Very uninteresting and sleepy movie... Don't waste your time...

1/10
bleah@ - first review
7.6.2002 - age: 18-25

I had high hopes for this movie, with the hyped up "Academy Award" winning cast. However it was SLOW. I found myself wishing it was over as it just kept going and going... Hilary Swank was very good, she was the highlight of the film.

5/10
the_girl@ - 4 reviews
6.6.2002 - age: 26-35

Really not good, story is like many other movies, bad cop vs good cop.

1/10
paparazzi@ - first review
6.6.2002 - age: 26-35

The actors made up for what lacked in story in this movie. I have to admit that Pacino did look v. tired and we also got v. tired of looking at him be so tired. Robin Williams is brilliant but his character was not twisted enough... Scenery in Alaska was beautiful and I might take a trip there some day!

6/10
myre08@ - first review
5.6.2002 - age: 26-35

This movie was pretty good. A little slow at times and Robin Williams comes into it pretty late but good nonetheless.

7/10
loveprettywoman@ - 2 reviews
5.6.2002 - age: 26-35

Good acting but predictable plot.

6/10
elfassy@ - 3 reviews
5.6.2002 - age: 18-25

A very good film! Pacino and Swank were great! Robin Williams did a terrific job, too. It was very interesting to see him in such a... different role than in the past. Magnificient scenery, as well. Very suspenseful. My 2¢ worth. ;)

8/10
steve_cochrane@ - 31 reviews
4.6.2002 - age: 26-35

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Very fast paced intriguing plots and sub plots. A must see.

8/10
peterharvey@ - 12 reviews
4.6.2002 - age: 36-49

Suckedddd - very little action, just a bunch of lengthy, complicated (well ok... interesting to some degree) character sketches to supposedly compensate... the plot definitely could have used some more "meat and potatoes" to perhaps take advantage of its great actors and the twisted and intriguing people whom they effectively portrayed.

6/10
crazycrazysheila@ - 4 reviews
4.6.2002 - age: 18-25

It seems Al Pacino and Robin Willisms are too old to give a wonderful performance. The story is old, too. Not much to say about it, just so so.

6/10
liujh811102@ - 2 reviews
3.6.2002 - age: 18-25

I thought it was very well done. It was refreshing to see Robin Williams in a role unlike the many he has done. Another great performance by Pacino as well.

9/10
captain_powder2@ - 3 reviews
2.6.2002 - age: 13-17

I liked this movie because it was interesting and freaky.

7/10
dkouli@ - 6 reviews
31.5.2002 - age: 1-12

I noticed a couple of the reviews refer to the seaplane at the beginning of the movie and the beautiful scenery. There is actually a Montreal connection to this. The pilot of the plane, who has a line in the movie, is actually from Montreal. His name is Olivier Zemen and he is actually a pilot by profession.

8/10
veronique.zemen@ - first review
31.5.2002 - age: 26-35

Good movie. A bit predictable, and a bit long. But at least it keeps your attention. Acting was good but not an Oscar performance. No good one liners.

7/10
pozcanon@ - 26 reviews
31.5.2002 - age: 26-35

I loved the mind games, they were the only reason I could stay awake (not because it was a boreing however, I was watching it at 1: 30 in the morning) I'm still having troble with Robin Williams in a serious role but he suprised me. Overall they did a good job (why can't B.C. be filmed as B.C. instead of Alaska)

8/10
goldfinger_the_1st@ - 22 reviews
30.5.2002 - age: 13-17

This movie is not what I would call a must see. It has an interesting plot, but the whole story progressed too slow and actionless. It really gets you to loose attention. Frankly, towards the end, I was just hoping for it to finish so I can leave.

5/10
weiwei_liu@ - 9 reviews
30.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Very good, the story is unpredictable!

