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.
12 Reviews
Average fare
caa82114 May 2008
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 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.
FOUND lost all interest
Pro Jury20 September 2004
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.
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.
yuck
blanche-225 September 2004
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.
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.
FOUND lost all interest
Pro Jury20 September 2004
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. Reader, please don't bother to find FOUND.
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. Reader, please don't bother to find FOUND.
5 Minute Workout
leonardhalliwell9 December 2021
Found indeed
kosmasp1 August 2010
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
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
Didn't Listen discovered FOUND!
countyfireman-1688528 October 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Reading the previous review should have been accurate enough as I became a statue watching this movie! The actors seem confused with where they are physicay unless Catherine & the PI are tumbling in bed while the parents are...? Every approach is based on the shallow.belief that unconditional love will conquer all. Then with the Polaroid photos being taken (and allowed) by Catherine who is as dumb as a turnip! The LT meanwhile is working on his suntan and finding free drinks.at parties. Meanwhile the fake PI dances the two step with a fired employee via a shotgun. A warm moment as they try to stay in step! Back at the house.
Mom & daughter are comparing overdose meds as to what works best! Mr. PI finds the cellar from burned down guest house. A cellar in Florida?' The water table is only 24 inches deep. How can we have a six foot cellar? The phony father is in on the whole deal. Maybe even murder! We know he has a bad temper. But THEN...,the PI finds a skeleton of guess who?! Well it appears to be eight years old and has a teddy bear placed with it. The Father is Insane and psychotic. His social pathetic personality is his undoing! The poor lawyer gets himself in deep water by getting into a trap! Finally, where is the LT? Oh yeah free drinks. Meanwhile mom is getting a breathing treatment via the old family car in the garage! But how...HOW did dad get a gun?! That always ruins it. Plus they argue over table scraps & chump change! The photo "show me!" Was anticlimactic! Why? Well after almost 2 hours.we WAIT? And see what? Nothing! The LT shows up wanting another free drink. And a lot is left out there with no conclusion.
Mom & daughter are comparing overdose meds as to what works best! Mr. PI finds the cellar from burned down guest house. A cellar in Florida?' The water table is only 24 inches deep. How can we have a six foot cellar? The phony father is in on the whole deal. Maybe even murder! We know he has a bad temper. But THEN...,the PI finds a skeleton of guess who?! Well it appears to be eight years old and has a teddy bear placed with it. The Father is Insane and psychotic. His social pathetic personality is his undoing! The poor lawyer gets himself in deep water by getting into a trap! Finally, where is the LT? Oh yeah free drinks. Meanwhile mom is getting a breathing treatment via the old family car in the garage! But how...HOW did dad get a gun?! That always ruins it. Plus they argue over table scraps & chump change! The photo "show me!" Was anticlimactic! Why? Well after almost 2 hours.we WAIT? And see what? Nothing! The LT shows up wanting another free drink. And a lot is left out there with no conclusion.
Comments for movie: Found
wi3andr10 September 2006
Warning: 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.
For that kind of money I'd also kill someone!
sol12181 April 2010
Warning: 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!
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!
Needs to be Lost
capecod-228 September 2004
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.
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.
Well-done, lots of surprises
vchimpanzee2 November 2006
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.
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.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
