The premise of "Tangled" is a promising one. It's the old story of unrequited love in a triangle of friends which leads to madness and violence. Could make for a thrilling movie, but for some reason "Tangled" was made more complex than it should be with its unnecessary flashback-storytelling and its "surprising" twist ending. A traditional approach would have made for a much more natural feel. Also, in the final third of the movie characters start to behave unbelievably, all for the sake of a more shocking "outcome". Leigh Cook and Rhys Meyers do their best to give their characters more credibility, but Shawn Hatosy and his wooden facial expressions make everything worse. "Tangled" is watchable if nothing else is on, but it's neither a good movie, nor a satisfying way to kill time.
31 Reviews
Unexpectedly Good!
harve_p26 May 2002
At first, I thought this is a second class movie with horrible acting, scene, script and so on and so on. But, after I watched it, I realized that I judged it too early. It's not as bad as I thought, as the matter in fact, it's not bad at all. It's unexpectedly good.
The cross-cut scene, the premise of thriller and good cinematography are already there when you watched it for 15 minutes. The more you watch it, you just follow what will happen and it may surprise you as it's not like what you expect.
What makes me amazed more is that, after I knew this is the first movie of the director, the script writer and the story writer. For their first experience, yes ... it's amazingly great movies. I hope to see more of their movies in the future. I must congratulate them for this.
The cross-cut scene, the premise of thriller and good cinematography are already there when you watched it for 15 minutes. The more you watch it, you just follow what will happen and it may surprise you as it's not like what you expect.
What makes me amazed more is that, after I knew this is the first movie of the director, the script writer and the story writer. For their first experience, yes ... it's amazingly great movies. I hope to see more of their movies in the future. I must congratulate them for this.
Three way passion
caspian197823 June 2004
Many critics will agree that the story of tangled does not hold up. The ending was surprisingly good. The narrator always has control of what he / she wants you to known. The idea that the narrator is lying, you wouldn't know unless the narrator tells you. Otherwise, what the narrator says is the truth. The acting is decent alongside the movie's production value. Although there is only brief nudity, the passion between the 3 main characters do hold up to keep the audiences attention. Rachael Leigh Cook, who continues to not show any skin, keeps her two "male" friends in limbo with who she wants to love and who she will only like. With a number of fake and absent sex scenes, Tangled is more of a tease than a thriller. With the good acting and average storyline, the movie is only worth watching once.
Confused
Damaduende25 March 2004
Warning: Spoilers
I´m sorry, what was I supposed to feel at the end of this movie? (spoilers ahead) Was I supposed to be shocked because Shawn Hatosy´s character wasn´t such a nice guy after all? Was I supposed to feel sorry for Johnathan Rhys-Meyer´s character? Well, it didn´t happen. He slept with the girl after all, no one put a gun to his head. He had the drug at his house, no one force him. So, Im not sure what was all about in the end. The guy was a creep, he had it coming. So, his friend wasn´t such a wimp after all, that was a relief. I don´t know, I enjoyed the movie, but the end was kind of a waste, trying to turn the good guy into a semi psycho when all I think he did was to get the girl he loved. All right, maybe he went a little bit overboard, but who hasn´t, one way or another? I give this movie a 6/10.
Not as Bad as the first 15 Minutes Lead you to Believe
JayJay_Scotland13 May 2002
While I found this suspense-thriller to be rather mediocre in many ways, I am glad to say this film did manage to keep my attention for its hour and a half or so duration.
'Tangled' was a film I had never heard of before, but rented it on the basis of a decent cast (especially Rachael Leigh Cook) and the fact there was nothing else interesting at the store which I had not seen already. It has a very low budget feel to it, as if this could really have been a made for TV movie. It's basically a fairly typical teen film; light plot, suspect acting in places, and just about entertaining enough. The film in the most part is told in flashbacks and concerns a three way relationship between friends Jenny (Cook), Alan (Rhys-Meyers) and David (Hatosy) as told by David. The film starts with Jenny and David as close friends boardering on lovers, but things take a very different and sinister turn when Alan comes on the scene. The film was very, very similar to the 1995 film 'Fear' starring Mark Wahlberg and Reese Witherspoon. In this movie Rhys-Meyers essentially plays Wahlberg's character, Cook plays Witherspoon's character, Estelle Warren plays Alyssa Milano's character and Hatosy plays a similar role to that of Witherspoon's father in Fear, though his character is more jealous than overprotective. This is a little better than 'Fear' though.
There were a number of things I liked about the film. The cinematography was nice, and also varied - both warm and vibrant early in the film and dark and cold when things take a downward turn. The way in which the events are told through flashbacks of different times and using varying amonts of colour, though not particularly original (Usual Suspects, Traffic), does at least make it intersting and a little different from the rest of its market. I also liked the fact that Rachael Leigh Cook for once plays a relitively sexy character, rather than her usual 'cute but slightly dorky' ones which have become her trademark (She's all That, All I Wanna Do, Antitrust, etc). There were a few scenes where the director tries to be a little deeper and metaphorical (e.g. kite scene, sitting on car scene, and the story about the brothers), but I felt these scenes suffered from lack of subtlety, especially the kite scene. Still, I liked the fact he tried them.