9/10
gkf@ - first review
30.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Sometimes the scenery in a film sets the tone. The opening sequence of this movie is incredible and worth the price of admission in itself. I won't give too much away but it involves a vintage Seaplane and some calving glaciers in Alaska or Northern British Columbia. Simply spectacular. This whole film has sort of an "early X files" gloom coupled with beautiful settings in nature which really complement the story line. Pacino is great as usual, playing an aging L. A. cop who has "seen it all". Not sure why he was summoned to Alaska to solve this case though? Hillary Swank is great as a Rookie "not so naive" as it turns out cop and Robin Williams shows us he can do a little more than "Mork from Ork" with his personality. I'm not sure what age group this Movie is marketing to with its diverse cast. I was quite surprised to see the Theatre full of late teens and early Twenties patrons. Not bad for a big Budget Hollywood follow up to "Memento". Robbin should have been there. Don't want to give away anymore about this film, it's worth seeing!

8/10
robepfef@ - 7 reviews
29.5.2002 - age: 36-49

This was a great movie. The characters are not cartoon-ish and not the epitomes of good and evil. They are complex, and every twist and turn raises questions about their nature and how we can categorize them. Indeed, the movie brings into question every little compromise of integrity anyone makes. Does the end really justify the means? Will a lifetime of white lies add up to murder when it’s time for repentance? This movie is invigorating.

8/10
philsajonesen@ - 14 reviews
29.5.2002 - age: 26-35

This movie was so bad. A almost fell asleep many times. Al Pacino has unfortunately become a charicature of himself like so many other great actors who get cast in the same types of roles over and over again. The storyu was uninteresting, unoriginal and very very dull. Don't waste your time!!!

2/10
misshollygolightly@ - 2 reviews
29.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Great acting in this film! However, I think someone could have replaced Robin Williams. Not that he did a bad job or anything, but when I see him on screen I think of MRS. Doubtfire or Patch Adams!! But he is a cutie and did a great job! The movie is overall Suspensful and is worth seeing... Although it drags on a little!! Pacino and Swank are Amazing!!

8/10
gaaaalit@ - 2 reviews
28.5.2002 - age: 18-25

This movie was a dark picture about human conscience and good versus evil. The acting was what definitely stuck out as without Pacino, Swank, and Williams it would have been a flop. Overall, very well written. Not a typical plot which is refreshing lately. I would rent it again when it comes out on DVD.

7/10
sherri-lyn@ - first review
28.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Quite the departure from Christopher Nolan's first flick, the ingeniously well-crafted "Memento", "Insomnia" is almost as absorbing, though a great deal more straightforward. Mind you, it's equally stark and does feature superb acting, a superlative script, and, of course, Nolan's deft directing touch. All things considered, a worthy follow-up to his first masterwork...

8/10
koivusback@ - 2 reviews
28.5.2002 - age: 26-35

This is cool!

10/10
tatsuyadonn2001@ - 36 reviews
28.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Very Good.

8/10
syl3@ - 29 reviews
27.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Great!!!

7/10
lyzia@ - first review
27.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Great BC scenery passed off as being Alaska. Great acting, good actors, and good to see Robin Williams in a new role. Haven't seen him in such a troubled good or bad charictor since The World According to Garp. Hilary Swank also put in a strong performance. Great story line, coming off as real, yet full of twists. I was a bit disappointed to catch in the final credits that it was a remake of another film. At least that got a credit. But I hate that the US has to Americanise all these things. Why didn't they just distribute the original? Because American culture has to dominate such things, and they wouldn't watch anything but the hollywood version. I would have, I am just glad they did a good job of it.

8/10
cliffa@ - 213 reviews
27.5.2002 - age: 36-49

Intriguing movie with a few twists. Not one of the typical movies where all the problems get tidied up in a neat fashion.

8/10
tazgirl_8@ - 27 reviews
27.5.2002 - age: 26-35

This is simply the story of the movie that could have been! It could have been soooo good! Pacino is always a good choice for a detective and Williams could have been magnificent as a bad guy. But unfortunately, the actors had nothing to chew on. The begining is very promising (for about 30 minutes) but it's all downhill from there. Moreover the end is soooo lame! I was expecting so much after "Memento"... Too bad, really bad.

