User Reviews

This is a 1994 British/Spanish/French co-production film titled ¨The Flandes panel¨ or ¨ Uncovered¨, starring Kate Beckinsale and John Wood, it is a cinematic adaptation of the bestseller novel about a mystery spanning from the 15th century to the present day . It deals with Julia (Kate Beckinsale) , an art restorer and evaluator living in Barcelona . While restoring an old painting showing two men and a woman playing chess , Julia discovers a text underneath the paint which reads "Quis Necavit Equitem", written in Latin (English: "Who killed the knight?"). The owner (Michael Gough) of the painting tells her that one of his forefathers was murdered , the painting might identify the killer . She consults a gypsy named Domenec (Behan) , a quiet local chess master , who reconstructs the game from the painting . When Julia's friends are killed she understands that there is more to it and with any piece she takes , somebody dies . With the help of a chess genius and her old friend as well as father-figure , an antiques dealer named César (John Wood) , Julia works to uncover the mystery of a 500-year-old murder . At the same time , however , Julia faces danger of her own ; as several people helping her along her search are also killed .

Thrilling suspense movie packs thrills , violence , intriguing events , gruesome slaying , nudism and winds up into an astonishing finale . Passable whodunit in which a beautiful young girl discovers a painted-over message on a 1471 Flemish masterpiece called ¨The Chess Game¨, while a serial killer executes gruesome murders and subsequently the art restorer attempts to resolve it . Exciting and stirring development , though predictable , when starring finds that his fellows , friends and relatives are being murdered one by one . This is an acceptable thriller but contains several flaws and gaps , in fact there was trouble brewing on the set because of overages and creative concerns between the director , writer and the studio . It is based on a novel written by Spanish author Arturo Pérez-Reverte in 1990 . Reverte is a Spanish journalist and TV reporter, who turned to writer and today the best-selling author in Spain and the best-selling Spanish author in the world . Famous author of "Alatriste" novels as he carried out quite a lot of the work of investigating historical documents relating to 17th Century Madrid. His novels have the common thread of being based on real historical times and that in each case a great deal of investigation goes into the making of his stories, as well as the fact that he has had to learn a great deal on topics ranging from chess-playing to historical first-editions from 16th Century Dutch masters to Informatics and even swordsmanship . His extraordinary imaginative abilities have been able to produce well-written adventure stories , being adapted for cinema the following novels : ¨The Fencing Master¨ , ¨Territorio Comanche¨ , ¨The ninth gate¨ , ¨Cachito¨ , ¨Gitano¨ and ¨Carta Esferica .

Regular acting by a very young and without experience Kate Beckinsale as Julia , a restorer who comes undone after witnessing brutal murders on her way . Very good support cast though really wasted , all of them play weird people varying from psychotically aggressive , paranoids , drunken and killer ; being performed by Sinéad Cusack , Peter Wingfield , Helen McCrory , Michael Gough , Art Malik and James Villiers . Anti-climatic and inappropriate musical score by Philippe Sarde . Evocative cinematography by Alfonso Beato , but an alright remastering being necessary because of the copy of the film is worn-out . Shot on location in Canet de Mar (Castle) and Barcelona where appears several touristic palaces and monuments such as Park Güell , Casa Mila and Sagrada Familia Cathedral . This intrigue movie was ordinarily directed and with no originality , by Jim McBride . He is an American director and writer, known for Great balls of fire (1989), Big Easy (1986) , Breathless (1983) , The wrong man (1993) and The informant (1997) . Rating : 5.5/10 , average .

Julia (Kate Beckinsale) an art restorer finds a hidden message in medieval painting she is working on that points to the murderer of one of the subjects depicted. Fascinated she digs deeper into the origins of the painting and the clues within. The old mystery though is soon paralleled by a new mystery as the people involved in her research start to die. The story is seemingly well suited to the British mystery genre but fails largely due to aspects of the execution.

Kate Beckinsale manages with her portrayal to be both slightly awkward as well as endearingly cute but she seems decidedly out of her depth in a few of the more emotional/dramatic scenes. The film does boast a strong supporting cast of British character actors who may not have name recognition to some but should be highly recognizable to many including; John Wood, Sinead Cusack, Michael Gough. For the most part the supporting cast acquit themselves well considering how clichéd their characters are.