I do have a number of critisisms though. Firstly, the plot can be a little slow at times which may not be to everyones tastes. Secondly, while the acting in the most part was OK, there were a few times (e.g. Cook's 'shocked and surprised' face in the first 10 minutes) which left me and the guys I was watching it with chuckling. Also the 'twist' ending is very predictable, and we had the whole second half of the movie figured out within the first twenty minutes. Still, theres at least a sense of contentment when things come together on screen how you predicted them.
Overall this is a mixed bag and not bad for a 1st time directorial effort - a mediocre but interesting suspense thriller which is worth a watch if you see it on TV.
Rating: 6/10
'Tangled' was a film I had never heard of before, but rented it on the basis of a decent cast (especially Rachael Leigh Cook) and the fact there was nothing else interesting at the store which I had not seen already. It has a very low budget feel to it, as if this could really have been a made for TV movie. It's basically a fairly typical teen film; light plot, suspect acting in places, and just about entertaining enough. The film in the most part is told in flashbacks and concerns a three way relationship between friends Jenny (Cook), Alan (Rhys-Meyers) and David (Hatosy) as told by David. The film starts with Jenny and David as close friends boardering on lovers, but things take a very different and sinister turn when Alan comes on the scene. The film was very, very similar to the 1995 film 'Fear' starring Mark Wahlberg and Reese Witherspoon. In this movie Rhys-Meyers essentially plays Wahlberg's character, Cook plays Witherspoon's character, Estelle Warren plays Alyssa Milano's character and Hatosy plays a similar role to that of Witherspoon's father in Fear, though his character is more jealous than overprotective. This is a little better than 'Fear' though.
There were a number of things I liked about the film. The cinematography was nice, and also varied - both warm and vibrant early in the film and dark and cold when things take a downward turn. The way in which the events are told through flashbacks of different times and using varying amonts of colour, though not particularly original (Usual Suspects, Traffic), does at least make it intersting and a little different from the rest of its market. I also liked the fact that Rachael Leigh Cook for once plays a relitively sexy character, rather than her usual 'cute but slightly dorky' ones which have become her trademark (She's all That, All I Wanna Do, Antitrust, etc). There were a few scenes where the director tries to be a little deeper and metaphorical (e.g. kite scene, sitting on car scene, and the story about the brothers), but I felt these scenes suffered from lack of subtlety, especially the kite scene. Still, I liked the fact he tried them.
I do have a number of critisisms though. Firstly, the plot can be a little slow at times which may not be to everyones tastes. Secondly, while the acting in the most part was OK, there were a few times (e.g. Cook's 'shocked and surprised' face in the first 10 minutes) which left me and the guys I was watching it with chuckling. Also the 'twist' ending is very predictable, and we had the whole second half of the movie figured out within the first twenty minutes. Still, theres at least a sense of contentment when things come together on screen how you predicted them.
Overall this is a mixed bag and not bad for a 1st time directorial effort - a mediocre but interesting suspense thriller which is worth a watch if you see it on TV.
Rating: 6/10
Very familiar but intriguing in its own right.
Zombified_66011 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Tangled is pretty much an American version of The Hole. The premise, setup and characters are very similar, and while the setting is different, if you've seen The Hole you will instantly notice the correlations between the two.
That said, I like this movie better. Maybe it's the likable leads, maybe it's the fact that the movie is still interesting outside of it's flashbacks, but if pushed, I'd say Tangled has the edge. It benefits mainly from having a key cast that only numbers 4 characters, and concentrating on developing these leads as opposed to confusing matters by adding lots of extras.
Tangled is very much a character piece, with most of its shocks and twists coming from alterations in behaviour and unexpected actions as opposed to physical violence or graphic visuals. All three teens in the love triangle are initially likable, vulnerable characters and it's only as the movie develops that you find some of them are not the people you believe them to be. This slow drip feed of information is addictive, and keeps you glued to the screen. Extra credit must go to the three leads, Rachel Leigh Cook, Shaun Hatosy and Johnathan Rhys-Meyers for putting in such charismatic performances, with Rachel Leigh Cook's twitchy acting style greatly suited to such a role.
Most of the movie, like The Hole, is told in flashback. Where Tangled departs most from The Hole is that the interlocking segments are as full of useful information as the flashbacks. Indeed as the movie progresses, more and more hinges on the aftermath of events as opposed to events themselves. This gives the movie a steady sense of development as opposed to the stop-start of most non-linear narratives, and eases your enjoyment of the film.
Basically I'd be lying if I said this movie was entirely original. It's very similar to The Hole, and it reminded me a lot of American Perfekt in parts as well. However I would still highly recommend it as it is a greatly enjoyable, well acted piece that deserves a lot more recognition than it seems to be getting, given it's only just come out in Britain this year, but was made 4 years ago. Go find a copy, stick it in your VCR and get watching.
