User Reviews

Between was one of the better, more intriguing films I saw at Sundance. I love that it was shot in a place I was not familiar with. It's filled with characters you don't often see in American films. Visually it was beautifully shot. I was surprised to find out it was shot on high definition.

Between takes place in Tijuana, Mexico. It's about an American woman who goes to Tijuana to look for her lost sister. I thought initially the film got off to a slow start but it still kept me interested. After about 15 minutes into the film, I overheard a woman who sat next to me ask her friend "Where is this going?" And that is what intrigued me about Between, trying to figure out what is happening. I love the ending (I won't give it away). In the Q&A, someone asked about an optional ending. The director said they considered a different ending but the one they chose was the most honest choice. I agree. Well worth a watch. Though I do think the first half of the film could have its pace picked up a bit.

It is truly amazing that, a film as horrific as BETWEEN even gets accepted into a prestige festival such as Sundance. I am not mad at the director for making such a poorly produced feature (even though he owes me $10 and 2 hours of my life), I am confounded how this movie made it past the Sundance judges. There is NO doubt that it is who you know at Sundance.

Before the movie began at the Echols Center at Park City, I knew I was in trouble: the director steps up to the podium then tells the audience this: "Folks, you are going to see a movie with a lot of twists and turns. Please, stay with it, as I promise you, the BIG twist ending is something you will love!" I mean, how dumb was that? Not only was he telling us the movie has a big twist, he was also trying to justify the weakness of the film's story-telling, that we must "hang in there". Bad start.

The film itself is a monotonous thriller about a girl whose sister is missing in Tijuana. THe girl goes to Mexico in hopes to find her sister.

The movie's title is a dead giveaway of "the twist" after watching 20 minutes of this film. Also, a deposition scene gives the movie away BIG TIME. You HOPE you are being led down a different path, ie, the recent SAW or even SIXTH SENSE for that matter, but no, you are not. You are spoon fed the entire movie within 30 minutes. And, for all of you stupid people out there, there are even force fed FLASHBACKS just in case you didn't get what was happening.

THe group I was with were constantly looking at their watches. Even a bunch of people got up and walked out.

DO NOT waste your life or $$ with this film.

On the other hand, the short film MOTEL that preceded BETWEEN was one of the best shorts I have ever seen. Now the guy who directed this DESERVES to work in this town. I would hope that the director of BETWEEN would give him $9.99 from the $10 I gave to him.

All these comments on here before the "real" comment listed below have GOT to be studio plants made up for this movie to get any sort of distribution. This was one of the films I was unlucky to see at Sundance and it was wretched. It will be lucky to get a straight to video release. The only thing going for it was Poppy Montgomery, who looked to be at least trying hard in this piece of garbage. Mainly she was just good eye candy.

I too noticed the director coming to the podium, distraught probably from previous screenings, warning the audience that they may want to get up and leave but to stick it out. What???!! The only thing that crossed my mind at that point, was "Uh oh, what have I got myself into?" No suspense or atmosphere created and the movie couldn't have ended with more of a disappointment. The only ride that this movie took you on was the fact that you were just guessing what the twist ending would be. Nothing else mattered, no good buildup or anything.

Shame on these producers or studio plants or whatever just trying to shamelessly plug a horrible movie.

When I discovered that a 2005 film was appearing on TV, it was a sure sign that this film was going to be a complete BOMB and it sure was from beginning to the very end. Nadine Roberts is a very attractive married gal who is very much in love with her husband and is a lawyer from Chicago, Illinois. Nadine's husband tells her about a nice home he is going to look at and describes the house in detail and explained there was even room for a child they just might want to bring into this world. You can see that Nadine is troubled about something and tells her husband she wants to go to Mexico and find her sister she has not seen in a long time. The reason for this decision was the fact that Nadine was having bad dreams concerning her sister and that she needed her help. The entire picture goes around in circles and many flash backs with many people involved down in Mexico. This is definitely a Lost Picture with a Lost Soul as the main character.

Ignore most of the reviews and ratings here, because they are pretty silly.

About two thirds of the votes are currently roughly equal for 10, 2 and 1 (all 20+), with votes from 3-9 essentially in the 4-7 range. It isn't that good, it isn't that bad. It's pretty mediocre, but watchable if you like plot twists and there is nothing better on.