While some may find it slow I was interested in the glimpse at the Art restoration process, I thought some things look authentic about the process, but other aspects didn't quite ring true. The current day murder mystery aspect was far less satisfying, character behavior and actions seemed inconsistent and for me the biggest flaw (considering the genre) was that the identity of the murderer seemed far to obvious. Further the brief flashbacks to the subjects of the painting did virtually nothing to advance or support the story, they simply felt unnecessary.

The film is set in Barcelona but features an almost entirely English cast that speaks entirely in English and makes no attempt at Spanish accents. This is common in American films but seemed odd in a British film. The film makes reasonable use of the Barcelona locations including some wonderful Gaudi architecture, but I actually would have preferred even more attention on the culture and the city.

"Uncovered" is based on Arturo Pérez-Reverte's novel "The Flanders Panel". Julia Darro, a young art historian and restorer from Barcelona, is working on a fifteenth-century Flemish painting called "The Game of Chess", when she discovers a painted-over message reading "Quis Necavit Equitem?" (Latin for "Who killed the knight?") Julia begins to research the painting's background to discover the meaning of this inscription, and discovers that it relates to a 500-year-old murder mystery. She realises that the solution to the mystery is connected to the chess game being played in the picture, and knowing little of the game herself recruits Domenec, a talented local chess player, to assist her. Julia and Domenec, however, realise that they are in danger, as several people connected with their research are also murdered.

The central mystery is an intriguing and ingenious one, and well developed, although I could spot the identity of the murderer well before this was announced on screen. There are no really outstanding acting performances, but the lovely Kate Beckinsale makes a charming heroine (although I could never work out why she sneezes so much). Kate is one of the few actresses who can get away with wearing her hair boyishly short and still look strikingly beautiful.

One criticism I have heard is that although the main characters are all supposed to be Spanish they all speak English without foreign accents. This, however, is not something which has ever worried me. The use of native British or American accents to represent foreigners' use of their own native languages is something I find perfectly acceptable. Charlton Heston's El Cid, for example, was also a Spaniard, and nobody complains that he speaks English like an American rather than like Manuel in "Fawlty Towers".

This is one of the few films to take an interest in chess and art history, two rather intellectual pursuits, and it does so in such a way as to make both those subjects seem interesting, even glamorous, featuring a romance between a beautiful young art historian and a handsome chess genius. It makes good use of its setting, with some wonderful views of the city of Barcelona, especially the architecture of Antoni Gaudi. (One of the characters lives in an apartment in Casa Batlló, and Julia and Domenec first meet in Park Güell).

Although this film was an Anglo-Spanish co-production, and stars a well-known English actress, it is curiously unknown in Britain. Although it is nearly twenty years since it was made, I have never seen it on television here, and it is available on DVD in the US but not in the UK. Yet it is, I think, a film which deserves to be better-known. 7/10

A young Kate Beckinsale barely 20 years old during principal photography (which began one week after her 20th birthday, 2 august 1993), stars as the ingenue protagonist in this light murder mystery. We immediately and easily glean that this is indeed inténded to be a light hearted lowbrow movie, from the cheery musical score which is incessant and at times quite annoying.

Beckinsale plays Julia Darro, a restorer of paintings in Barcelona, who gets a job to restore a 500 year old painting, by the fictitious painter Van Huys (sounds like Van Nuys .... from the boulevard ... get it?) from Flanders, so, not a true Dutch Master but something close to it. She discovers that the painting contains a hidden, painted over message in Latin: "Quis Necavit Equitem" or "Who Killed the Knight?". What unfolds is a who-dunnit with some plot twists, but since they eventually kill off all possible suspects, when we get near the end, it's pretty clear who is the culprit.

Now, miss Beckinsale bravely shows some skin in this movie but, there have been numerous women who done that before her and at a younger age at that. Of the 260+ actresses in this 18-21 age group, Amber Heard, Barbara Capell, Charlotte Alexandra, Charlotte Walior, Clémence Poésy, Donna Wilkes, Georgina Cates, Hayley Mills, Heather Langenkamp, Helena Bonham Carter, Jacqueline Byers, Katie Holmes, Lizzie Brocheré, Mathilda May, Melanie Griffith, Odile Michel, Romane Bohringer, Tamara Mello come to mind, and those are just the ones that were of legal, non-Brooke Shields age, so to speak. But what makes her truly braver than her younger collegueas, are two things that stand out: She has the lips of Art Malik touching her breasts and ... she shows some truly hairy armpits somewhat later .... I found that last one to be especially shocking, since "even" French actressess haven't done that since the 70s. And they dó get a bad rep on the whole hairy armpits thing anyway.