That said, I like this movie better. Maybe it's the likable leads, maybe it's the fact that the movie is still interesting outside of it's flashbacks, but if pushed, I'd say Tangled has the edge. It benefits mainly from having a key cast that only numbers 4 characters, and concentrating on developing these leads as opposed to confusing matters by adding lots of extras.
Tangled is very much a character piece, with most of its shocks and twists coming from alterations in behaviour and unexpected actions as opposed to physical violence or graphic visuals. All three teens in the love triangle are initially likable, vulnerable characters and it's only as the movie develops that you find some of them are not the people you believe them to be. This slow drip feed of information is addictive, and keeps you glued to the screen. Extra credit must go to the three leads, Rachel Leigh Cook, Shaun Hatosy and Johnathan Rhys-Meyers for putting in such charismatic performances, with Rachel Leigh Cook's twitchy acting style greatly suited to such a role.
Most of the movie, like The Hole, is told in flashback. Where Tangled departs most from The Hole is that the interlocking segments are as full of useful information as the flashbacks. Indeed as the movie progresses, more and more hinges on the aftermath of events as opposed to events themselves. This gives the movie a steady sense of development as opposed to the stop-start of most non-linear narratives, and eases your enjoyment of the film.
Basically I'd be lying if I said this movie was entirely original. It's very similar to The Hole, and it reminded me a lot of American Perfekt in parts as well. However I would still highly recommend it as it is a greatly enjoyable, well acted piece that deserves a lot more recognition than it seems to be getting, given it's only just come out in Britain this year, but was made 4 years ago. Go find a copy, stick it in your VCR and get watching.
Whatever Happened to Lanie Boggs
pierotti13 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Tangled is an apt description of this film. It jumps around in both time and point of view so that you never really have a clear view of what actually happens in the climax.
The one thing that kept going through my mind while watching Tangled was that if Rachel Leigh Cook's Lanie Boggs from "She's all That" had gone off to college convinced that she was now attractive to boys she would have grown into the neurotic, annoying Jenny Kelly she plays in this film. Like Lanie, Jenny is pretentious, arty, and self involved. She does however have a doting admirer in David, a shy boy planning to become a writer who appears to be charmed by Jenny's bohemian, pseudo intellectual ways.
David makes the mistake of introducing Jenny to his wacko ex-roommate Alan, one of those guys who is apparently irresistible to women. Alan is better, or at least more dramatic, looking than David. He also appears strongly inclined towards a criminal career, which probably makes him a 'bad boy'. In any case Alan moves in on Jenny, posing nude for her and dragging her off to 'adventures' in the woods. For some strange reason this dysfunctional group becomes a threesome, with Alan and Jenny tormenting David with their romantic activities. I have never seen a crueler scene in a film than when Alan asks David to give him and Jenny 15 minutes alone while they are walking back to their car from an adventure in an abandoned house where something nasty took place in the past involving a good son and a prodigal son.
At this point sunshine temporarily enters this dreary film as Alan sets up David with Elise (Estella Warren) a big, funny, sexy girl who originally thinks Alan is asking her out, but manages to respond well when she discovers she has made a date with David instead. Many people have disparaged Estella Warren as an actress, but in the scene in the café with David when she realizes he is her date, Estella Warren does more acting using her face alone than Rachel Leigh Cook does in the entire film. Watching Warren's look change from disappointment to embarrassment to pity to sympathy in the space of a minute shows a genuine sense of how human emotions work. Later as Elise and David walk and talk, Elise's self deprecating humor and ability to poke gentle fun at David's pretensions mark her as a keeper, at least to me.
(Spoiler alert) Instead of thanking his lucky stars that a girl like Elise would be interested in him, David remains obsessed with Jenny. Jenny catches Alan and Elise together in flagrante delicto (apparently like Ado Annie, Elise is a girl who can't say no), causing Jenny to throw a monumental, but very arty, hissy fit. This serves to draw David and Jenny together, especially after Alan is arrested for possession with intent to distribute.
Alan is convinced that Jenny set him up, out of jealousy,and he plots his revenge during his year in prison. Turns out however, that David is not quite the wimp he appears to be. He used Elise to set up Alan and then turns in Alan so he can have the rebounding Jenny to himself.
Everything culminates a year or so later in the abandoned house where David shoots Alan, either to protect himself and Jenny (the official version), or from anger (the apparent true version) because as he says, "After all I did for her, she still wanted the a**hole". At least at this point most men in the audience will feel sympathy with David.
The one thing that kept going through my mind while watching Tangled was that if Rachel Leigh Cook's Lanie Boggs from "She's all That" had gone off to college convinced that she was now attractive to boys she would have grown into the neurotic, annoying Jenny Kelly she plays in this film. Like Lanie, Jenny is pretentious, arty, and self involved. She does however have a doting admirer in David, a shy boy planning to become a writer who appears to be charmed by Jenny's bohemian, pseudo intellectual ways.