To everybody who voted 1 or 2 to plummet the rating, shame on you. To the silly people who submitted the glowing reviews, shame on you thrice.

To those that haven't seen it yet, give it a chance on TV if you don't have many choices. But don't bother recording or renting. 5/10.

When Between began, I thought I had it all figured out. A girl goes to Tijuana to find her missing sister. She has some psychic connection to her and her dreams lead her to the truth about the disappearance. Boy, was I wrong. This movie is nothing like I expected.

I thought that Poppy Montgomery was great in the role. I really like her as an actress and she's the main reason I watched the movie. I was pleasantly surprised to see Adam Kaufman playing her husband as I'm also a fan of his. They are completely believable as a loving couple who support each other in their time of need. The mystery that unravels as the film goes on always keeps you guessing. Every time you think you have this movie pegged, you're wrong. It's hard to describe without giving too much away. I don't want to spoil it for anybody.

The locations they shoot at are beautiful. You really get a sense of what it's like for this girl to wander through a strange city, interacting with people who speak another language, getting even more confused with every step she takes. All the people she runs into are really interesting characters. They all seem to be hiding something.

I really think this movie is one of a kind. I can only think of a few others that could even fall into the same category, but nothing even come close to the tone of this movie. There are very few endings to movies that I absolutely love, even though they're kind of hard to accept. This is one of them. You don't quite see it coming, but after everything, it's the only way it could have ended. I was not surprised to hear this movie premiered at Sundance. I wish I'd heard of it before and rented it instead of watching it on Lifetime. I'm sure the original cut is even better than the TV version.

If it's not clear by now, I loved this movie. I felt like they cast the best people for the roles and the overall mood of the film was pitch-perfect. Most movies that try to recreate a dream almost always fails. This one succeeds in every way. It easily could have turned into one giant cliché, but it never did. I highly recommend it if you're looking for a suspenseful mystery, a psychological thriller, or a love story that won't disappoint.

The most innovative independent films in this country are being made by Latin filmmakers and Between is no exception. In the tradition of Inarritu with Amores Perros and Amenabar with the Others, director David Ocanas transports the viewer through the unfolding of a complex mystery. The story focuses on the journey of Nadine, played by Poppy Montgomery, as she travels to Tijuana in search of her sister who is missing. Her search propels the viewer through a series of events - some in the future and some in the past - with supernatural overtones. Most of the action takes place in the border city of Tijuana which provides the movie with a certain grittiness and mystery that sucks Nadine in as soon as she arrives. Ocanas weaves the elements of the story into a powerful narrative. I was never quite sure what was going to happen next and had an unsettling feeling that it wasn't going to be good for Nadine. Through the use of flashbacks, Ocanas manages to convey that something bigger (and perhaps more sinister?) is going on here as Nadine continues her search. Ocanas strikes an excellent balance, though, keeping the movie from becoming too dark using exquisite cinematography of daily scenes in Mexico with bold colors, striking backgrounds, and rich scenery. I'd encourage lovers of indie film (especially if you're a fan of Inarritu or Amenabar) to go see this movie. It's a beautiful, gripping, thought provoking film.

Can you put it together? In the same way a puzzle begs this simple question, so does the cinematic mind bend BETWEEN. From the first several seconds of the intro, cut by dramatic scene leaps & use of black and white to color, the film begins to offer us one jagged piece after another. And this is how we are pulled from our seats and strapped into what this film is selling, an entertaining and intellectual challenge. The general theme of one woman's physical and psychological journey, wrapped in a cloak of conspiracy and love, is offered in well thought out doses that keep us hooked as we catalog the pieces. It may be almost impossible to gather them all your first time through (I've seen it three times), but when we step back at the end of the film, with just a little help from director David Ocanas, the picture emerges. We are left partially satisfied, and overwhelmingly in immediate need of a second loop to gather the pieces we are sure we missed! Pierced with beautifully shot scenes across gritty Tijuana, this film is a visual and cleverly weaved intrigue that cannot be missed…several times!

See the movie Between, if at all possible, with a group of friends, then plan on talking about it for quite a while. It's sufficiently robust to support multiple interpretations, all of them absorbing. If your group is anything like the one I saw it with, they'll spot several ways to unravel it.