The lightness of the movie is fully intentional, so much of the whining that it doesn't do the book justice is wholly irrelevant. And I get the feeling that much of the negative reviews come from .... let's call them ... the "Cesar Belvedere"-side of the spectrum. Which is odd, because John Wood (what's in a name) is actually one of the excellent aspects of this movie. Even.

Oh well. This movie is like Back to the Future, and all JCVD movies: they are excellent in their respective genres. So, don't go comparing this to "They shoot horses, don't they?" That's nonsensical. If you think this movie hurts the book, get the funding and make one yourself.

7/10.

The Melancholic Alcholic.

The story behind this movie is quite interesting. Perhaps for some the real mystery was obvious all along, but for me, it held my attention for the whole duration, and it took a second viewing to fully unravel the threads.

The real gem in this movie is Ms. Beckinsale. She is radiantly lovely throughout, and there is a strong sensuality about her that pervades the entire movie. And yes, those who long to see her unclothed will not be disappointed. Even with clothes on, though, she manages to exude this alluring aura that is irresistible.

The supporting cast is mixed. Perhaps the best is the investigating police detective, who is a classic. The gigolo guy is rather over the top.

I also wish they had not inserted those brief historical re-enactments, as they neither fit well into the narrative thread, nor are they in any way convincingly real.

It is perfectly comprehensible that in converting a book into a film, certain aspects become altered. There will always be deviations from perhaps the original idea, and of course certain literary concepts will be lost. Only very occasionally does a film come out that may seriously be considered a faithful adaptation of the novel in question. What is totally incomprehensible is the mutilation suffered by the highly readable 'La Tabla de Flandes' by the most popular Spanish author Arturo Pérez-Reverte. The novel is set in Madrid – the film moved that scenario to Barcelona. The quiet, absorbed, meditative intellectual chess-player Muñoz in the book was replaced for the film by a vulgar, gaudy, flamboyant, almost gypsy-looking, blonde called Domenec, and the nicely composed Spanish señorita called Julia was transposed into a terribly British Kate Beckinsale. Indeed, all those fine characters penned by Pérez-Reverte were transformed into British Isles actors. Apart from these unbelievable – and unforgivable – changes of convenience, the film hustles along from scene to scene in a highly disordered and accident-ridden way, confusing those who have not read the novel, angering those who have, and no doubt leaving the author feeling nauseous.

I have read just about everything Arturo Pérez-Reverte has published to date. In film versions I have only seen 'La Tabla de Flandes' and 'Territorio Comanche' (qv). Suffice to say: forget about the films in all cases, and Sr. Pérez-Reverte himself is the first to veto these films. But if you would like some challenging, exciting reading of good style and pace, carefully meditated and ingenious plots, frequently based on real history and exhaustive investigations to prepare them, I recommend in the following order: El Hussar, Territorio Comanche, El Maestro de Esgrima (q.v. - 1992 directed by Pedro Olea and worth a watch), El Club Dumas, La Tabla de Flandes, and La Piel del Tambor, as well as the 'Capitán Alatriste' series – all available in English (am not certain about the first title being in English) and probably in French and German, as well as other languages.

No question in my mind, there's no question that the vitality of film these days is in the hands of Spanish storytelling: layered narrative, magical deviations from causality, sex as physics. The beauty of woman and places deeply rooted to the elegance of understanding.

There are narrative notions and cinematic qualities being nurtured in this broad community that are worth nurturing by us through appreciation. Here's a project that when you sum it all up is a dreadful movie, but it knows what it is about in terms of some intelligent ideas. It just didn't have the talent to match those ideas.

Here's the deep spine which is attempted: Pérez-Reverte writes mystery stories in a magical realism tradition. His device is usually to play between the happening of a thing and the representation of that happening in a book or painting. The idea is to fold his representation (his book) into the story, reaping all sorts of storytelling advantages.

Once these layers are established, he can jump in and out of various levels, and so can we as readers and some of the main characters as they develop insight. Layers are narrative layers, story threads, time, and almost always abstraction layers in terms of creating events and creating laws behind those events.

