Directed by Luc Besson, "La Femme Nikita" was an overwhelming action/romance/thriller and Pygmalion story that scored big in the French box-office and got an enthusiastic reception across the Atlantic. Indeed, Roger Ebert praised the powerful performance of Anne Parillaud and the bleak melancholy of the film while Gene Siskel loved the way the film approached violence in a sort of subterranean way, the film made it appealing and stylish but through a character who didn't enjoy killing, and that was the mark of great thriller, it's not about mindless and enjoyed violence, in the case of Nikita, it was a survival tool but also the key of an existential cage. So their comments comforted my thoughts, it was one of the best 90's French movies.It was interesting to compare this to their reception of John Badham's remake "Point of No Return": Ebert was pleasantly surprised that a film which is a clear copy of the original (with a few changes here and there) managed to elevate itself above its 'remake' status and was more engaging and compelling than he expected. While not in the same vein of Anne Parillaud's vulnerable performance, Bridget Fonda did justice to the role, and the film managed to grab his interest and make him feel for the girl, whose code-name became Nina, in homage to Nina Simone, one of the film's touches of originality. Ebert loved the way the film distanced itself when it was possible (not at the key moments though), that she was sentenced to death after shooting a cop (in the original, she was just randomly 'killed') and overall, he liked it. Siskel didn't, he thought the attempts to capture the atmosphere of the first film was phony, and never hit an emotional chord like Besson's film did. So it was a split vote.And I guess,that's the effect "Point of No Return" will have, it's a mixed bag. Either you like it or you don't, but it's not that simple. In case you didn't see "La Femme Nikita", you might enjoy the remake but then reconsider your appreciation after watching the '(objectively) superior original. And in my opinion, watching the original first is perhaps the best service you can do to the remake, because I don't think the remake ever tries to overshadow it, it has no other ambition to be an Americanized version of a French movie and it does a fair job at that, which is more than you can say about American remakes. Several French classics have been remade into Hollywood movies and more than often, they're never as successful or they're not as good. For one "Sorcerer" or "Birdcage", you get "The Man With One Red Shoe", "Pure Luck'", "The Dinner Game" and "Father's Day". But since Besson's material had an American quality of its own, remaking it mainly consisted on adapting an international looking story with an American cast.And that's why it works, Bridget Fonda is no Anne Parillaud but as Nina, she exuded the same mix of sadness and commitment to her job that made the character so fascinating. And she was surrounded by a quality cast, Gabriel Byrne reprised Tcheky Karyo's mentor role as Bob, Miguel Ferrer is the boss who leaves no secret about his sentiment toward Nina, Anne Bancroft steals the show reprising the role of Jeanne Moreau (and yeah, there's something very fitting in Bancroft replacing the eternal French cougar) and Dermot Mulroney is a fair replacement for the boyfriend part, did I forget one? Oh yeah, Harvey Keitel while really intimidating as the Cleaner, can't be compared to Jean Reno, that's no comment on Keitel's acting, he'll be a far more efficient cleaner the next year as Mr. Wolf in Tarantino's "Pulp Fiction". It's not the 90's A-list star cast but they're all talented actors taking their roles seriously and I didn't really get Siskel's impression of phoniness. To each his own.But I'm making this review obviously meant for users who saw the original, I think it's the best advice I can give, watch it first. You know why? Because one of the things I loved about Besson's film is that it was a great thriller as far as unpredictable things went, it was full of surprises, sometimes thrilling, sometimes funny, exciting and even emotional. These elements are all handled very well by Besson who was at his prime as young 30-ish director, John Badham doesn't take any risk and his directing isn't really transcending, but the film works nonetheless. So, if there's one surprise effect to be spoiled, better to be from the less stylish one. But it won't ruin the enjoyment of the second for all that, because I enjoyed anticipating the scenes and seeing how Fonda, Byrne or any other actor handled them, it was fun to see the film and superpose it with the original experience and look for the few differences between them.And there were many differences, and perhaps the best one was the music, there were Nina Simone's songs used as a fine leitmotif, representing the only connection with Nina and her previous life, but then there's the score. The film is scored by Hans Zimmer and it's one of the most penetrative and emotional scores I've heard recently, it does enhance the character of Nina and adds to her tragic dimension, and it's used in very key moments where you're just about to label the film as action picture and all magically, the music gets in your ears, and you're literally transported. Well, maybe it's the one thing it got better than the first, and that's saying a lot since Eric Serra's score was great, too.So, it might not be in the same league than the first but that's not saying much since we're talking of a masterpiece, yet it's a good American remake of a French film and that's saying a lot, since they generally suck.