David makes the mistake of introducing Jenny to his wacko ex-roommate Alan, one of those guys who is apparently irresistible to women. Alan is better, or at least more dramatic, looking than David. He also appears strongly inclined towards a criminal career, which probably makes him a 'bad boy'. In any case Alan moves in on Jenny, posing nude for her and dragging her off to 'adventures' in the woods. For some strange reason this dysfunctional group becomes a threesome, with Alan and Jenny tormenting David with their romantic activities. I have never seen a crueler scene in a film than when Alan asks David to give him and Jenny 15 minutes alone while they are walking back to their car from an adventure in an abandoned house where something nasty took place in the past involving a good son and a prodigal son.
At this point sunshine temporarily enters this dreary film as Alan sets up David with Elise (Estella Warren) a big, funny, sexy girl who originally thinks Alan is asking her out, but manages to respond well when she discovers she has made a date with David instead. Many people have disparaged Estella Warren as an actress, but in the scene in the café with David when she realizes he is her date, Estella Warren does more acting using her face alone than Rachel Leigh Cook does in the entire film. Watching Warren's look change from disappointment to embarrassment to pity to sympathy in the space of a minute shows a genuine sense of how human emotions work. Later as Elise and David walk and talk, Elise's self deprecating humor and ability to poke gentle fun at David's pretensions mark her as a keeper, at least to me.
(Spoiler alert) Instead of thanking his lucky stars that a girl like Elise would be interested in him, David remains obsessed with Jenny. Jenny catches Alan and Elise together in flagrante delicto (apparently like Ado Annie, Elise is a girl who can't say no), causing Jenny to throw a monumental, but very arty, hissy fit. This serves to draw David and Jenny together, especially after Alan is arrested for possession with intent to distribute.
Alan is convinced that Jenny set him up, out of jealousy,and he plots his revenge during his year in prison. Turns out however, that David is not quite the wimp he appears to be. He used Elise to set up Alan and then turns in Alan so he can have the rebounding Jenny to himself.
Everything culminates a year or so later in the abandoned house where David shoots Alan, either to protect himself and Jenny (the official version), or from anger (the apparent true version) because as he says, "After all I did for her, she still wanted the a**hole". At least at this point most men in the audience will feel sympathy with David.
The good and the bad one
TheAstaroth13 March 2010
Despite all the negative reactions I read, I consider Tangled unexpectedly enjoyable for a popcorn movie and worth watching. Maybe the scenario is not that shiny and the whole concept could have been processed in a much more impressive way, but still, it's a fine piece.
The story tells about the love triangle of young American high school students. The warm-hearted David (Shawn Hatosy) secretly admires his best friend, beautiful photographer Jenny (Rachel Leigh Cook). When David's old friend, crazy and attractive, heedless Alan comes on the scene, Jenny falls in love with him. How will David deal with it?
Especially Rhys Meyers did a good job. He's also very cute. Everybody has to love him as the beautiful and uncontrollable heartthrob Alan. The movie has an interesting cut sometimes. The story is perceived from retrospective and has a surprising ending. It's nothing intellectual or sophisticated surely, not artistic and not as complicated as it might look. But if you just want to relax and get amused (and if you like some of the lead actors starring here), you should watch it.
The story tells about the love triangle of young American high school students. The warm-hearted David (Shawn Hatosy) secretly admires his best friend, beautiful photographer Jenny (Rachel Leigh Cook). When David's old friend, crazy and attractive, heedless Alan comes on the scene, Jenny falls in love with him. How will David deal with it?
Especially Rhys Meyers did a good job. He's also very cute. Everybody has to love him as the beautiful and uncontrollable heartthrob Alan. The movie has an interesting cut sometimes. The story is perceived from retrospective and has a surprising ending. It's nothing intellectual or sophisticated surely, not artistic and not as complicated as it might look. But if you just want to relax and get amused (and if you like some of the lead actors starring here), you should watch it.
Moronic thriller for 12 year old girls
bodyshots8026 January 2003
This movie was pretty horrible except for Cook. She is gorgeous, however, she cannot really act. But that's okay because as long as you get to look at her that's all that matters. This movie was stupid and made for stupid people. They even explain the whole movie at the very end when it didn't need to be explained. A five year old could have figured out the twists without the movie having the end tell you. The first 10 and last 10 minutes are the most ridiculous. Just skip this altogether.
An above average romantic thriller with unexpected depth.
geoffgee18 August 2008
I enjoyed this unusual little thriller on a number of levels. It's always good to see Rachael Leigh Cook, but especially so when she's playing more 'serious' (and sensuous) roles. I liked the multiple flashback way the events leading up to where the film opens were gradually pieced together.
I felt the plot of this film had an underlying theme in that it incorporated an exploration of the dynamics of how these two male characters employ different tactics in competing for Jenny Kelley's (Rachael Leigh Cook's) affections. In short, there's an 'in depth' study (in particular) of David Klein's (Shawn Hatosy's) character.
Finally (similar to what I think has already been observed in an earlier comment) I thought several scenes excellently captured the unpredictable spontaneity in the various ways in which passionate love can sometimes evolve.
I felt the plot of this film had an underlying theme in that it incorporated an exploration of the dynamics of how these two male characters employ different tactics in competing for Jenny Kelley's (Rachael Leigh Cook's) affections. In short, there's an 'in depth' study (in particular) of David Klein's (Shawn Hatosy's) character.