But the books themselves have problems. The ideas in their construction are a whole lot more engaging than the books themselves. The actual skill at storytelling just isn't masterful enough to control, channel and exploit these conceptual tides that have been unleashed.

One of his books was made into a film by a true master filmmaker, Polanski, and starred someone who knows that rare trick of layered or folded acting, where you inhabit more than one layer at a time. You had to work at it, but "Ninth Gate" really is as good as its ideas, and the ideas are in that film are both richer and crisper than in the source book.

And now we have this film of another of Pérez-Reverte's works. A simpler book in key ways.

One change it makes is to relocate the story to Barcelona and Gaudi's architecture. He is our most "folded" architect, and that change shows some real understanding of what is at stake. The filmmaker here is the guy who best exploited the environmental fabric of New Orleans to transform a simple story into a pretty interesting film in "The Big Easy."

For some reason, he is unable to do the same here. I think he could have if he had more time to get into the rhythm of the place, which is less hedonistic than New Orleans but more achingly romantic; more poundingly African under a sunny, slightly mechanical nonchalance. The project could have used this, and it was in his power, but it eludes us this time.

And that lack of control extends to more mundane production elements. The balance between realism and theatrical stereotypes/architypes was lost, probably unachievable with this cast.

The cast centers on Kate Beckinsale as our surrogate detective, who really is alluring, and in precisely the way the project demands: physically, she is made here as befitting of the place: sloppy, casual (unshaven pits), boyish face, innocent questioner on the surface -- deeply sexual and possibly powerful underneath. But she couldn't deliver that last part, the power part. Indeed, any emotion is amateurish. I haven't really paid much attention to her later work. I think it about the same.

So. What we have is a parcel of really great ideas. Important, central ones if you love movies and seriously use them in building a life and life awareness. These are all here, but mostly implicit. You have to almost ignore the movie to see them.

But along the way, you get a pretty girl, the most intriguing city on the planet, and a painting that is worthy of its role.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

A young art restoration specialist based in Barcelona is retained by an art gallery to restore a 17th century Dutch Masters paainting that has been in a private collection since it was created. The painting depicts an elderly nobleman playing cards with a younger man, while a noblewoman watches in the backgrounnd. All restorations include an xray, and this image reveals an underlying original painting on the same two men playing chess instead of cards. On the lower right, in Latin, are the words "Who Killed the Knight." The film reveals the names of the people in the painting, their relationships to each other, and how they relate to the current owners.

This is a reasonably suspenseful film with qhite a few surprises. The performances are ot bad, although Kate Beckensale's inexperience is glaring. The story, however, more than compensates for this modest short coming, and the sight of the scantily clad beautiful English actress at age 21 is quite breathtaking.

This film is so terrible that everything about it vies for the distinction of being 'the worst of …' Is it the worst directed film? The worst acted film? The worst screenplay? One could go on and on. Every character in the film is despicable, and every actor and actress is at his or her worst, with the men and women equally disgusting in every respect. How is it possible to make one of the world's worst films from an interesting novel by a distinguished Spanish author, Arturo Pérez-Reverte? Well, these things happen. Just think of all the terrible films made of classic novels ever since the cinema began. Perhaps most offensive of all in this film is the performance of Kate Beckinsale, who looks like she is about ten years old, and the director is always making her take her clothes off so he can have another look at her breasts, and when they are covered up, the tight little garment over them keeps them well in view because the director is apparently obsessed with her and her sexuality. Nor does she seem any less obsessed with herself. We get great gory close-ups of her slobbering kisses with some of the most disgusting men one has seen in a long time, one young blond fellow in particular whose mouth is larger than her face is wide, so that one wonders how she avoids being swallowed. The arrogant vanity of all of these people, who clearly believe themselves to be the most beautiful creatures on earth when they are in fact extremely ugly (except for Beckinsale who qualifies as cute but disturbingly vain and rampant), is nauseating in the extreme. Only one performance in the film has any merit to it at all: John Wood as a lonely old queen who is the lifelong protector of Beckinsale manages some genuine pathos, and as that is the only wholesome emotion visible in the entire film, one notices it. The story could and should have been made into a really interesting film, a film as compelling as, for instance, that of Reverte's novel THE FENCING MASTER (1992), which was a triumph of film-making. But the story is thrown away and the horrible screenwriter starts using the word 'f…' as soon as the film commences and continues to do so throughout, obviously thinking that it will make him popular with some imaginary 'youth' or 'trendies' who he thinks might watch the movie sometime. But the idea that one is somehow going to be in the vanguard of popularity because one can say 'f…' a lot is a tired and outworn notion which never had the slightest credibility to begin with. Sinead Cusack is terrifyingly horrible in this film in every respect, and I expect she wishes she could destroy every print and DVD of it in existence to eliminate the evidence of her greatest folly. Michael Gough and James Villiers also disgraced themselves. No one was safe in the hands of that director. The original story itself is intriguing. A Flanders panel painting comes to light in Spain after 500 years in the private hands of a noble family who live in an ancient castle. The title of the film, UNCOVERED, does not really relate to Kate Beckinsale's juvenile form, but rather to the Flanders panel itself. Kate Becksinsale (aged ten or whatever she really is, as who can tell with her hair cut like a boy and her tomboyish figure) is the unlikely picture restorer hired to clean and restore this valuable painting, and if you can believe that you can believe anything. People hire ten year-olds to restore valuable paintings every day, surely. She commissions an infra-red photo and discovers that a mysterious inscription had been painted over, which says in Latin 'Who killed the knight?' Two men in the painting are playing chess, but one of the men himself is a knight, and it turns out that he was killed as part of the intrigue portrayed in the painting. Meanwhile people start getting killed all round Beckinsale, and these killings seem to be related to those of 500 years ago and follow the pattern of the same chess game which is portrayed in the painting (the next moves of which predict who will be killed next). Well, there is no point in going on, because who cares, when a film is so terrible, what the original story was.

