I've seen many films just like or similar to Atom Egoyan's "CHLOE" I can name a few right off the top of my head: "Fatal Attraction"(1987), "9 1/2 Weeks"(1986), "Indecent Proposal"(1993), "Lolita(1997), "Disclosure"(1994). In addition, one of the most infamous of the erotic thriller genre "Basic Instinct"(1992), now I ask you what all these films have in common. Simple they all have alluring femme fatale characters that try to seduce and kill and assert there power over men how theses beautiful and dangerous women and easily manipulate and control the men that are either after them or desire them. Theses type of films can go one of two ways 1. down the road of complete and utter absurdity and rampant sexuality(Basic Instinct, Lolita) that don't have a shred of intelligence and only serve the purpose of giving audiences some good sex scenes and nothing much else. On the other hand, the film can balance brains and sex to coherently tell an intelligent story of love, desire and family social angst (Fatal Attraction, Unfaithful, Eyes wide Shut) to make the film more than about sex. It’s more about the complications of begin unfaithful or how sometimes the desire or simple thought of begin with someone else or wanting someone can destroy your life. Atom Egoyan's tempting and beautifully photographed story of how one woman’s (Julianne Moore) suspicion takes her to a very dark place that will change her life forever.
Atom Egoyan's potboiler of a drama "CHLOE” succeeds despite the morbid pace of this film how it succeeds all depends on the actors and their performances. If there, performances are flat, the film is flat and while the performances in this film are not Oscar worthy, they certainly are better than the usual that come out of this genre. It's an above average erotic thriller seeing as it is more of a drama than an erotic thriller and that is what makes this film an actually film instead of an 1hr. 36 min sex scene which to me is nothing to sneeze at. What I liked about this film was the character they were all grayed instead of black and white. You knew there motives you know what has happened but you do not know exactly if it's true and there is where the films main strength lies and also one of the main points of the plot and story. You can derive a conclusion but then in the end, when the big reveal, you realize you only got fish. "CHLOE” may not be perfect and it certainly has its moments where it falters in the end this film won't let you down even it may seem that it does.
I am not lying to you when I say that this film is complete and utter guilty pleasure entertainment with some very handsomely written dialogue and amazing cinematography that pull this film all together and with keen direction from Atom Egoyan "CHLOE" does not fail.
Julianne Moore has done so much better than "Chloe" but I will give her the benefit of the doubt and say this in her favor Moore wasn't bad, she wasn't great but she wasn't bad and that for what it is something spectacular. Moore has had a good role in a while and in "CHLOE” she shows that she can return back to the days when she laid on the powerful performances that were Oscar worthy. Certainly her performance in "CHLOE" is nowhere near being worthy of an award but for what it is good enough for me to say that she did a fine job. Liam Neeson never really fails you but lately he has been releasing a string of films that are less than good his performance is almost unnecessary he doesn't fit the part at all he is just droning along at an uneven pace, Neeson just comes off as an eyesore in this picture with his distant performance. The best performance in the entire film comes from someone you would count out as being good, Amanda Seyfried, she gives such an unsettling and haunted performance that this film could survive solely on her if it wanted to. But sadly even though the film is called "CHLOE" she is playing second fiddle to Neeson and Moore being there just as something to look good when in reality she could have been so much more instead of being just the face of the film and nothing more, Seyfried is massively overlooked but amazingly still shines.
"CHLOE" may not impress many and others may overlook this film due to its premise and dismiss it as something they have seen before and while yes this has been done once or maybe twice or hell maybe ten times before. The only thing that keeps "CHLOE" fresh and stylish is the great script, keen direction and solid performances from the main cast. Without those things, "CHLOE" would sink under its own premise but it is good enough on it’s own to be called flawed but worthy.