Finally (similar to what I think has already been observed in an earlier comment) I thought several scenes excellently captured the unpredictable spontaneity in the various ways in which passionate love can sometimes evolve.
Passes the time
rob-2361 August 2002
A good cast does their best with an average script that, although predictable, is still watchable until the very end. Shawn Hatosy (The Faculty) plays David who fancies the pants off his close friend Jenny (Rachael Leigh Cook – She's all that), although the reality hits him that she only regards him as a friend and nothing more.
things change dramatically when David's ultra confident and slightly mysterious old friend Alan (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers – Velvet Goldmine) appears on the scene and sweeps Jenny off her feet, leaving David feeling very jealous indeed as well as concerned as he knows all too well of Alan's dodgy past. The story is told from David's point of view and includes many flashbacks as the story unfolds which do not always work. Plus, the final 'twist' is absolutely no surprise at all.
things change dramatically when David's ultra confident and slightly mysterious old friend Alan (Jonathan Rhys-Meyers – Velvet Goldmine) appears on the scene and sweeps Jenny off her feet, leaving David feeling very jealous indeed as well as concerned as he knows all too well of Alan's dodgy past. The story is told from David's point of view and includes many flashbacks as the story unfolds which do not always work. Plus, the final 'twist' is absolutely no surprise at all.
Underrated movie
rpzowie20 February 2005
I thought this was an extremely well-done suspense mystery that attempts to answer the question: what does a young man do when he's in love with his best friend, only to see someone else move in on her? Jonathan Rhys-Meyers' performance was well beyond convincing, to the point where it felt I was watching actual events transpire before me. Overall, I thought this was a very good story line with some good plot twists. Rachael Leigh Cook and Shawn Hatosy were also well cast. This is the type of film that will generate a lot of things to discuss regarding the plot, antagonists and so far. It might not be Heat (my favorite film), but it's good.
Good Guys can get the girl....
Julesyboy28 August 2004
er....as long as they turn a bit Psycho for a few minutes....This movie has at least one good thing going for it before it even starts and that's Rachael Leigh Cook, who's just so naturally beautiful it breaks my heart just watching her on screen. It's also the only reason I watched this movie. I wasn't expecting much but I was pleasantly surprised, the oh so versatile Ms Cook put in another top drawer performance and the two blokes, Shaun Halitosis and Jonathan Rhys Jones were also good. The obvious outcome isn't that obvious provided, like me, you're far too busy checking out RLC than paying attention to the plot, which, contrary to other reviews isn't that complicated. It definitely killed an hour or two, well an hour and 26 minutes to be exact and overall was a good bit of escapism. Watch it, don't watch it, either way, your life is unlikely to be better or worse for it....
This story had better not been told
Mort-3127 December 2003
What a stupid, ridiculous little movie! It doesn't work as a thriller, the acting is not bad enough to call it an unintentional comedy, and it can't tell us anything about life either. The only thing I learned from it was that it is not completely uncomprehensible that so many girls are mad about Jonathan Rhys-Meyers.
All the three actors do their best to conceal the catastrophic weaknesses of the screenplay. They fail yet raising interest in themselves: Rachel Leigh Cook is sweet, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is a decent maniac, and Shawn Hatosy is perfectly natural as the miserable "good son". I hope the actors really got a lot of money for this film. So much for the positive aspects.
Right from the start the film fails to build up any suspense or even interest in the allegedly mysterious events that go on in the flashbacks. The mix of characters is much too arbitrary to form an attractive plot, so the way they act is stupid and not at all convincing. Single scenes are highly over-directed by use of dramatic music and even more dramatic one-liners. I was prepared for a plot twist but then the film was over and I realized I had missed that "plot" "twist".
This is even too bad for television.
All the three actors do their best to conceal the catastrophic weaknesses of the screenplay. They fail yet raising interest in themselves: Rachel Leigh Cook is sweet, Jonathan Rhys-Meyers is a decent maniac, and Shawn Hatosy is perfectly natural as the miserable "good son". I hope the actors really got a lot of money for this film. So much for the positive aspects.
Right from the start the film fails to build up any suspense or even interest in the allegedly mysterious events that go on in the flashbacks. The mix of characters is much too arbitrary to form an attractive plot, so the way they act is stupid and not at all convincing. Single scenes are highly over-directed by use of dramatic music and even more dramatic one-liners. I was prepared for a plot twist but then the film was over and I realized I had missed that "plot" "twist".
This is even too bad for television.
I recomend it for RLC and JRM fans.
johnnymoviefan13 October 2002
When I first saw this movie with friends, they thought it was confusing, but I followed the plot just fine. I have to admit, it wasn't the best movie I have ever seen, but anyone who is a fan of Rachel Leigh Cook, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, or Shawn Hatosy would like it. I, a huge fan of JRM, did. You can tell this was a low-budjet film, but the acting was great. The plot was a little far-fetched, but the ending was good. All in all, if you can't find anything to rent on a Friday night, grab a big ol' bag of popcorn, some friends, and try this movie... especially if want to see a really hott guy, JONATHAN RHYS MEYERS!
