on the scene, and he just appears in and out of the film inexplicably. The police department is completely shoddy and crooked and shields their detectives from investigation BECAUSE THEY'RE JUST DOING THEIR JOBS! vilifying the process of internal affairs investigations.

There's even a secret tunnel into the church where the murderer goes in and out of, and when the police find it, they never post anyone to watch it. The priest hides the secret of the tunnel, because he doesn't feel it's important. Huh? What the hell? Bad writing, bad acting (I think with a better director, the actors could have performed better), and definitely bad direction. And of course a requisite sex scene that does nothing to further character or plot, simply because it's a B horror movie.

IF YOU WANT TO SEE AN EXCELLENT AND UNDERRATED B HORROR FILM: try Close Your Eyes with Goran Visnjic from ER and Shirley Henderson (Moaning Myrtle).

I KNEW I should have avoided this film, but I was in the mood for cheesy horror, but I got just cheesy.

Decent, though somewhat predictable

[overdog_001 · 6/10 · 15 September 2008]

Alison Eastwood is a solid B-list actress. She's not going to win any Oscars for this kind of work, but there's a reason she keeps getting hired. Quite simply, she brings home the bacon.

The reason the so-called occult mysticism is dropped early in the movie is explained quite clearly by the unfolding plot. There's a little celeb skin for those who go for that.

Judd Nelson's character is a non-entity who feeds the cops information; although it's the first time I've seen an FBI priest in a movie. I suspect actor John Rhys-Davies has fallen on hard times; this is not up to the A-list movie roles he has landed so far. He looks like he has lost a lot of weight in recent years; his character was believable, though somewhat thinly-spread (no pun intended).

It's a murder mystery, a serial killer movie, and has an interesting twist at the end. If you're hoping for the next Sixth Sense, don't bother. But if you like solid made-for-cable cop movies, it's entertaining.

Saw this without checking the rating - my bad

[ofjeworstlust · 2/10 · 12 February 2005]

Oh no. Just don't think of renting/seeing/buying this one. Rip-offs from many movies with the same storyline. Bad acting - if you've seen this one think of THE interrogation scene. No one buys that one. Or the teenage daughter that is wild and changes into a daughter anyone would like to have, yeah right. The story line? So stupid I couldn't believe it and my wife stopped watching half way. Reasonable decors, lighting and effects. But OMG, the end is so predictable and the 'who' and 'why' won't bother anyone. This already is too much for comments on this so called movie. Some supernatural effect are brought into the story, but they aren't explained or worked out thoroughly.

Unexpectedly good thriller

[otheq · 9/10 · 1 May 2005]

I went to the video store and was looking for a thriller. I saw a "recommend" on this one.

I don't get where all the bad comments are coming from. I thought the film was really very goo.

Of course most of the ones I've read can't seem to write very well.

I found the story, acting and all around feel of the film was compelling.

The weakest of the group was the lead, Allison Eastwood, but even she held your interest.

It reminded me of "Seven."

It's worth a look.

What a wreck!

[timbrown3630 · 1/10 · 29 October 2005]

This was the worst movie that I have seen in a long, long time. My wife and really love "cop movies" but it seems as if they just don't know how to make them any more. When will we again see a "Serpico" or "French Connection"? I was absolutely appalled by the cartoon like performance of C. Thomas Howell. I wondered what happened to this promising actor and now I know...his was probably the goofiest part in the whole movie.

Well I guess that $3.00 wasn't too much to lose for this dreadful piece of dreck. After all, we had more than a few good laughs at the hammy acting and crappy sets.

Well Done Thriller

[cddavis49 · 10/10 · 25 October 2010]

This film was on Lifetime as a World Premiere, and I really enjoyed it. I found the plot to be unpredictable, the production was very good, and I was surprised to see Alison Eastwood carry the lead. The production value was so much better than what you get from Lifetime. The locations creepy and unusual. You hardly ever see a sustainable, tough female lead. I though the Director did a great job keeping the visuals interesting. It reminds me of thrillers like seven and they way they keep you guessing all the way to the end. I tried to guess the ending, but never saw the twist coming. The film kept me guessing. It's well worth watching.

A good independent thriller.

[rickblain20 · 9/10 · 26 April 2005]

This film was recommended to me at the video store. I did not expect the film to be this good. I found the story to be very compelling, the acting was good. I read that the lead, Allson Eastwood, is Clint's daughter, you can see the resemblance.

The snow scenes give the film a very creepy element, which adds to the mood.

The violence is not over the top, which most thrillers seem to attempt.

They spent some money on the look of the film. And there is a neat little twist at the end.

I would recommend the film.

Rick

Really bad - keep away

[mr_filipe_lemos · 14 February 2005]

This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen:

bad acting

bad story

bad characters

even bad scenarios Did this movie went to the cinemas? If it did... I would want to be the poor guy who payed ticket Not even the sex scene (which appeared out of nowhere) was not worthy of special attention

Does anybody know Carol O'Connell? She's a great new york writer. I've any of her books is transformed into movies. See it, it can only be amazing. And please mail me if u know anything