Some in my group tried sorting out what happened by diagramming a plausible order for the thriller-type clues. To their credit, together, they managed. Others insisted it as a psychodrama. Still others saw it mainly as a love story, but they couldn't agree whether the ending was happy or not. One viewer saw the movie as a post-modern essay on "between-ness" in which the characters are wavering precariously between illusion and reality, hope and despair, and certainty and contingency. The movie's setting in Tijuana, a city that exudes a peculiar between-ness, supports his interpretation.

Between's cinematography, particularly the junkyard scenes, keeps rattling around in my head, giving rise to even further interpretations. I like that quality in a movie. I also like the (unsuspecting) narrator's perspective, relating her tale through triple deep layers of awareness and imagery. I could be wrong about this, though. Maybe the narrator is actually the expert witness on near-death experiences who, at the movie's outset, is being deposed in a Chicago courtroom, or perhaps one of the attorneys spellbound by his testimony.

Between is in some ways like Memento, only better, because it stirs up more creative juices. At least for our group it did. Those who don't think much about the movies they watch will quickly become bored with Between, though, as will those who rely heavily on filmmakers' well-tested conventions.

This movie kept my attention from start to finish. It was like putting together pieces of a really big puzzle. You know how some pieces look like they fit but they really don't so you have to set them aside for later? Well that's how this movie was. I didn't want to miss anything because every moment was a clue. You don't realize it until the movie is over so you want to go back and see it again and again. The actors did an excellent job with their performances. I also really liked the way the film was shot. The slow, staggered camera moves helped to intensify the suspense of this movie. Using Tijuana as a backdrop was also a clever choice by the director. The colors, the movement, the characters and drama of Tijuana were incredible. The title "Between" was also a perfect choice because as a viewer I wanted to know what it really meant. You are led to believe it is one thing and then something else and something else again. You don't really get a fully, clear meaning until all is said and done. I loved it!

David Ocana posed his wonderful talent in this film.

The film was mostly shot in the city of Tijuana, Mexico. It is here that the protagonist Dianne comes to reality, or is it something else?

The movie style portrays the typical Alfred Hitchcock classic suspense with a touch of Bernard Herrmann, the well known composer of movies such as Psycho. The musical score is phenomenal. I applaud the composer for his excellent arrangements. The slightly melodic arrangements are used sparingly throughout the film nevertheless it renders a powerful effect of a good Psych thrill film.

Symbolism and imaginary ideas surge from the dreams which are based on Freudian-Lacan theories of dreams and relationships. It is here that Dianne must decipher and decide which step to take, which will take her to eternity. It is Pandora's box on the afterlife.

This film is for those of us who love a good psych thriller. The movie contains a lot of clues- one must be keen and sensitive to find each hidden clue. The movie gets better as you watch it again and again!

TWO thumbs up.

Salud, Dinero, Paz y Amor en 2006!

Impeccable sound, cinematography and editing do justice to the uncommonly elegant plot which we can loosely categorize as a mystery. BETWEEN, however transverses genres with generous ease, so much so that one wonders when "thriller", "mystery", or "love story" became separate endeavors.

We first met our heroine, played by the glorious Poppy Montgomery in the midst of a clue. Her journey on the outset is the most physical and mundane of acts: she must cross the border into Tijuana (a visual feast which is worked to the hilt) to find her missing sister.

A lesser actor might fumble the demands of this role as Nadine is required to be a spirit of sorts - a brave, sincere, and passionate woman who is willing to cross any border to find the truth. We soon realize that her journey is in fact a metaphysical one calling upon her spirit and strength; it occurs to one how seldom women are given such roles.

The clues are presented for our perusal: Valentines' day, a letter, a clock, a bus, a repetition of a phrase. We discover we are involved in a literal story that questions it's own literalness, that is more about the act of experience than any particular experience. The memory and movements of our heroine are in need of our full attention and we come to understand that our participation is required. We have to trust what we see and remember what we see and look, always, closer. This is perhaps the most stunning accomplishment of this film: our own involvement.

There is a feel to a Mexican city that is unlike any other. In Ocanas' hands we are two steps closer and inside this city, able to travel freely in a manner not often expressed through most film makers eyes, meaning observing eyes or, plainly, American eyes. The soaring energy and particulars of Tijuana begin to feel intimate and become as regular and every day as our local grocer. In one critical scene Nadine finds herself in a junkyard filled with buses. We are not just captivated by the strange beauty of this scene, we are there with her, searching and stumbling under the same hot sun.

