Rating: 
Summary: taut thriller with good acting/chemistry between actors
Review: I said 'this is a woman's movie'. My hubby said 'what's not to like?' Stowe and Quinn add that special spark that gives what could have been a ho-hum mystery into something enticing. Suspend disbelief about the premise of retroactive vision, and you will be entertained. Stowe is at turns bitchy and steamy, sensuous and clingy...all the things you would expect of a woman in love, in peril,and feeling vulnerable in her blindness. Quinn is all "Irish-cop" with a penchant for Stowe. The supporting actors are all top-rate, and the writing is more than adequate to keep you entertained. Trust me.
Rating:
Summary: Uncommonly Good Performances
Review: It's true that the story may stretch your willingness to believe at times (though it seems that the "delayed vision" phenomena is accurate), what makes this a really good movie is the quality of the acting. Aidan Quinn and Madeline Stowe create real people in this movie - people you could readily run into on the northside of Chicago. There isn't a false note to their performance. The same can also be said for the supporting work of James Remar.Add to the quality of the performances the visual feel of the movie - Michael Apted has put together solid visual effects with a great and realistic vision of Chicago. This isn't the standard lakeshore/magnificant mile plus generic city that you usually see. This is the Chicago of the neighborhoods. Finally, the music for this movie introduced me to The Drovers - a Chicago band that is absolutely brilliant. If you're anything like me, the day after you watch this, you'll be out hunting their cd's.
Rating:
Summary: Uncommonly Good Performances
Review: It's true that the story may stretch your willingness to believe at times (though it seems that the "delayed vision" phenomena is accurate), what makes this a really good movie is the quality of the acting. Aidan Quinn and Madeline Stowe create real people in this movie - people you could readily run into on the northside of Chicago. There isn't a false note to their performance. The same can also be said for the supporting work of James Remar. Add to the quality of the performances the visual feel of the movie - Michael Apted has put together solid visual effects with a great and realistic vision of Chicago. This isn't the standard lakeshore/magnificant mile plus generic city that you usually see. This is the Chicago of the neighborhoods. Finally, the music for this movie introduced me to The Drovers - a Chicago band that is absolutely brilliant. If you're anything like me, the day after you watch this, you'll be out hunting their cd's.
Rating:
Summary: Thrilling and Chilling Original Plot Line
Review: Since first teamed up as boyfriend and girlfriend in the 1985 Richard Dreyfuss/Emilio Estevez comedy 'Stakeout', Madeline Stowe and Aidan Quinn make a huge comeback together in 'Blink'. Madeline Stowe is a young woman in her twenties who undergoes an operation that lets her regain partial vision after being tramatically blinded as a child. While still making the drastic adjustment to a new world, she unfortunately becomes the only witness to a murder. Handsome and cool Chicago police detective John Halstrome's (Aidan Quinn) attraction forces him to defend this witness to his doubting collegues as being credible. He subsequently winds up juggling a steamy affair with Stowe, and decifering true or false whatever she actually sees...and what are mere dellusions brought on by fear and the recent surgery. Two strong-willed and attractive stars make for a very good romantic scenerio, neither could've done better than Stowe and Quinn. The movie I think is a great for Chicagoians, staying true to the city and its make-up especially with it's native star Quinn and his awesome windy city accent. As for the plot, its a thrilling and interesting crime as it begins to unfold, adding touches of fear with scenes of the killer...seen mostly through Stowe's blurry eyes. You really need to see the movie unedited to get the full thrust, which is why I bought it a while ago. You really couldn't see a movie with these two without being able to watch their passionate love sequences, and I always thought watching a really good murder mystery that had frequent commercials was like making love with coffee breaks every ten minuets. Take a look at this great, new-classic thriller with plenty of comedic touches and you wont regret it.
Rating:
Summary: Just a little creepy
Review: Stowe portrays a blind musician who has undergone surgery to correct her vision. While she is adjusting to her new reality, she becomes a witness in a murder investigation. Quinn is the detective assigned to the investigation. Laurie Metcalf (from Rosanne) has a minor role in this as well. I especially enjoyed the music. If you like your mystery blended with romance, this would make a great Friday night rental.
Rating: 
Summary: plot is simply wonderful
Review: The film is excellent. Madeleine Stowe is performing perfectly. This film is a milestone in her career. Especially, I recommend the final scene of the film. Breathtaking.
Rating: 
Summary: Don't Watch This or You'll Go Blind!!!
