|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Index||11 reviews in total|
Only the physical attractiveness of the players might cause a viewer to
pause when scanning the channels with the remote control. But a
charming girl with a pretty face alone does not create drama.
Only shallow showbiz actors and directors would think it plausible to present the reunion of a long lost child with her mother and father as a casual and mundane event. Outpouring at the end of long suffering, raw emotion, deep feelings -- all completely missing from FOUND. The big reunion in FOUND is little more than an owner finding misplaced car keys after a five minute search.
Only made-for-TV folk think it does not matter when the actors are clearly seen wearing underwear during "nude" love-making scenes. The technical production values are weak, even by low-end cable channel standards.
FOUND is painful to watch, not because of story-telling power and emotion, but because the plot has problems and almost each and every scene lacks credibility.
FOUND is missing drama. Please don't try to find FOUND.
This is one of those fun fluff movies that contains serious subject
matter, but it plays out more blasé. A Florida couple (Joanna Cassidy
and Greg Evigan) are reunited with their daughter (Tania Saulnier) who
has been missing for 16 years. But not everything is what it seems in
Victor Browne and Tania Saulnier give more memorable performances than the two leads Cassidy and Evigan. Browne in particular added some good comedic moments. But all of the actors did a great job and the film is entertaining. The locations are very beautiful and the director, Rex Piano (who also directed another good movie, Blind Injustice), did a nice job, especially in capturing some great visuals. This movie is one that is fun to watch kicked back late at night while eating nachos and drinking a beer.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
I enjoyed the movie: Found, for the most part. A good drama. Very good cast members. However, there were some parts that weren't accounted for. Like, who checked out roger from the hotel room, and who returned his car back into the rental company? Also, where was roger's body when the police and paramedics came? I really think that Joanna Cassidy knew the first time she saw "katherine", she knew even from 16 years ago that she was not her original adopted daughter. But she was so glad just to have a daughter. Remember, when her husband showed her the pictures and she found out that the girl was in a scam with the investigator, she didn't disown the girl as her daughter. Anyway, I give the movie what I think it deserves, a 7.
What is it that tips the viewer off that a movie is made on the cheap?
The fact that normally attractive people look awful, the slow motion
story, the "something off" about the acting that signifies a lousy
director, the bad, derivative script, the rotten dialogue? No matter
what it is, you have FOUND it here. The usually vivacious and glamorous
Joanna Cassidy is cast as a neurotic, heavily medicated woman whose
daughter was kidnapped 16 years earlier. Greg Evigan plays her smarmy
husband, and if you ever had a doubt that he's smarmy, just look at the
way he was photographed. I wouldn't have been surprised if the
character rang the bell at Notre Dame in his spare time.
Within five minutes, the audience can guess the entire story. My advice - look for the remote, and when you have FOUND it, turn off the TV.
Private detective Vince Whitaker meets a woman in a bar. He is
good-looking enough that he could have had any of the women there, but
the woman he chose is the bartender, whose name is Julia.
Then Vince shows up at the Florida beach home of construction executive Charles Drake and his wife Ellen. He has wonderful news: 16 years after their daughter Catherine was kidnapped at age 8, he has found her. Ellen is delighted, but Charles is suspicious. Julia, though, seems to remember a lot. Charles won't believe Julia is Catherine until he sees a birthmark he didn't tell the press about. She has it, so it must be her. Right?
Ellen spends a lot of time with Julia, buying her clothes and even a car. She has been so depressed for years, and she is taking numerous medications. Julia is so happy to have this relationship. As she explains, her nanny Lupe told her that her parents were dead. She ended up in numerous foster homes and finally ran away to Arizona. She says she has never had a relationship like this, and she doesn't even care about the money she might get from Catherine's trust fund.
Vince does care about money. It took a lot of effort for him to find Catherine, and Charles offered a $200,000 reward years ago. While Charles is investigating Vince, Vince is investigating Charles, to make sure he gets everything he can. And Lt. Conroy, a uniformed officer when the kidnapping took place, wants the case solved.
The movie offers numerous surprises and unexpected plot twists. Well, unexpected for me, anyway. I often find that when people on this site saw something coming a mile away, I was completely fooled. And that's the way I like it. It makes the mystery quite fascinating.
I thought all of the leading actors, and many of those with cameos, did a good job. Victor Browne has to be singled out because in the course of his investigations, Vince pretended to be an IRS agent and a lawyer. He had a different name every time he talked to someone, and I don't recall just when he was Roger. He was so polite when he first met the Drakes.
I didn't even recognize Greg Evigan, who I liked so much in light-hearted comic roles on "My Two Dads" and "P.S.I. Luv U". He was so mean and such a schemer.
I should also mention Joanna Cassidy. She reminded me a lot of Evelyn in "Two and a Half Men", and I even suspected I might have overlooked Holland Taylor's name during the opening credits.
Tania Saulnier also did a good job. She was so sweet, at least when her character was supposed to be. And Julia really convinced me she wanted a mother, not money.
When I first saw John Colton, who played Ellen's financial manager, I thought he looked just like George W. Bush. At least he had a similar face. His performance was good, but I didn't see anything to suggest he would be good in the role of the President. That's not to say he couldn't do it.
A couple of cautionary notes: there was little violence, but we were shown the gruesome results of violence. And while no actual forbidden body parts were shown thanks to creative positioning, we saw as much of Tania Saulnier as it was possible to see on broadcast TV. Unless the show is "NYPD Blue", that is. And the sex scenes were pretty athletic. Does it make the movie any more unsuitable if I mention the camera?