Aside from her husband, Robert (Adam Kaufman) is Detective Campos (Jose Yenque) the detective, (though by now we know we realize that we are the detectives) who is equally as compelling and with a leading man's fresh appeal. His character is introduced as, simply, an official and a rather cruel one at that. Campos manages to convey both this and a secret. Is he her enemy? Her guardian angel? Or is he just a bitter man who has seen too much violence.

These questions remain available to us and we are willing to accept at any moment that a new aspect of one's personality or a duplicitous motive will be revealed. Much like our relationships in 'real life', every character introduced, from the Tijuana doctor to the elderly matriarch, express a level of personality and presence giving this film much tenderness so even the most daring of revelations and turns remain grounded.

BETWEEN does more than this however. It deposits these familial characters inside a plot in which it is reveled that they are mere puppets, at the will of greater forces. The fact that we already feel connected to them makes this both jarring and thrilling.

There was a point toward the end of BETWEEN when I realized I was worried. We are all somewhat accustomed to disappointment in some form when loose ends must be tied up - it is a common occurrence in complex works. What a relief it is when our careful attention pays off and we are treated to a finale more deeply satisfying than any you are likely to see in cinema today.

Robert Nelms and Director David Ocanas have penned what was referred to at Sundance as a "metaphysical thriller." It almost works. The movie begins with a mysterious sequence of a woman seen only by her bare feet walking along a sidewalk in a Mexican city. Shortly thereafter, we are introduced to Nadine James, an attorney who soon learns that her sister is missing in Tijuana.

Although they were not close, Nadine is haunted by dreams of her sister, and immediately heads for Tijuana to try to find her. But it quickly becomes clear that what we are experiencing is not the linear and tangible reality we are all accustomed to. Dream-like sequences come and go. Events are repeated, but not exactly. Nadine runs into Kafkaesque characters in an Alice in Wonderland setting. On one level, she is playing the role of a detective, trying to unravel a mystery. But on another, she is clearly battling her own demons and trying to decipher the meaning of her own psychological flailings.

You get the feeling that Ocanas is attempting to follow the success of M. Night Shyamalan. But there are too many flaws in the script; too many contrivances. The tension drags on without building to a climax. Some of the clues are too obvious, and some absolutely elusive. Having said all that, I believe that thrillers need to play by a simple rule: At the end of the film, do I realize that I could have figured it out if I had been sufficiently smart and observant? And to be fair, Between passed this litmus test.

As an aside, at Sundance I sat next to the producer of the movie at its world premiere. He was coming out of his seat in excitement. (That's a great part of the fun at Sundance. There is so much anticipation and enthusiasm accompanying each movie.) Turns out I was right in the midst of the cast and crew. For many of them, including Ocanas, it was their first feature-length film. To their credit, this was an ambitious maiden voyage.

BETWEEN is condensed Bergman. It gripped me from the opening shot to the last. A number of its scenes still reverberate in my mind. It's the kind of movie that I want to, no, need to, talk about, afterwards. I wanted feed-back to my own reactions and perceptions. Did others see and feel what I had seen and felt? What were their interpretations? How did they account for what happened? BETWEEN is fast-paced, keeping me "on edge" all the way through; not for the faint of heart. Set in titillating Tijuana, BETWEEN slices from the traffic of the streets to a dimly lit interior of a wealthy home; from the pulsating intensity of a hospital operating room to the serenity of a walled garden; from the eerie explorations of a junkyard to the solemnity of a funeral in a cathedral. The cinematography is striking and memorable. If you want a film that will "stay" with you and make you want to see it again, see BETWEEN

Director David Ocañas and co-writer Robert Nelms have made possible a somewhat simple and straightforward metaphysical film. Simple as it could have been, the plot is made unnecessarily complicated for the sake of dramatic and suspensive effects. There is a handful of psycho-philosophical ideas but not many well-developed. Yet, the movie is successful to some extent. Still, the film hangs from a thread so delicate like that of a ripen apple on a tree.