Unimaginative!
MrsObvious23 April 2003
At first I have to say that I really love Jonathan Rhys Meyers, I think he's one of the most talented young actors in the moment. I couldn't believe he signed for such a bad movie!
The plot in unconvincing and unimaginative. The so-called-thriller isn't enthralling for a second.
I'm also wondering why Rachel L. Cook was casted for this role, 'cause there isn't a spark of talent!
This film is a bad clichee, nothing more!
The plot in unconvincing and unimaginative. The so-called-thriller isn't enthralling for a second.
I'm also wondering why Rachel L. Cook was casted for this role, 'cause there isn't a spark of talent!
This film is a bad clichee, nothing more!
Entertaining, besides some flaws...
RealLiveClaude3 July 2003
When I received my copy of Tangled, I was expecting something not up to scale, but finally, I was quite surprised by the end result...
This story of a love triangle, as told by a guy (David) who tries to survive an accident is a déjà-vu subject, but the use of flashbacks is like a piece of the puzzle, which we see the full result at the end of the movie.
Rachael Leigh Cook did produce partly this movie, but it is sad that this movie hasn't been released on a wide basis (mostly for lack of interest). However, she passes the mark here. And shows that she has some sex appeal. Just for proof, she is better than Estella Warren here, who is a complete bore...
Shawn Hatosy is a bit weak in the role of David, but Jonathan Rhys-Meyer steals the show as Alan here. Hoping this guy gets better roles one day as he shines here. Even I would say he was better than Ms.Cook (which I am a fan)... Good job also by Lorraine Bracco, that we never see often in motion pictures (I remember her in Medecine Man and GoodFellas...).
The script is good, and the Toronto settings are quite convenient (just wondering if the story is settled in the U.S. or Toronto itself). The movie is quite entertaining, and of much better fare than those "Based on a true story" type films...
Watch it if you like watching a story built like a good jigsaw puzzle, in which the end might surprise you !
This story of a love triangle, as told by a guy (David) who tries to survive an accident is a déjà-vu subject, but the use of flashbacks is like a piece of the puzzle, which we see the full result at the end of the movie.
Rachael Leigh Cook did produce partly this movie, but it is sad that this movie hasn't been released on a wide basis (mostly for lack of interest). However, she passes the mark here. And shows that she has some sex appeal. Just for proof, she is better than Estella Warren here, who is a complete bore...
Shawn Hatosy is a bit weak in the role of David, but Jonathan Rhys-Meyer steals the show as Alan here. Hoping this guy gets better roles one day as he shines here. Even I would say he was better than Ms.Cook (which I am a fan)... Good job also by Lorraine Bracco, that we never see often in motion pictures (I remember her in Medecine Man and GoodFellas...).
The script is good, and the Toronto settings are quite convenient (just wondering if the story is settled in the U.S. or Toronto itself). The movie is quite entertaining, and of much better fare than those "Based on a true story" type films...
Watch it if you like watching a story built like a good jigsaw puzzle, in which the end might surprise you !
I Will Never Be Able To Get Back The Time I Lost Watching This Movie!!!
miragenemo20 July 2004
Warning: Spoilers
This movie was supposed to be a thriller, yeah right...in who's mind? A deranged split personality! This movie was NOT Interesting and Not Interesting enough to want me to see it more than twice. I only watched this movie twice so I could give it a chance, may be I missed something...nope, I didn't miss anything nor did it require my watching it again...
The acting was below par for all three main characters and the rest of the cast. Rachael Leigh Cook didn't act, she just read her lines, Shawn Hatosy looked like he was reading his lines and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, well I'll give him this much, he can dance and he seems to like movies where he portrays a weirdo and/or he can show off whatever part of his body/anatomy he can. As for the rest of the cast Lorraine Bracco seemed bored with her character and only slightly interested in what she was saying. With the way these actors were trying to act, it's a no wonder this movie got off the ground and was released.
Without giving away too much of the plot this movie was basically a he-said she-said with ridiculous plot twists and flashbacks to what supposedly happened and what actually happened. The so called good boy(Shawn Hatosy as David) is actually bad, the devil may care boy (Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Alan) is actually good and the girl(Rachael Leigh Cook as Jenny) is basically a stupid blonde(insert all dumb blonde jokes here) disguising herself as a brunette. And of course Lorraine Bracco as Anne Andersle seemed bored, and for want of a better word she is a bit dead pan.
By the time the first flashback finishes you get the idea that this is a he-said she-said type movie and realize that not all is as it seems. When you see the next flashback you finally realize that David has some problems and is probably the reason why he is hurt and that he is a liar. At this time you just want to turn away and say enough is enough. Unfortunately I tried to give this movie a chance twice...wrong answer, I should have walked away when I could have!
This movie was basically PREDICTABLE and BORING!!! The storyline was a waste of time and the acting, oh I'm sorry there was NO ACTING just pathetic excuses for reading lines in a script!!!