This American version of "La Femme Nikita" from 1993 stars Bridget Fonda a a drug-addicted murderer who is saved from lethal injection by a government agent (Gabriel Byrne), who gives her the chance to train as an assassin. Naturally she takes it though she is very resistant.She goes through the training and carries out assignments, but has to on the surface lead a normal life. When she meets and falls for J.P. (Dermot Mulrooney), having to keep so much of situation secret becomes difficult.Bridget Fonda is excellent as Maggie, who is transformed into a classy killer. Gabriel Byrne gives a marvelous performance as her low-key recruiter, who winds up bonding with her. Harvey Keitel plays "The Cleaner" and he's scary as all get-out.Very exciting film, violent, and fast-moving. Fonda seems to be retired now - she is a very appealing actress and handled the role beautifully.

The movie is tagged as "action, "crime", and "thriller". All of these tags are massively misleading...It's actually a DRAMA! Nothing more, nothing less.Bridget Fonda is very cute; I adore her. She's a very talented actress and her charisma is undeniable. She was EXCELLENT in this movie -- no doubt about that.But... I expected a thriller... with some action. What I got was a lame love story.The movie is 80% romantic scenes and 20% action. Not what I expected.It started out VERY promising, but when she gets involved with that cheesy dude... the movie declines in an instant and becomes boring, predictable, and, eventually, downright unwatchable.Oh, why did they have to ruin such a good premise by introducing all that LAME romantic crap!? It could've been such a great film.What a shame...

This movie has only 2 excellent factors.Firstly, (Bridget Fonda)'s performance as Nina. Portraying fear, innocence, alienation, and violence was her glorious talent here. Actually, in some places, she was more serious than the movie itself. This undoubtedly is going to be in her top 5 works ever. True (Anne Bancroft) and (Dermot Mulroney) played their roles beautifully; (Bancroft) as old and a bit conscienceless version of Nina, and (Mulroney) as the carefree young man who becomes careworn after loving a grisly mystery. Though, I see that no one could compete with (Fonda), or reach the "excellent" rank she mounted.Secondly, (Hans Zimmer)'s music. It tells the story in indelible effectiveness, being hair-raising, sentimental and painful. I loved in specific the fiery track of the restaurant's chase, and the blue yet optimistic one of the very end.Sorrowfully, the ordinary factors include the rest of the movie ! The sets were poor; I quite hated (Anne Bancroft)'s class of a room. I discovered that (Fonda)'s black dress, that she wore in her first task, is stolen, not remade!, from the same sequence in Nikita (1990); the original French movie that this one is based on (now how uncreative !!). (John Badham)'s direction is so average. It has an executive character all along. As an action, it's deprived of anything special. And as emotional it's just good. (Badham)'s only merit, I think, was leading the performances soundly. Some points bugged me very. Concerning the restaurant's assassination; how in god's name carrying out a murder, by a governmental "secret" agent, without any disguise whatsoever, and in front of all the restaurant's customers, waiters and cooks ? Let alone any cameras as well ?! Then, the through-the-window assassination was done absurdly; that gun was so near to the extent of being seen by anyone, plus it was easy to know the source of the bullet ! And the matter of kidnapping the blond mistress, in front of all of her bodyguards, was more and more absurd. Why not gassing all of them since the start ? Add to that unwarranted points like seeing (Gabriel Byrne) kissing the heroine, or (Miguel Ferrer) throwing a joke. However, nothing was worse than the ending; I don't know a logical reason for it but a desperate intention of making a sequel ! (Point of No Return) couldn't be into the point unless in terms of performance and music. Hence, it ends up as average, despite (Fonda)'s cleverness while even blinking, and (Zimmer)'s music which can make the stone cry. Well, many average factors with a few excellent ones make average work. And the example is clear; this work !