Seeing the movie and seeing the review here in IMDb I am surprised at the low rating this movie has. It is not a perfect movie but it is fairly well played with a number of interesting characters and above all in my eyes a good deal of proper suspense on a level you don't see often anymore. The whole setting of the movie is pretty unusual which makes it all the more interesting. Art world, Murder, Theft, it's all in there in a relative well paced movie. It also has a great level of realism, you can actually imagine this to be real, it could have happened this way. Ignore the bad reviews, watch the movie with an open mind, in my opinion you can't really be disappointed.

I enjoyed this film. I've seen it perhaps a dozen times. Ms. Beckinsale is breathtaking. She receives strong support from the other players.

This movie is a very poor translation from the novel. Loosely based at best, with location and characters changed to the point where they are barely recognizable. The original plot of this story was intriguing and one that would make a great movie, had it been written with clarity and thought. However this version is designed with plenty of liberties taken on character development and plot continuity. Some I am sure would love the generous portion of nudity without reason or cause. Kate Beckinsale wandering around on the screen naked for no apparent reason is something I doubt we would see much of now. If you enjoy laughing over a miserable attempt to make a mystery, then by all means, rent this one, have some friends over, make popcorn, and have a cooler of beer on hand, and prepare to be entertained. But if you are looking for an edge of your seat afternoon of entertainment, look elsewhere.

Julia (Kate Beckinsale) is a restorer working in a five hundred years old painting, which theme is a chess game: there are two men playing chess and a woman watching them. This painting will be sold in an auction after the restoration, and the amount will be split among the owner, an old man who lost his wealthy, Julia's best friend Menchu (Sinéad Cusack) and her partner. Max and Lola, relatives of the owner, are very interested in the selling. Julia has no family and was raised by Cesar (John Wood), who has a fraternal love for her. Cesar is also homosexual. Julia finds a hidden message in Latin in the paint, an after some investigation, she finds out that the translation would be `Who killed the knight?' Soon, many characters are associated to the pieces of the chess and are killed, following the movements of the game in the painting. This incredible and complex plot is a great disappointment. One of the attraction is Kate Beckinsale in the beginning of her career, with a beautiful body and breasts, but with a rough and common face. Presently, nine years older than in this movie, she is very gorgeous, very well produced in her films, with a delicate face, thin nose, beautiful and long hair and wonderful costumes. My vote is five.

The movie was all in all for it's time a good movie. However, there is such a HUGE error in the flow of the movie at the end that it appears incredible that something like that could go unnoticed. Rather than spoil it, watch the movie for yourself and see if you can spot it. While you're at it, you may just enjoy the movie as well.

The characters in the movie do a good job with a decent script, although, there really isn't anyone who comes across as a memorable actor. The movie was directed well enough that there was certainly good flow to it and there was certainly a hint of who the killer was without any explanations until the end of why.....