2/10
einstein@ - 2 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 26-35

It's different than other movies because the good guy is not 100% good and as the movie goes on, you really wonder how the movies is going to end.

8/10
nh_3@ - 3 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 18-25

J'ai trouvé que le film était très bien interprèté mais il manquait un peu de suspence sur ce que pensaient les personnages. Bref, un film à voir seulement pour l'interprétation de Al Pacino, Robin Williams et Hilary Swank.

6/10
yodouly@ - 2 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 13-17

The title of the movie is quite ironic, since most people will probably find themselves snoring through this disappoinment of a picture. It starts off strong, with terrific acting, a breathtaking setting and solid suspense. After the first forty-five minutes or so, it just loses its appeal. Robin Williams is nothing special in this; we're just used to seeing him in comedic roles, so this comes as a shock. Pacino is great though, as is Hilary "The Next Karate Kid" Swank. Great idea for a film, but it just goes nowhere. At the end, you'll wonder where the past two hours of your life went.

6/10
newscott13@ - 373 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 26-35

I saw this movie, and I thought it was action-packed. Great acting jobs by all the stars.

8/10
country_chick23@ - 5 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 13-17

What a great movie. I was expecting this movie to be predictable but it wasn't. Incerdible acting by Pacino and Williams and a really good story. Go see it. Very entertaining.

9/10
vinvega90@ - 16 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 26-35

[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
Question: I didn't quite understand why we find Maura Tierney asleep in Dormer's bed at the end of the movie. Nothing indicated that there was anything going on, or about to happen, during their last conversation. It also seemed unlikely that Dormer would have enough energy to do anything. What do you think is the significance or meaning of her being there in his bed?

8/10
beach@ - first review
26.5.2002 - age: 50+

Great film. Completely unexpected from the trailer I saw, an original spin for once. The entire cast lives up to what you would expect from them in brilliant performances. The entire film looms in a sort of "grey" area with regard to good, evil, right, wrong... which makes it so interesting, and leaves you thinking.

9/10
r_k_noble@ - first review
26.5.2002 - age: 18-25

It's been a long time since I've seen an intelligent thriller like this. All characters are extremely interesting and very complex. No good guy or bad guy bullshit. Everyone has a problem with his or her conscience and the plot is twisted in ways that will push these people to their limits. The psychology is deep, the atmosphere is tensed, the symbolics are efficient, and the acting is absolutely fantastic. Pacino, who finds here a part that's worthy of his talent, hasn't been that good in years. Robin Williams is amazingly subtle and brilliant. As for Hilary Swank, she gets a straight part, but she plays it with intelligence and finesse (especialy when we find out that she is not as naive as we thought) Everyone should watch Chris Nolan's carreer very closely, for he proves here that he is a truly great director (and everyone HAS to see Memento, his previous film)

10/10
ideesenvol@ - 2 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 36-49