Review: This film had great potential but was ruined by non-heroic and even pathetically unsympathetic characters. "Blink" is about a blind woman who undergoes a corneal transplant and meets the murderer of her upstair neighbor the first night home from the hospital. She is still half blind but she is the only witness. Before this premise starts to interest you too much, please note that the investigator given us to solve the murder first encounters the blind woman while he's doing a striptease for his buddies when she's playing the violin at a pub. And who was he trying to attract: this well-groomed, perfectly coiffed blind lady with a perfect body who goes around asking questions like: "Am I pretty?" Her mother pushed her face into a mirror when she was playing dress-up so now she is a harridan prone to tantrums, drinking, and acting out dependency issues, none of which is ever presented as qualities in need of psychotherapy (which they all are) but presented as NORMAL. Our hero, the drunken detective, finds these qualities "fascinating" and falls madly in lust with her. When is an irrational, emotional, yowling female throwing things ever anything BUT fascinating! Yet her doctor has fallen in love with her too! Rather than having us focus on the murder conflict, we get two pedestrian love-interests on which to focus during the muddled middle of this twisted train wreck of a film. You'll almost forget there was a murder and a few good scares in the beginning. Her psychiatric therapy and subsequent medication with anti-depressants would've been much more interesting, dramatic, and realistic. Can people really behave like this and expect to solve murder mysteries, play the violin, and heal the blind! Am I supposed to care about such unrealistic and fake people! Anyone of them could have been run over by a Cadillac and I would've cheered. The only character in the film I liked was her seeing- eye dog and HE was the one who was hit by a Cadillac! By the end of this bilge the investigator, rendered impotent at solving the crime by his immaturity and poor taste in "fascinations", winds up the doormat for the irrational, emotional, blind vixen after she finds and kills the murder herself. But by that time you'll be mopping up spew and have completely forgotten the cool premise that made you watch this film in the first place. Whoever came up with the original premise deserves 10 stars. The writers who fleshed out the characters need to take some advice: We the audience are not the idiots you think we are! We can't sympathize with someone just because she is blind (especially if she is an irrational harpy making stupid decisions). We don't buy it that such a shrew can be found "Fascinating". We can't admire people who put "play" before work and "play" before "plot". We can't accept as sympathetic a disabled character disabling those who are trying to do their jobs, help others as well as herself. This makes it too evident that she is reducing the world to her level so she can function on higher planes of existence. This serves no one's interests. Don't try to cover this up by portraying the character as self-sufficient when the whole crux of the story hinges on the fact that she is not yet completely competent and has even more issues to overcome psychologically than physically. Sorry comrades, but you just can't pull it off! What we have here in "Blink" is a film so bad you'll have to scrub the stains out of the whites of your eyes with laundry soap. But then...you'll go blind. That's probably the entire point. Wink Wink.
Rating:
Summary: Don't Watch This or You'll Go Blind
Review: This film had great potential but was ruined by non-heroic and even pathetically unsympathetic characters. "Blink" is about a blind woman who undergoes a corneal transplant and meets the murderer of her upstair neighbor the first night home from the hospital. She is still half blind but she is the only witness. Before this premise starts to interest you too much, please note that the investigator given us to solve the murder first encounters the blind woman while he's doing a striptease for his buddies when she's playing the violin at a pub. And who was he trying to attract: this well-groomed, perfectly coiffed blind lady with a perfect body who goes around asking questions like: "Am I pretty?" Her mother pushed her face into a mirror when she was playing dress-up so now she is a harridan prone to tantrums, drinking, and acting out dependency issues, none of which is ever presented as qualities in need of psychotherapy (which they all are) but presented as NORMAL. Our hero, the drunken detective, finds these qualities "fascinating" and falls madly in lust with her. When is an irrational, emotional, yowling female throwing things ever anything BUT fascinating! Yet her doctor has fallen in love with her too! Rather than having us focus on the murder conflict, we get two pedestrian love-interests on which to focus during the muddled middle of this twisted train wreck of a film. You'll almost forget there was a murder and a few good scares in the beginning. Her psychiatric therapy and subsequent medication with anti-depressants would've been much more interesting, dramatic, and realistic. Can people really behave like this and expect to solve murder mysteries, play the violin, and heal the blind! Am I supposed to care about such unrealistic and fake people! Anyone of them could have been run over by a Cadillac and I would've cheered. The only character in the film I liked was her seeing- eye dog and HE was the one who was hit by a Cadillac! By the end of this bilge the investigator, rendered impotent at solving the crime by his immaturity and poor taste in "fascinations", winds up the doormat for the irrational, emotional, blind vixen after she finds and kills the murderer herself. But by that time you'll be mopping up spew and have completely forgotten the cool premise that made you watch this film in the first place. Whoever came up with the original premise deserves 10 stars. The writers who fleshed out the characters need to take some advice: We the audience are not the idiots you think we are! We can't sympathize with someone because she is blind if she is an irrational harpy making stupid decisions. We don't buy it that such a shrew can be found "Fascinating". We can't admire people who put "play" before work and "play" before "plot". We can't accept as sympathetic a disabled character disabling those who are trying to do their jobs, help others as well as herself. This makes it too evident that she is reducing the world to her level so she can function on higher planes of existence. This serves no one's interests. Don't try to cover this up by portraying the character as self-sufficient when the whole crux of the story hinges on the fact that she is not yet completely competent and has even more issues to overcome psychologically than physically. Sorry comrades, but you just can't pull it off! What we have here in "Blink" is a film so bad you'll have to scrub the stains out of the whites of your eyes with laundry soap. But then...you'll go blind. That's probably the entire point. Wink Wink.
Rating:
Summary: Don't Watch This or You'll Go Blind!!!