A truly bad movie, from a generally good director like Jim McBride (I loved "Great Balls of Fire"). Based on a novel from Perez Reverte, this film is dull and uninteresting, and the only thing you can recommend from it is a nude scene from Kate Beckinsale (48 minutes after the start, so press your fast forward button in your video).

This one is for that small coterie of Kate Beckinsale fans. She's quite young here and, with a tomboyish haircut, looks and acts like a post-Disney Hayley Mills. And a little obligatory nudity from our heroic pixie helps her fans put up with the mediocre goings-on before and after. The film itself has an interesting core idea, but I frankly thought it would be more about the ramifications of the painting's ancient mystery (ala 'Da Vinci Code') than an excuse to pile up present-day murders via a chess game associated with the painting. Of course, I didn't realize that this film is from 1994, before the 'Da Vinci Code' phenomenon. But the chess game routine is quite old hat, 1994 or otherwise. The music score is also far too lighthearted and bouncy for what is supposed to be a thriller. As always, the carnage accumulating around the heroine doesn't seem to faze the cops who appear to wait for the next killing, show up, then calmly survey the damage and ponder why it just keeps happening around our female lead. This one is a time killer for those who have way too much time on their hands.

I felt this was a nice flick,a very different concept from what i've seen so far,of thriller movies.And the mood of the movie in spite of it being a thriller,was very light which made it all the more enjoyable with funny scenes aplenty in between.and the most surprising thing was that Kate Beckinsale kind of looks nice even with the ultra short hair,very unexpected i should say.

Nice performance by Kate Beckinsale,and the rest of the crew.Two of the nude scenes could've been done away with and one in particular,where she stares at the picture naked.There was really no need for that i felt. But it was that casual theme of the movie that you wouldn't really say it doesn't fit in.Thats about it,overall an enjoyable movie.

This is a mildly entertaining film as long as you are not expecting very much. Uncovered is pretty much on par with the old Sunday Night Mysteries like McMillan & Wife and McCloud. There is some nudity in the film but it is really nothing to get too excited about one way or the other. The characters are pleasant enough to watch but none are truly compelling. The story is mildly interesting but there is nothing captivating or compelling about the storyline. The analogy to the chess game is mildly amusing but it seems somewhat of a reach for a feature length film. The main reason to see Uncovered is the opportunity to see Kate Beckinsale at an early stage of her career.

This is a worthwhile experience, despite all the many flaws the film has. It's a weak work in most of the skills you may think of, related to film technique, and film expression:

The acting is childish, this applies to practically every participant. Exception made to Beckinsale, she moves around in a naive boyish manner, but she distills sex, she is that character who concentrates attentions, without being excessively aware of that. She does it well. The rest of the acting is weak. The editing doesn't help as well. The premises for the montage work in a film such as this one weren't so hard to follow. They just had to tell physical actions, linear and common. Yet there are transitions, basic continuity problems that aren't solved, expressions in the faces that change, and so on. The music is also not well placed, it's a bad soundtrack in its own musical value, but above all in the mood that transmits. The tribal references weren't needed, and in the kind of story depicted, noir influenced, it would have been nice to have the music link the sets and evolutions in the story line.

But there are three things for which i think this is worth taking a look. One is the narrative structure, how the story moves on. This is based on a novel by Pérez-Reverte, the man who also wrote Ninth Gate. So we have a merging of art and life, the story happening in front of us was "written" or at least determined many years ago, buy an artist, in this case a painter. The first scene is masterful in transmitting this, really it was one of the most economic and meaningful first scenes i saw ever. It basically starts with a closeup of a hand in a painting (a hand as a synonym for power, ability to do things), and the camera moves away from the painting (it moves, it's not a zoom out)and we get to see the border of the painting fully merged with the "real" environment surrounding it. This illusion of merger works for a few moments after which we get into the environment and momentarily forget the painting. This really works.