From acclaimed director Christopher Nolan (Memento) comes the story of a veteran police detective, Will Dormer (Al Pacino) , who is sent to a small Alaskan town to solve an unspeakable crime: the murder of a teenage girl. Forced into a psychological game of cat-and-mouse by the primary suspect, Walter Finch (Robin Williams) , events escalate and the detective finds his own stability dangerously threatened. What is there to expect out of a film by Christopher Nolan that stars three Academy Award winners? A lot more than you can imagine. INSOMNIA opens with a beautiful shot of a plane traveling over Alaskan mountains as the credits roll by and the stunning scenery, alone, sets the mood for the film from the very beginning. We, as viewers, immediately find ourselves embarking on the journey to solving an unspeakable crime in Alaska. Although the film is categorized as a thriller, there aren't too many thrilling moments. It's a psychological thriller, well written, very well-directed, and of course very well-acted. From Al Pacino to Robin Williams to Hilary Swank, the cast couldn't be any better. The performances are outstanding. To see Robin Williams switch from his usual "funny-man" character to that of a "serious-man" one is incredible. As for Pacino, he's great at playing a detective suffering from six nights of no sleep or relaxation. The story, itself, is quite interesting and somewhat intriguing, but it's important to note that INSOMNIA is a remake of director Erik Skjoldbjaerg's Norwegian film by the same title (which was released in 1997 and starred Stellan Skarsgard) To truly appreciate a film, one must appreciate a vision and there's no vision like Christopher Nolan's. Like in Memento, Nolan uses his unique style of subtle flashbacks, close-ups, and fast edits to shape the film into a twisted one and he succeeds at doing just that. Often at times, the camera angles are remarkably impressive. I have not yet seen the original film, therefore I cannot compare the two pictures yet. I'm sure it's just as visually enticing as Nolan's version. The dark film doesn't really leave any room for laughs, however some of Pacino's one-liners could make you smile and feel a sense of relief for a little while. Any problems with the film? None really, except for one. The one thing about INSOMNIA that didn't satisfy me was the ending. The film reaches its' climax and offers viewers an unsatisfying five-minute resolution. The ending could've been worked on a little more, but the film is nonetheless a delight. The story is interesting, the dialogue is solid, the acting is riveting, and the direction is impeccable. I rate the film an 8 on 10. Bottom line: INSOMNIA is one of the good thrillers that won't be easily forgotten. I must admit, it's always a pleasure watching a film that exceeds most of today's "money-making" films. I recommend it. *** Review by Paul Stathakis ***.

8/10
pavlito84@ - 16 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 18-25

I went to see the movie without any expectation. At first I thought it was a little slow. But when everything comes together, I was at the edge of my seat, holding my breath. The scenery is amazing and the characters are very complex. It is definitely a good movie worth watching.

8/10
jn_liu@ - 36 reviews
26.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Ever since "Memento" came out, I've waited to watch "Insomnia". I was entrtanced during the whole movie; that is until the ending (a typical Hollywood shootout) took away the whole viewing pleasure from me. I've never felt so cheated... what exactly remains the point of the movie and the questions it asks about "crossing the line" if it's gonna end that way? After thinking long and hard I've decided this movie is still worth seeing because: #1 Pacino, I believe, gives his most authentic performance in years... he looks old and fragile and we remember he was once the unforgettable Michael Corleone #2 this is Nolan's third movie and his first big studio movie... and I'm hoping that ending was the result of some producer shouting in his ears (Mulholland Drive springs to mind) And all these time I was thinking the movie through, I decided to totally forget about the ending and focus on all other aspects of it (which were masterful) and the movie is worth viewing just to experience how well Nolan and his excellent cast handles the complex moral issues: for once short term memory loss of Leonard seems like a blessing in disguise, Al Pacino's Dormer cannot forget the acts he has committed in the name of justice and in a land of perpetual daylight is plagued by insomnia.

9/10
nnaomi38@ - 12 reviews
25.5.2002 - age: 18-25

In my opionion, this is a 5-star movie. It was very intense and kept me on the edge of my seat.

