Part thriller, part detective, a bit of horror mark this well photographed, well acted, but ultimately not quite successful film. It is too long and seems as if the makers couldn't decide how to end it. Works best for the viewer if he/she doesn't try to figure out every aspect. Interesting attempt, but starts to lose the viewer with repetitive murder followed by following the murderess/love object. Best part is her meeting the blind man she was to marry. Sympathetic aspect of a movie pretty cold despite the would be psychological explanations for behavior of murderess and her tracker.

As you already know, that's the second adaptation from the Marc Behm's novel. The first one was the Claude Miller's feature, starring Michel Serrault and Isabelle Adjani. I have not watched the French movie since a while now, but this one is very close to the novel, although, not as close as it should have been. I mean, many scenes from the book are unfortunately not shown here. Very important sequences. But I admit that this book's atmosphere was rather complex to film, and the director did a fine job in that field, better than the Miller's movie, as far as I remember. And many details provided by the novel were not put here, I understand why actually. But take for instance the short scenes in the book, when the lead female assassin meet two guys who throw her off. One talks to her about his dead child, and she decides to spare him, not to kill him as she did with the others. Very important moment, for me, at least. And the other sequence, where she is attracted by a dude in a bar and the guy suddenly stands up and tells her he will be back in a few seconds, because he walks away to talk to another woman. And the guy in question never came back to our lead. The author Marc Bahm, said that "SHE" realized that a page of her life was over. Very important link that that the film, at least this one - the French movie, I don't remember - did not show. So, I think that this outstanding story should have been supported by a three hours movie, or a mini series. Just to be faithful to the story.

This movie is complete and total crap. There is no hidden meaning, it isn't high brow art that it is misunderstood, it just plain sucks. The film doesn't seem to know what it wants to be, and the acting is terrible. The actors are good, they just have nothing to work with here. The scenes are just cobbled together and most, if not all, the characters have no dimension, no depth, and no motivation. The actors are forced to just phone it in, and the blame is not theirs. Comcast streams it for free, so after watching Kiss the Girls, my wife (who had not seen KtG) suggested we watch another Judd film. We picked this one, and that was a major mistake. Save yourself and avoid our error, don't waste your time!

Take a trip around America in Eye of the Beholder. This voyeuristic spy thriller covers thousands of US miles, including all the major cities, yet it goes nowhere. For a while, the story is interesting, but it gets progressively less so. Eye of the Beholder, is pretty ambitious, but it's not actually that smart. What we get can be interpreted as Vertigo plus Rear Window updated for the late 20th century, or as a hundred minute man hunt that is dressed up look fancy. Either way, the movie is not that appealing, and furthermore it is far too long (or it feels that way). This is one of those movies that you are kind of eager for the end to come, because having never gotten to be a part of it, you are just a viewer in the audience watching shallow characters run around on screen. Neither Ewan McGregor nor Ashley Judd can bring much life to their roles. What is ironic though is that even when the ending comes, you may find yourself frustrated, because it's abrupt and lame, and leaves so much unanswered. Eye of the Beholder, is a film that misfires. It attempts too much, and leaves out important ingredients like intellect, dimension, and thrills/chills. I don't think I can recommend it.