Other thing is the use of House Batló, by Gaudi. It's interesting how the camera (and the editing) lies about the building, to enhance it's qualities. It's not a particularly brilliant exploration of the space, but it's quite competent: what happens is, we get Beckinsale going up the stairs that lead to the first floor, she rings the bell in that first floor. These stairs are beautiful, they curve like the back of an animal, you get the sensation of elevation, instead of going up. Than this is edited and the inner space we get is from inside the attic, which is built with bows that remind an animal spine and bones. Later in the film, we have an outside establishing shot that leads the camera, from the outside, all the way up to the attic. We understand that the character lives in the attic, not in the first floor. This was interesting and showed a specific interest in playing with the house. A side note is that this film is a good opportunity for you to check the great ground floor of the house, which is today polluted by the bars which conduct the tourists, and the tourists themselves, lining up to get in, and filling the sidewalk around. Pity. I have a theory that tourism is literally killing and sucking life out of our best places in the world, but this is another discussion.

Anyway, the touristic gaze can also be seen in the shots that depict the city. Here we also get lies, usually related to the intention of getting the establishing shots. Here i think they messed up. They didn't have to show all the known places all the time. There are fantastic relatively hidden places in that city that show more of its mood and life than the monuments. One of those places is actually used, the St Antoni market (the protagonist lives in front of it). The place is alive, and they use it well in some scenes. But than they lie about the city, so we have her going from Batló, to Rambla, to the Temple, to the market as if they were close enough to walk to, one after the other, sequenced like i said. It's a lie, i have nothing against it, but i have against making the postcard taking nothing useful out of it. A good use of common architecture is the one made with Beckinsale's house, especial its central stairs, and central lifter. The use of Park Guëll is not particularly interest, except for some movement between columns, but that's it. And in that movement, they inserted some staged flirting between couples. Very poor, very artificial, they didn't need to do it, the park has an interesting life on its own.

My opinion: 3/5

http://www.7eyes.wordpress.com

The book LA TABLA DE FLANDES becomes UNCOUVERED in the movies. It is common said that books are ever better than the films that came from it, but in this case it's a complement on the film. I've read the book and seen the film and they couldn't be more far apart. This book with a good adaptation to the cinema would make a great thriller, with various points of historical interest. Even though 'The 9th Gate' was not the right adaptation from the 'El club Dumas', from the same author, Arturo Pérez-Reverte, it is a good film, making the fans of a good thriller eager for a much better work in what concerns 'LA TABLA DE FlANDES', stating yet that it's very easy not to drift from the book, while make a new movie...

Without Kate Beckinsale in it, there would be no reason whatever to watch this piece of mindless drivel.

I haven't read the book, but I can well imagine it was a rollicking good, unputdownable page-turner. It should have been easy to make a good movie from it. So why didn't they? I don't think Jim McBride is a bad director, so let's not blame him. So I guess it must be the screenwriter, and maybe the producers, if they agreed that the finished product was what they wanted in the first place.

Anyhow, as I said, there is absolutely no point to watch this other than to marvel at Kate. She seems to have been a top actress from the word go. If you're a fan of hers, you'll like this. Otherwise, don't waste your time. Especially don't watch it if you know anything about chess. You will be frustrated and enraged. Did you know that experts call rooks "Castles"?

simply terrible ... even kate beckinsdale who is apparently a competent actress in other roles, is just ridiculously bad in this pathetic adaptation of one of the finest novelists of the last 50 years ... it is just beyond me how they could watch the dailies during the filming and think they had anything other than the poorest type of community theatre production ... either ridiculous reactions to other character's actions or words or stomach curdling overwrought howling fits by beckinsdale make this one of the 10 worst movies i've seen in the last 20 years ...

and to ruin one of the fine novels of Arturo Pérez-Reverte is truly a crime ... this kind of movie unfortunately reflects on the novelist and makes movie adaptations of his other works unlikely ... as if it's his fault ... read his novels ...

and furthermore the soundtrack almost made me turn the movie off in the first ten minutes ... my god ... it's as if they searched royalty free soundtracks and then chose a mixture of the worst ones ... annoying at times to where you're thinking of murder but not from the plot ... so pathetically 'obvious' as when they suddenly insert an old sax-dominated noir type section when beckinsdale is searching her apartment ... just awful and kate is playing a brit ... why are her pits hairy? and of course why bother having actors at least use a Spanish accent for the parts that are supposed to be spaniards ... just use a British accent ... that sounds 'european' enough ...

jim mcbride should be horsewhipped for doing this ... actually he should get double punishment for directing it as well as completely mucking up the novel with his input on the screenplay ... the other two dolts credited with the screenplay are obviously adleminded since they wanted their name on this piece of trash and again why can't we give ZERO STARS???!!!