Russell Crowe would of course come to be better known elsewhere (filmicly) in this year, but what of his other release in 2000? Proof of Life is a blender, a picture that is in part thriller, part romance, part drama and part observation on a very real life problem - that of kidnapping for ransom. So many genres to tackle means that invariably Taylor Hackford's film feels over stuffed, pushing the running time to two hours and fifteen minutes, it is this that hurts it. A shame because if trimmed of the pointless filler and drawn out sequences then there is a very efficient (ok, maybe routine is a better word here) and well acted piece on show. The drama and tension (sexual and perilous threat) is all building towards the action packed finale, which, while well mounted, doesn't seem an adequate pay off for the number of extended chatty scenes we have had to tolerate to get there. Nice tip of the hat to a classic at the end, though. 6/10

I was pleasantly surprised with this film. I wasn't expecting much based on the IMDb rating but I love Russell Crowe so thought I'd give it a run. I was also interested to watch it as it is the film that initiated the affair between Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe. Meg Ryan plays the role of the distraught wife well. The film illustrates the disparity between the lives of the poor in South America and the wealthy westerners - and the perils of venturing into such hostile lands.I found the movie engaging throughout. I dislike all the gratuitous violence in movies these days and I found this did not have too much violence, nor too much mush. It wasn't too wordy either, so you could pop out to the kitchen to get a quick drink and come back and pick up again. And it had a nice, happy ending, which I also like. A good Saturday night flick.

I just wanted to add something that I think it's missing from all the comments here: This kind of approach to South America and its recent history is insulting and biased. 1. The pro-left rebels in the mountains are portrayed as comic stereotypes: dirty, illiterate, terrorist. 2. Nothing in the movie even hints the BIGGEST problem, which is the constant involvement of the US in South American and Central American internal affairs and the exploitation of the South American resources by the West. 3. The white characters are so f***** pure and one-sided that it made me want to puke.The kidnapped man is a damn builder who wants to "help the people".The wife and the sister are down-to-earth strong American women. The rescuers are funny and charming and have a noble agenda.Whereas everything about the South American country is mercantile and primitive. No s***, Sherlock.Western directors should do some research and soul searching before working with such background stories. This is the real history and drama of a whole continent, not some childish Star Wars story.As for movie itself, I enjoyed it somewhat because of some good actors. Morse is great, Caruso tackles the type of supporting role that we are usually used to see Bill Paxton in, and Crowe is OK in his tough guy military role. The only problem with the acting is Meg Ryan, who's not only miscast but really does an awful job here. Really terrible, as always, actually.

Taylor Hackford's Proof of Life is a hopelessly uneven, dull- as-dishwater, slap-dash chunk of topical hokum to begin with. I don't know which character I cared about the least, except a pre-CSI David Caruso, showing some sort of talent for acting(?). Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe are stolidly unpleasant. One can only hope they were more interesting for and to each other when they had their fling in real life. On screen, they're wholly unappetizing. Once again, the benefit of watching this gunk on the Sunday afternoon movie is that you don't have to pay for it. You'd be better off puttering about in your garage.