What is someone thinking when he or she is dying? Without giving up the end of the movie which in reality, as in unfinished dreams, paradoxically starts where it begins, David Ocañas directs a film which happens to be a somewhat good exercise in the inimitable Alfred Hitchcock classic suspense or the Psycho-liked psychological thrillers. That is how the movie is successful. Not only that, the scriptwriters had in the back of their mind, or perhaps in front of them, the film Six Sense where a child says, "I see death people." Or better yet, the director was supported by the works of the great Czech writer Kafka. This is case of memorable art. But there is also artwork that is like a bad dream and one wants to assure oneself that it never happened. I vividly remember Joseph K., who we know nothing of, who has just come from a distant town to a mysterious and new city in search of something that we, detail by detail, get to know. He has come to let himself in the castle who symbolizes what Between couldn't make justice to– the problem of reality, of death and dying, and of the metaphysical anguish of being alone in this godless world. The city of Tijuana and its visitors are a bad parody of The Castle.

Further, I believe that directors like Hitchcock or the Wachowski brothers can be –almost– imitated by good film maker. But it is a desperate and overwhelming task that of imitating great literature in cinematographic scenes. And everything is worth seeing in Between. We can see, for example, that literature is insuperable and that films are for entertainment. Even well-intentioned films can't portray what good literature portraits: men and women caught between one thing or another, whether it is human emotions or the never ending problem between the divine and human, reality and dreams, good and evil, innocence and guilt.

Despite its shortcomings, could I say that I like it? The movie tries to depict life after death, or between here and there. A movie like Between makes a serious theme like the after death experience a common place and makes it no more than forgettable entertainment. Did I like Between because the movie beings where it ends, with a barefooted woman, walking towards her immortality? After this scene, the mystery supposedly begins: there is a woman who when either when alive had an identity problem or is dreaming all the scenes while agonizing. Is there anything new in having a woman go on a journey (in real life, she wouldn't make too far into the city of Tijuana without falling prey to the real demons surrounding big and furious cities) looking for a sister whom, according to clues in form of clichés, does not exist. From the beginning I suspected that she only exists in the mysterious visions of the dying woman.

Dreams and reality, being caught between death and life, are subjects that need to be taken separately if one is serious enough to examine them. That is not one of the discoveries of Between; it fabricates a mind-twisting mystery, only to unravel it (mysteries that are deep inside ourselves can never be decipher and that is the beautiful human experience) and discover that it was only a psychological break down of a woman near the end of her life.

Also, the reality in Tijuana is not what is being portrayed in Between. What is a beautiful woman doing in a desert almost without being noticed, first wearing a plain white dress and after that wearing a plain red dress? We all know that it can only happens in dreams. But good movies who play with black and color, with dreams and reality, are successful at making the dreams seem real, so that one is almost certain that the dream is as true as reality seems to be.

As a psychological film, Between wouldn't even had made Freud proud. Is the meaning of death deciphered by having dreams or visions –and revisions– of a lost sister? I think this phenomenon should now be called the Sister-complex. In contrast the Matrix, even when it felt short of being aesthetic acceptable –great works of art imitate nature and not machines– was much more accurate than what Between tried to depict. Between is a theory that never let us see any evidence to support the claim that dreams, and mind-made mysteries are part of the dying experience. On the other hand, Between would have sadden the french philosopher Descartes who claimed that the mind can live without the mind.

When it comes to sound and picture, I can say that all was astonishing. In most movies there is no suspense without sounds. These tricks benefited this film. I dare to say, after all, that I liked the clues that keep the moviegoer wondering. First it is Valentines' day. There is a letter found inside the zinc pipe. A bus and collection of clocks, repetition of phrases and scenes. And there is the woman-Oracle, who is directly taken from The Matrix.

I believe that the greatest achievement of this movie is its impeccable déjà Vu. It reminded me of all good and bad movies I have ever seen. Perhaps that is a good thing. And in the mind of moviegoer, Between will soon be nothing else but a pleasant déjà Vu.

Most of the reviews I see on the movie "Between" are TOO analytical. Take the movie for what it is. I am an average occasional movie viewer and I thought this movie was quite thought provoking regarding reality, dreams, and moments of subconsiousness... even if there were scenes of bad acting/editing for the "movie critics". The fact that the movie is so broken and dicy lends to more and various interpretations... which I think makes the movie worthwhile for discussion. I have viewed this movie three times and I still feel like I need to see it again to pick up on clues that I may have previously missed. Give it a break! One final note.... The movie could have taken on a completely different religious significance if the mom reading to the daughter flashbacks would have been from Psalm 23:4 and/or Luke 1:78-79.