DON'T BOTHER WITH THIS MOVIE, IT IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND SHOULD BE DESTROYED!!!
The acting was below par for all three main characters and the rest of the cast. Rachael Leigh Cook didn't act, she just read her lines, Shawn Hatosy looked like he was reading his lines and Jonathan Rhys Meyers, well I'll give him this much, he can dance and he seems to like movies where he portrays a weirdo and/or he can show off whatever part of his body/anatomy he can. As for the rest of the cast Lorraine Bracco seemed bored with her character and only slightly interested in what she was saying. With the way these actors were trying to act, it's a no wonder this movie got off the ground and was released.
Without giving away too much of the plot this movie was basically a he-said she-said with ridiculous plot twists and flashbacks to what supposedly happened and what actually happened. The so called good boy(Shawn Hatosy as David) is actually bad, the devil may care boy (Jonathan Rhys Meyers as Alan) is actually good and the girl(Rachael Leigh Cook as Jenny) is basically a stupid blonde(insert all dumb blonde jokes here) disguising herself as a brunette. And of course Lorraine Bracco as Anne Andersle seemed bored, and for want of a better word she is a bit dead pan.
By the time the first flashback finishes you get the idea that this is a he-said she-said type movie and realize that not all is as it seems. When you see the next flashback you finally realize that David has some problems and is probably the reason why he is hurt and that he is a liar. At this time you just want to turn away and say enough is enough. Unfortunately I tried to give this movie a chance twice...wrong answer, I should have walked away when I could have!
This movie was basically PREDICTABLE and BORING!!! The storyline was a waste of time and the acting, oh I'm sorry there was NO ACTING just pathetic excuses for reading lines in a script!!!
DON'T BOTHER WITH THIS MOVIE, IT IS A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND SHOULD BE DESTROYED!!!
Not very thrilling
The_Void2 November 2008
I have a habit of enjoying small scale thrillers, and figured Tangled looked good enough for me to spend some of my precious time on. Well, not only is this film not good enough to warrant using up ninety minutes of my time; it's arguably not even a thriller, seeing as the movie features nothing in the way of suspense; and doesn't make up for that with anything interesting about the characters or the situation. This is actually a real shame because the base of this movie is good and could easily have lead into something worthwhile; but the writers clearly weren't talented enough to capitalise on the promise. The plot focuses on a love triangle between three young people and as the film starts, one of the triangle has been admitted to hospital with plenty of bumps and bruises. He gets questioned by the police and the film then cuts to flashbacks which shows us what happened in the build up to him being beaten up and put in hospital. Turns out that there's a girl named Jenny at the bottom of it; and this starts a rivalry between two friends.
The choice to have the film cutting back from flashbacks all the time was a big mistake; it's really annoying and means that the film doesn't flow very well, which certainly affects it in terms of tension and suspense. A film like this therefore really needs to have strong characters to work from; but it doesn't. None of the three central ones are really fleshed out and I didn't believe their relationships either. The three central cast members are not particularly good; they're not helped by the script, in fairness, but the performances are nothing special anyway. This is only the second time I've seen Rachael Leigh Cook in anything (Get Carter remake being the first) and I doubt I'll be seeking out anything else with her in it. Shawn Hatosy is as wooden as they come, while Jonathan Rhys Meyers does put some effort in but doesn't create a convincing character. The first hour is really quite dull and comes off as more of a drama than a thriller. The final third of the film is when the inevitable twist comes into play and while the finale is better than the rest of the film; it's really nothing to write home about. Overall, Tangled tries it's best to be clever but unfortunately fails and I wouldn't even recommend this as a decent timewaster.
The choice to have the film cutting back from flashbacks all the time was a big mistake; it's really annoying and means that the film doesn't flow very well, which certainly affects it in terms of tension and suspense. A film like this therefore really needs to have strong characters to work from; but it doesn't. None of the three central ones are really fleshed out and I didn't believe their relationships either. The three central cast members are not particularly good; they're not helped by the script, in fairness, but the performances are nothing special anyway. This is only the second time I've seen Rachael Leigh Cook in anything (Get Carter remake being the first) and I doubt I'll be seeking out anything else with her in it. Shawn Hatosy is as wooden as they come, while Jonathan Rhys Meyers does put some effort in but doesn't create a convincing character. The first hour is really quite dull and comes off as more of a drama than a thriller. The final third of the film is when the inevitable twist comes into play and while the finale is better than the rest of the film; it's really nothing to write home about. Overall, Tangled tries it's best to be clever but unfortunately fails and I wouldn't even recommend this as a decent timewaster.
you've got to be fuc*ing kidding me!
asim34522-118 October 2008
I mean talk about stealing ideas! I watched this movie a few months ago and I also happened to watch an Indian movie in 2005 and you would not believe how closely related they are! Three people in this movie- two men and one women and the same for that movie. Same plot, same twist in the end same pretty much fuc*ing everything! EVERYTHING IS THE SAME!!!!!!!!! I mean is the director of this movie so shallow he has to steal form other movies and that movie happens to be an Indian movie as well. For shame, for shame. At first I thought it was a coincidence but after watching this movie and watching that Idnian film form before I have to say that the 2005 Indian movie and Tangled are like identical twins but this is the older one. (The Indian film is something like this: Ashique Banayaa Apne or something like that)
A Gem of a Movie --- Rachael Leigh Cook's Best-Ever Role
vitaleralphlouis21 May 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Just as Dimension Pictures provided Kirsten Dunst with her best and sexiest role in the spider-free "Crazy/Beautiful" -- now Rachael Leigh Cook with a part in "Tangled" that brings out the full range of her talent as an actress, and her magnetic sex appeal.