I enjoyed this.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
This is like a expanded soap opera but worse. Such poor acting but even worse is the plot. Parents finding their daughter after 15 years from her being kidnapped - I've acted more excited over finding $20.00 in a jacket pocket. Tania Saulnier is a babe no doubt but that can't save this waste of celluloid. There are just so many holes in this epic - when trying to determine if someone is really your daughter and hundreds of thousands of dollars are at stake - no DNA testing ??? Come on. While one could spend more time finding the flaws in this creation...... my suggestion would be to "Find" something better to watch.
A lot of "Lifetime" flicks have their resident "sociopaths." So does
this one, although it's not necessarily the one whom you'd expect, when
revealed towards the end.
I noticed this film listed when I was looking-up something for that evening, and had an unexpected couple of hours to kill. Tuned it in, although I didn't know any of the leads except Joanna Cassidy, vaguely.
The writers have inserted a few of the kinds of twists inevitable in this type story. The don't surprise at all, but each one has two or three variations which might have been chosen - so the only mystery is which will be the one they chose.
At the outset, when the 24-year-old daughter reappears, having been kidnapped at age 8, for about 30 seconds you might expect it could be a story where the remainder will deal with her reconciliation, adjusting to life back in the old homestead/town, etc.
However, there never appeared to be much chance of this, and the emotional displays of all concerned were about on the level you'd expect (maybe less) upon finding a lost pet turtle.
You soon know that there will be the fore-mentioned "twists," and some supposedly dark and dangerous revelations to ensue.
The problem is that the writers/director/actors never really raise any proverbial "head of steam," there's nothing which could frighten the viewer, and nothing which either makes one gasp or make the kind of comment you might expect during any real dramatic moments (none of which appear here).
Pretty much average, and would be rated lower except for nice scenery/locale and an attractive cast of the four leads and some of the support thespians.
While there was a bit of brandishing of weaponry, this was logical where involved, and thankfully this film omitted anyone running amok with butcher knives, heavy scissors or hedge trimmers.
I don't actually know why I rented this (I guess I give every movie the
benefit of the doubt), but I can tell you it is almost harder finding
this on IMDb, then in your videostore (highly unlikely and not true,
just saying). There are quite a few movies that have the title Found.
And although it is kinda fitting to this one (can't say anything about
the other movies), it's still not helping the movie being any better
than it actually is.
The acting is really very low standard (if you want to call it that), there are few things that don't seem to make much sense (not that you would actually be inspired by the movie to use your brain), but have a twist along the line that make them sort of plausible (information is the key word here). If you keep "not using your brain" that is. I guess you could have some fun with this, if you let yourself, but in the end, it isn't really any good
What did I miss here? This is 2004. These people never heard of DNA
testing? It would have been more plausible if it was set in say, 1960.
The reunion scene was almost laughable, if it wasn't so pathetic and stilted. I've seen people get more excited when there is an empty checkout counter at the supermarket. Joanna Cassidy is normally a wonderful actress. Too bad she didn't have the material to go along with her talent. The plot was very easy to follow. Outcome was completely predictable. I was rather disappointed. If they wanted this movie to be full of suspense and a thriller, they sure missed the mark.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
***SPOILERS*** It's when this mystery man Roger Whittaker, Victor
Brown, showed up unexpectedly and unannounced at the Laken's Charles &
Ellen, Greg Evigan & Joanna Cassidy, front door at their Sarasota
Florida home that their lives suddenly turned upside down. Claiming to
be a private investigator Whittaker tells the shocked couple that he
not only located their long lost adopted daughter Catherine, Tania
Saulnier, but in fact has her with him to present to them!
At first thinking that this guy Whittaker is some kind of con artist in wanting to get the $200,000.00 reward for finding their lost daughter Catherine the Lakens' soon find out that both he and she are the real McCoy! That's until local police detective Conroy, Glenn Herrera, started sticking his big nose into the matter and came up with a number of major inconsistencies in Whittaker's and "Catherine's" story! In the fact that they both knew, in the biblical sense of the word, each other and were a lot closer then they lead everyone, including the Laken's, to believe!
There are surprises galore in "Found" with the biggest coming at the end of the movie in just what was not only behind Catherine's disappearance with her nanny back when she was 8 years old some 16 years ago but what was the person behind it. And even more shocking what exactly happened to her and her nanny that turns out to be the key to this whole mystery!
***SPOILERS*** We soon learn that the smooth talking and sure of himself Whittaker in fact turns out to be a fellow called Vince the bartender from Phoenix Arizona who had concocted this whole fake story of finding Catherine to get the reward money. Later feeling he's being short changed Whittaker got a bit too greedy when he found out that the Laken's had set up a trust fund for Catherine that amounted to over 14 million dollars that she can live off from when she turned 21. Even though at the time she or whoever the person who claimed to be Catherine was 24 years old! What's by far the biggest surprise in the movie is who exactly was behind this scam in the first place. And what exactly were his, or her, reasons for doing it besides the money which turned out to be a secondary issue! In that person trying to save his neck, when the truth was about to come out, in something that happened in him pulling off Catherine's disappearance that carried the death penalty in the state of Florida not a 10 to 20 year sentence for kidnapping and extortion!
|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Plot summary||Ratings||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|