10/10
wandajb@ - 45 reviews
25.5.2002 - age: 36-49

I wouldn't be suprised if some of the production team from this made in BC thriller are busy on this site promoting it as a "great" film. That should be seen as a sign of trouble. Oscar material? You must be wholeheartedly kidding! With some of the most worthy material for Oscar nods coming this fall, in my opinion the bigger suprise will be if this film receives a nomination at all. Not that it is a bad or poorly made film. My suggestion? See the original Scandinavian version with sub-titles first. If you have any acquired taste and appreciation for foreign flair you will agree that the American version pales in comparison to the original. Which made this movie-goer ask: why was this movie re-done in the first place? The original film scored such rave reviews that it would make it difficult if not impossible to improve upon its smooth ambient lighting style, carefully blended with swimmingly smooth cinematography and a clever script expertly delivered by actors we are unfamiliar with here in the Northern Hemisphere. There's an old saying that says if it ain't broken, why fix it and that saying could aptly be applied here. Robin Williams is fine to see in a non-comedic role and the supporting cast is really very good as well, especially Jonathon Jackson {hard not to spot the resemblance to Josh.) The fatal flaw in this movie is too much emphasis on story and not enough on character development. The film seems intent on rushing in the details about the characters background as the film goes along, leaving the viewer with little time to wonder or muse about their motivations and psyches. A more superb job could have been done if they stretched this one to 2 1/2 hours instead of just two. The action scenes are good, but just try to imagine how much visceral action can be had in a small town? Speaking of movies set in a small town, certain directors excel in this are more than others. Atom Egoyan set the mood and pace perfectly in 'the Sweet Hereafter'. John Sayles proved to be the master of his craft in 'Lone Star'. And whoever directed the Russell Banks novel adaptation 'Affliction' also seemed to have a genuine knack for effectively capturing that 'everybody know what everbody else is doing' {or think they know!) flavor that is so important for setting the mood and tone for the films location. Some great BC scenery is to been seen here though which may make it worth the cost of the ticket price alone. Al Pacinos performance was superb throughout, but theres nothing he could have done about spots in the film where he has to say lines that to me didn't seem fitting for his character. After all, he isn't reprising Micheal Corleone here or Tony Montana. Seven out of ten only because of the great location shots.

7/10
maxs3000@ - 15 reviews
25.5.2002 - age: 26-35

I was very excited for this film début, but only to be a little disappointed. I was expecting something with more twists and turns. As I expected the big "grand finale", I did not get that. Overall, the movie was still well done.

7/10
jkimmel@ - 44 reviews
25.5.2002 - age: 18-25

A beautiful psychological thriller with one of the greatest actors of our times, Al Pacino, delivering a riveting performance that I certainly hope the Acedemy remembers when the time comes around next year. It's rare these days for a director to embark on making a movie that forces the audience to think, and it's a refreshing change to see such a brilliant and original piece of work shown on a silver screen.

10/10
watcher20@ - first review
25.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Copy cat film. The original was better. Save this one for Video.

5/10
retech@ - first review
25.5.2002 - age: 50+

Great movie! Absolutely loved it... go see it now!

10/10
adrenaline20250@ - 3 reviews
25.5.2002 - age: 18-25

This is a story about good and evil. Although Al Pacino is the protagonist, he is certainly not the "good" in this story. Yet, I am not sure who is "good" in this movie. Hilary Swank, the only pure person in the film, consciously decides to perform an evil act, but is convinced not to by Al Pacino. Perhaps Nolan's point is that there is no boundary between good and evil; both realms are intertwined.