Two young men are best friends, but one has Rachael Leigh Cook for his girl friend. A common problem in real life but seldom in non-comedy movies, the other guy likes Rachael but of course he keeps this buried and quietly accepts the fact that Rachael wants and belongs to the other guy. But things can change.......
There is a 1 minute 43 second scene which I've lifted from the movie and show people as "Almost Two Minutes in Paradise" --- one man's dream is fulfilled after a 2 year effort including betrayal and literally stabbing his best friend in the back: Rachael wakes up and after kissing the guy on the cheek begins a ragging fit screeching about her not finding her cigarettes. When her Marlboro's are found after numerous 4 letter words and slamming around, the seizure stops and she coyly smiles in the young man's face. True happiness! Great moments are NOT romantic moonlit walks on the beach. Such ideas are for shallow losers. Great romantic moments are being with a 90 lb spitfire, full of life, overloading your heart, ragging on a guy at 8 AM before the coffee's had time to drip.
Two young men are best friends, but one has Rachael Leigh Cook for his girl friend. A common problem in real life but seldom in non-comedy movies, the other guy likes Rachael but of course he keeps this buried and quietly accepts the fact that Rachael wants and belongs to the other guy. But things can change.......
There is a 1 minute 43 second scene which I've lifted from the movie and show people as "Almost Two Minutes in Paradise" --- one man's dream is fulfilled after a 2 year effort including betrayal and literally stabbing his best friend in the back: Rachael wakes up and after kissing the guy on the cheek begins a ragging fit screeching about her not finding her cigarettes. When her Marlboro's are found after numerous 4 letter words and slamming around, the seizure stops and she coyly smiles in the young man's face. True happiness! Great moments are NOT romantic moonlit walks on the beach. Such ideas are for shallow losers. Great romantic moments are being with a 90 lb spitfire, full of life, overloading your heart, ragging on a guy at 8 AM before the coffee's had time to drip.
Confusing
lydia_15_20021 April 2002
This has an average plot, an average ending and average performances. "Tangled" is just a typical teen movie- one that's been done before. What can I say? I was more confused than captivated! The first hour is spent flashing backwards and forwards to the past and then to the present, and even at the end the first five minutes haven't been explained. Sure, it twists your expectations, but I wasn't impressed. There's nothing there to grab your attention and make you want to stay watching for the whole hour and a half. The odd moment of humour is made even more confusing. People appear to be dead then aren't even injured. I didn't understand this movie- if anyone did i'd be happy to hear what it was all about!
No other reason to watch besides Jonathan!
lauleebelle31 March 2003
I am a huge fan on Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and he is the reason why I was dying to see this movie. For the amount of money that it cost to buy the DVD, I wasn't too impressed with the movie. The only reason to watch it is b/c of the photography scene. OOOh la la!!
Why Bother!!!
miragenemo14 July 2004
This movie needed more than help, someone shouldn't have released it at all.
1. The storyline stank.
2. The time I lost watching this movie, I can NEVER regain!
3. Someone must have had money to burn to want to actually finance this movie!
4. The beginning of the movie barely introduces the characters and it took too long to get to the point. You could already figure the movie out by the time the second flashback occurs.
5. No suspense and no point...
6. What a waste of time for actors who barely bothered to act in this movie!!!
I'm surprised someone actually claimed credit for writing and directing this sorry excuse for a movie....
1. The storyline stank.
2. The time I lost watching this movie, I can NEVER regain!
3. Someone must have had money to burn to want to actually finance this movie!
4. The beginning of the movie barely introduces the characters and it took too long to get to the point. You could already figure the movie out by the time the second flashback occurs.
5. No suspense and no point...
6. What a waste of time for actors who barely bothered to act in this movie!!!
I'm surprised someone actually claimed credit for writing and directing this sorry excuse for a movie....
Give me a break
raulfaust21 July 2013
Warning: Spoilers
As many people say, you know it is a bad movie when it keeps going back to the past and coming back. In fact, "Tangled" does this and is bad. Main problem with this film is such a BAD plot; many scenes are totally pointless and characters do weird stuff all the time. I believe it's one of the strangest movies I've ever seen, when it comes to the storyline. Characters are crazy, unstable and undecided. Directing is just regular. Shawn Hatosy has an annoying smile-- there's something weird about his upper teeth. The only acceptable thing in this movie is the final twist, which is also plausible, even if cheesy. And my friends felt a little unnecessary the nudity in this movie, which is, in my point of view, whatever.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
