It’s easy to understand why Warner Bros. has had a hard time marketing Angel Eyes to the general moviegoer. Even after seeing it, I’m still not quite sure what it’s supposed to be about. Everything you’ve seen or read about this film would point in the direction of the supernatural, like a cross between The Sixth Sense and City of Angels, but you couldn’t be more deluded. The tagline of the film reads: “The deeper you look, the more you will find.” But I’ve always found it pointless to search for treasure at the bottom of a dry well.

The film opens with a traffic accident that seems very devastating except that we’re reserved to only a couple points of view. Over to one of the vehicles is Chicago policewoman Sharon Pogue (Jennifer Lopez) who comforts an unseen victim before the film cuts to a year later. Hmmm, you think this has something to do with the rest of the plot? Well, I guess since people didn’t catch on with Bruce Willis getting shot in the dead people movie, the filmmakers thought the same rug could be used over our eyes again.

But this film isn’t about dead people, unless you count James Caviezel who plays the mysterious Catch Lambert. Why he is mysterious? Because he goes around unshaven in a long coat, not saying much in a monotone voice and helping strangers. Early on it appears as if Caviezel stepped out of his role in Pay It Forward and carried over the mantra his druggie character learned into this story. But his devotion to the common man ends when he sees the beautiful Sharon and begins stalking her from afar.

Their paths cross finally when ol’ Catch saves her from the aftermath of a failed drive-by attempt directed at her fellow cops. Sharon, intrigued and thankful to this guy who likes to sit alone in bars, has no qualms about inviting him back to her apartment and doesn’t even break much of a sweat when he casually looks through her drawers. He even charms her with lines like “I was trying to imagine you without your clothes on.” If that were a sexy come-on line, it might work in a Zalman King kinda way, but not when it’s played off like a misspoken joke. (He meant street clothes, not her police uniform.)

Up to this point, the underlying meaning of the story appears to be to search for the good in every person or situation, no matter how cynical or cautious you may be. That may be good advice for critics going into screen Angel Eyes, but comes off more like hypocritical pandering when that intention is lost through a series of half-baked subplots involving disrespecting gang thugs and a history of wife beating in Sharon’s family.

The relationship between Catch and Sharon develops through a series of (mostly) well-written, but poorly acted scenes (all by Caviezel). Naturally when relationships in movies like this peak, we are treated to not dialogue, but the creatively challenged standby, the musical montage. At least in this one we get to see Jennifer Lopez in her black underwear, but that’s a minor plus in a film full of negatives that’s trying to teach positives.

But Sharon just HAS to know. Who exactly is Catch? What’s his deal? Is he a guardian angel? How could he be if everyone sees him? And why is he such a bad actor? The answers to these questions are answered in due time in Angel Eyes. Not before all the clues are laid out like an institute for the blind that would rather scream at its patients than take the time to teach Braille. But I’ll take on that last question nevertheless.

JAMES CAVIEZEL CAN NOT ACT! If the cheap seats couldn’t hear me, add a few more exclamation marks. Can someone please tell him that he’s awake and that his dryness as an actor wouldn’t even be welcome to flood victims? He smirked his way through The Thin Red Line and added more insult with an anesthetized performance in Frequency, which was half-ruined by him alone. Here, as the romantic lead, he proves that women too can be possessed by nothing more than a pretty face with absolutely nothing going on underneath. As that woman, Lopez fares much better than she did in last summer’s The Cell. Acting up against Caviezel certainly helps as you can see a wealth of difference between each of their big monologues towards the end of the film. The camera is so tight on his face for his tears (as opposed to Lopez’s) that you can only wonder where the onions are strategically placed. And I suppose if a single performance can encapsulate an entire film, Caviezel’s is the best way to describe Angel Eyes.

I couldn’t help but continue to think of the far superior (and vastly overlooked) 1993 romance Untamed Heart with Marisa Tomei’s waitress slowly falling in love with the shy, soft-spoken mysterious short-order cook played by Christian Slater. Similarities will jump out at anyone who remembers that little gem such as the timid, humble guy living a quiet life and would rather sit alone amidst a roomful of people. Catch befriends a stray dog here, revealing that the dog told him that his name is Bob while Slater told Tomei that he doesn’t know his own dog’s name because he never asked. Catch even takes it upon himself to pick up a trumpet on stage at a jazz club (over no one’s objections) and performs the same number that played over Heart’s opening credits.

I guess even after Lopez broke up with P. “don’t call me Puff Daddy” Diddy, the yearning for sampling still beats somewhere in her heart. Ironic for a film that is eventually about letting go of the past even if that involves forgetting about your mother getting beaten, sending your dad to jail, watching your brother pick up where dad left off and killing your family altogether. At least, I think that’s what it was about. And frankly, I didn’t care enough about it to look any deeper.


Recommended:
No

Suitability For Children: Not suitable for Children of any age