9/10
ozwald@ - first review
24.5.2002 - age: 26-35

Christopher Nolan succeeds once again at mastering a suspenseful script into a truly superb film. Nolan (Memento) creates a complex and carefully construed tale that has plenty of intentional misdirection that is quite convincing. Al Pacino plays another one of his droopy detectives in a role that is quite unoriginal if placed in other films. Yet what separates this role from others is his portrayal of L. A. Detective Will Dormer actually has some ‘meat’ attached to it. Pacino plays a detective with a history of successful apprehensions, yet, he has flaws just like any other person and they come back to haunt him. Relocated from Los Angeles to Alaska, he is sent in hopes of capturing a killer who murdered a local schoolgirl. Judging from the previews, premature assumptions can be made labeling the film as another simple ‘cat-and-mouse’ thriller. Instead, those conceptions will be lost soon after the haunting opening credits emerge and we are transplanted directly into a deep and complex character study set against the backdrop of a local homicide mystery in a small Alaskan town. The film’s antagonist (For those who have seen the film - is he really the villain or the catalyst for Pacino’s ethical debate?) is a local writer portrayed by Robin Williams. This is Williams’ second villainous role in his trilogy of films (Death to Smoochy, One Hour Photo) that aims at diversifying his resume. Williams impresses as he juxtaposes between an innocent victim of a mishap and between a calculating and conniving murderer. Director Nolan has assembled a terrific cast as this complex plot unfolds at a frivolous rate. This is a film that a discerning viewer will admire and a viewer with a short attention span will loathe. Nolan tosses us with one set of objectives and midway through the first act, we are sitting in on an entirely different film. Adjectives such as formulaic and conventional should not be associated with a film such as this. Nolan has completely revitalized the tired genre of the murder thriller with his sleek direction and picturesque photography. Nolan first had conceived of the idea upon viewing a Norwegian film of the same name directed by Erik Skjoldbjaerg. Nolan seems to have taken the flaws of the original and improved upon them in a sleek feat of filmmaking that leaves much to be questioned about its’ brilliance. One viewing is not enough to internalize the level of sophistication Nolan has created with this brilliant film. Hillary Seitz’s first attempt at writing a screenplay is solid but must be understood that the conception was not hers. Still, her script contains some juicy scenes that benefit all our characters in this film. Three Oscar winners (Pacino, Williams and Hillary Swank) highlight this film and with good reason. At first glance, the cast seems informingly incongruent, yet with time, all explains itself. Swank’s performance as Detective Burr seems unnecessary right up until the final moments in the film. Yet, this is all of the resolute brilliance Nolan lends to this film. This film succeeds on several levels of cinematic bravura. David Julyan’s haunting score coupled with intense subliminal flashes match the films’ dark tone and Cinematographer Wally Pfister (Memento) captures the majestic beauty of the Alaskan sea front. As aforementioned, a thrilling chase of a murderer can be expected when introduced to the film. But not long after, we are delving into a debate that has a positive fix on morality. A battle between a person’s conscience and his actions are truly at the forefront of this intellectually intriguing and complex thriller. Despite its’ disappointing anticlimactic finale, the film still has enough zest and brilliance to make this film a true testament to the skill of Director Nolan. Giancarlo’s Rating: ***.

8/10
giancarlorocks@ - 28 reviews
24.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Pacino, Swank and WILLIAMS deliver great performances. WIlliams eats up the screen! An adult film that delivers a punch.

9/10
liseanne_frederic@ - 3 reviews
24.5.2002 - age: 36-49

First movie of the year who deserves its Oscar's buzz. Everybody in this production have worked their ass off to go up with a thriller in the same categorie as classics like "Seven" or "Silence of the lambs". Pacino is naturally great as Will, but it's definitely Williams and Swank who stand out (not to say that they're better than Pacino; it's just that... well, Al rarely sucks, something that you cannot always say about this other two) It's quite obvious that Williams want to kill his personal of a wild-and-crazy guy; in this film, he played one S. O. B. of a cold killer. As for her, Swank finally prove that a Oscar wasn't a fluck. A great supporting cast (Nicky Katt, Jonathan Jackson and Katherine Isabelle in particular) , a solid script and a beautifully shot film should also put this movie in your most-see list. But, for me, the main reason to go see "Insomnia" is for the director, Christopher Nolan. I truly have no idea from were he come from, what's his background and so on, but ever since "Memento", this dude is for me a guy to watch out. You can truly see that he got a unique vision for his movies. So don't be suprised when his name get propped out alongside A-listers like Spielberg, Lynch, Fincher and the likes. Don't also be suprised when "Insomnia" gets a lot of Academy Awards nominations...

9/10
mightymad@ - 8 reviews
23.5.2002 - age: 18-25

Note: The user reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our visitors. We are not responsible for their content.

Click to see more reviews:
[1-50]   [51-100]  [101-100]