Review: This film had great potential but was ruined by non-heroic and even pathetically unsympathetic characters. "Blink" is about a blind woman who undergoes a corneal transplant and meets the murderer of her upstair neighbor the first night home from the hospital. She is still half blind but she is the only witness. Before this premise starts to interest you too much, please note that the investigator given us to solve the murder first encounters the blind woman while he's doing a striptease for his buddies when she's playing the violin at a pub. And who was he trying to attract: this well-groomed, perfectly coiffed blind lady with a perfect body who goes around asking questions like: "Am I pretty?" Her mother pushed her face into a mirror when she was playing dress-up so now she is a harridan prone to tantrums, drinking, and acting out dependency issues, none of which is ever presented as qualities in need of psychotherapy (which they all are) but presented as NORMAL. Our hero, the drunken detective, finds these qualities "fascinating" and falls madly in lust with her. When is an irrational, emotional, yowling female throwing things ever anything BUT fascinating! Yet her doctor has fallen in love with her too! Rather than having us focus on the murder conflict, we get two pedestrian love-interests on which to focus during the muddled middle of this twisted train wreck of a film. You'll almost forget there was a murder and a few good scares in the beginning. Her psychiatric therapy and subsequent medication with anti-depressants would've been much more interesting, dramatic, and realistic. Can people really behave like this and expect to solve murder mysteries, play the violin, and heal the blind! Am I supposed to care about such unrealistic and fake people! Anyone of them could have been run over by a Cadillac and I would've cheered. The only character in the film I liked was her seeing- eye dog and HE was the one who was hit by a Cadillac! By the end of this bilge the investigator, rendered impotent at solving the crime by his immaturity and poor taste in "fascinations", winds up the doormat for the irrational, emotional, blind vixen after she finds and kills the murder herself. But by that time you'll be mopping up spew and have completely forgotten the cool premise that made you watch this film in the first place. Whoever came up with the original premise deserves 10 stars. The writers who fleshed out the characters need to take some advice: We the audience are not the idiots you think we are! We can't sympathize with someone just because she is blind (especially if she is an irrational harpy making stupid decisions). We don't buy it that such a shrew can be found "Fascinating". We can't admire people who put "play" before work and "play" before "plot". We can't accept as sympathetic a disabled character disabling those who are trying to do their jobs, help others as well as herself. This makes it too evident that she is reducing the world to her level so she can function on higher planes of existence. This serves no one's interests. Don't try to cover this up by portraying the character as self-sufficient when the whole crux of the story hinges on the fact that she is not yet completely competent and has even more issues to overcome psychologically than physically. Sorry comrades, but you just can't pull it off! What we have here in "Blink" is a film so bad you'll have to scrub the stains out of the whites of your eyes with laundry soap. But then...you'll go blind. That's probably the entire point. Wink Wink.
Rating: 
Summary: UNUSUAL, THOUGH MEDIOCRE, THRILLER...
Review: This is a thriller that has an intriguing plot. A beautiful fiddler, Emma Brody, blind since the age of eight, gets a corneal transplant twenty years after the domestic tragedy that robbed her of her eyesight. She then regains her eyesight, in a manner of speaking. It is a work in progress, and she is only able to see shadowy or distorted images. She also suffers from some sort of delayed or retrograde reaction to what she sees. So, images she sees today are really things that she may have seen the day before. This becomes particularly problematic or disconcerting when she becomes the only witness to have seen a killer shortly after a murder took place in her apartment building. Naturally, the police are a little skeptical about her value as a witness. Having been blind for so long, however, her olfactory ability is heightened, and she is able to provide another valuable clue as to the killer. This becomes important, as the killer strikes again and again. The Detective assigned to the case, John Hallstrom, the precinct's self-proclaimed lady killer, becomes smitten with her, much to his surprise, as he has tended to be a love 'em and leave 'em type of guy. She, in turn, bitter because it was her mother who had blinded her, is initially unreceptive to his charms. When each is willing to drop their cynical, public personas, they find that their inner selves mesh, and they fall in love. Unfortunately, Emma is in acute danger, as the killer has a definite agenda, and Emma appears to be at the top of his list. Madeleine Stowe is excellent as the beautiful Emma, giving her a hard-edged exterior while not losing her vulnerability. Aidan Quinn seems a little bit like a fish out of water as the rude, crude, and lewd Detective Hallstrom. It is only when his character falls in love with Emma, that Quinn seems to come alive in the part and feel comfortable. It is then that he hits his stride. The love scenes are passionate and inspired. The rest of the cast gives competent performances, but the film never hits the level of suspense that one anticipates. The serial killer is a murky character whose raison d'etre is ultimately skimmed over. The sub-plot involving a potential romance between Emma and her eye surgeon sort of collapses onto itself, leaving the viewer to wonder why it was interjected into the story in the first place. Moreover, it is a major ethical breach for a detective to become intimately involved in a love affair with a witness in a case being investigated by that detective. Notwithstanding some of these short comings, however, it is still interesting enough film to warrant a rental, if not an actual purchase.
| 
