A female doctor suspects her husband of cheating, and so enlists the help of an escort to try and catch him in the act. What she doesn't know is that this is inadvertently placing her entire family in danger.
ATOM EGOYAN DIPS HIS TOE IN unusually tawdry territory in this entertaining erotic remake of French thriller Nathalie…
A startlingly sexy Amanda Seyfried stars as Chloe, an escort hired by Catherine (Julianne Moore) as a honeytrap for her husband (Liam Neeson). She wants proof that he wouldn’t act on his attraction for younger women, but her intentions become confused when Chloe returns with lurid tales that she finds oddly arousing.
This teeters on the B-movie brink, but fans of psycho-sexual boundary-pushing will be happy to tolerate its more ridiculous points. Moore and Seyfried also retain their dignity amid the kind of sexual tension Jennifer’s Body could only dream of. Maybe Seyfried’s learning on the job.
Strong turns from its female leads and Amanda Seyfried elicits more sexual tension from proceedings than Jennifer's Body ever managed.
Reviewed by Anna Smith
Fair. ... More
Posted by reminn at 12:01, 03 November 2010 | Report This Post
|Ain't That Good.|
Chole ain't a good movie. Why? Because it's very predictable of what's going to happen and could see the twist from a mile of. Sure the three top stars give good pefomances but basically, this film is just porn and shocking of how it got away with a 15. Not recommened. ... More
Posted by joanna likes films at 09:33, 21 September 2010 | Report This Post
A film with its heart in the right place but its hand in the wrong one, Chloe is a classic case of brilliant premise gone wrong. The fact that Moore suspects her husband Neeson of being unfaithful and employs Seyfried to find out if he is makes sure that the film starts out superbly - the three lead actors have their plates deliciously full and themes and characters are comfortably in place. So what goes wrong? Wilson's script simply fails on the credibility level. It's highly doubtful that what... More
Posted by djphilips at 19:37, 02 August 2010 | Report This Post
MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS Just when the film starts to get good into thriller territory it ends. Also I don't find it believable that Amanda Seyfried can play Chloe a high class prostitute because she looks so young gorgeous though she is. And also I don't think this film is age appropriate if a 15 year old were to watch this they would be subjected to graphic description of sex acts which is really just more of an adult theme which is why I think this film should be an 18. ... More
Posted by Bighousewill at 15:12, 25 July 2010 | Report This Post
There is strong talent in this and i think Amanda Seyfried is on the road to be a bieng a good actress. Its all rather wasted here because its trashy and ultimately soft porn. ... More
Posted by Soprano168 at 20:34, 13 May 2010 | Report This Post
| RE: Chloe - the soft porn experience......|
The original Nathalie had Fanny Ardant and Emmanuelle Béart.
However good this might be, it hasn't got Fanny Ardant and Emmanuelle Béart. I'll be giving it a miss. ... More
Posted by mediarats at 20:56, 08 March 2010 | Report This Post
|Chloe - the soft porn experience......|
An intriguing premise doesnt take long to develop into soft-porn lesbianism (your reviewer was not quite right - this IS practically a B movie in places!) although the fac t that this temptress then gets involved with the son! creates a weird love triangle you didnt perhaps coming.
Absolutely ripe for spin-offs on the Adult Channel or the top shelf of your local DVD store. A surprise some of this stuff passes as a 15 at times.
Best enjoyed on DVD with a well known brand ... More
Posted by filmsunlimited at 20:45, 08 March 2010 | Report This Post