I find difficult to believe how underrated this movie is! For ambition, vision and courage, it reminds me a little of another David, David Lynch's masterpiece Mulholland Drive. I watched the latter several times, and even though I came up with any number of ideas, interpretations etc.. I was still at a loss as to its overall meaning, I got a little help from my friends and everything fell into place. Between is somewhat different in that, when into the very last sequences of the film (to the credit of director David Ocanas) everything become clear, you are left with a very direct and straightforward narrative structure. One thing both movies have in common is that holding the narrative key doesn't detract from any successive viewing, which, on the contrary, become even more poignant. But as to Between's first viewing, you are constantly transported through sequences, dreams, realities, nightmares, the semi-psychedelic effect this had on me was to induce a inward looking reverie/reflection on my own personal experience, our shared 'post-modern' one, and how thin is the line which separates our everyday perceptions from our nightmares! Interesting

the geographical and 'metaphysical' proximity between the two movies respective locations LA and Tijuana. If you liked or loved (like myself) this movie and, in the unlike event that you have not watched Mulholland Drive yet, go out and buy yourself the DVD! I would also like to recommend a BBC production which is not terribly well known beyond this shores: Life on Mars! In the end, Between and Mulholland Drive's somewhat labyrinthine exploration of different and extreme states of consciousness, only bring you an infinite straightforward compassion for the misery, sadness and splendour of human life.

A Standing Ovation for "BETWEEN" This is note from the Producers of BETWEEN: BETWEEN had the honor of being an Official Selection in the Dramatic Competition at the 2005 Sundance Film Festival (and as an additional complement to the film, BETWEEN was also selected as a Slamdance 2005 Dramatic Competition film. With all due respect to the Slamdance Film Festival, we chose Sundance.) The First Editor's cut (90 minutes) of BETWEEN screened at 2005 Sundance -- Due to the short time between the end of shoot, Sundance submission and its acceptance, this first cut was edited in less than 24 days and music done in two weeks.

Returning to Los Angeles after Sundance, the director and the producing team worked for the next seven months to complete BETWEEN. During this time, the team conducted three research/test screenings; using each screening to provide producers with valuable input from diverse audience members to consider during the ongoing edit, music and sound work. BETWEEN also hired a very talented up-and-coming composer (who counts I AM SAM, NINE WEEKS, SHREK, among others to his credit) to create a superb score which continually elicits very strong audience response and has received the BEST SCORE at a film festival. BETWEEN has also garnered a BEST DIRECTOR award. Similarly, POPPY MONTGOMERY has consistently received amazing and well-deserved praise from audiences for her role in the completed film.

BETWEEN was completed in August 2005. The producers screened the completed BETWEEN in New York in August 2005 to very enthusiastic audience response, of which one viewer exclaimed " It's thinking man's SIXTH SENSE." One week later, BETWEEN screened to multi-generational (audience members ranged from late teens to early 70's) "average" American audience in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. From this type of crowd that tends toward more mainstream pictures, BETWEEN received a STANDING OVATION! To learn more about BETWEEN, please visit www.BetweenTheMovie.com, to view the latest Trailer, a Los Angeles Festival Audience Response clip and other film information and updates. We hope this answers questions we have received from many throughout the country.

We sincerely thank the hundreds of audience members who have shared their positive comments, their enthusiasm, have provoked insightful conversation, have generated a great word of mouth and expressed their strong support for this unique and provocative thriller -- truly this film has "touched a nerve". And, we are excited knowing that we are on our way to sharing the BETWEEN experience with many more.

Sincerely, Producers of BETWEEN

For an LMN movie, this was a welcome surprise. It was suspenseful, visual, and not the usual fare.

Poppy Montgomery is very good as displaced Chicago lawyer ostensibly in search of her sister or husband, who were in a car accident in Tijuana, Mexico.

The sights are interesting and bizarre, one of which includes a school bus marked "Out of Service"/Fuera Servicio. As she wanders the blazing hot streets in a symbolic white dress, we begin to piece the puzzle together.

Overall this is a very intriguing movie which is well-directed and acted. Do not miss next time it is broadcast. 8/10.