Excellent but underrated film

everything you have heard about this movie is true.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Sister This remake of the 1973 Brian DePalma horror classic is far less interesting than the original. Festival co-director Julien Fonfrede promoted the screening as the film's North American premiere while, in fact, it was previously shown at the Sitges Film Festival. Despite the marketing faux pas, the film caught this reviewer's interest as a remake of a DePalma film.The story centers around Siamese twins who, as adults, must face surgery to live in health. Physiological disorders place their health in jeopardy and a severe psychological disorder of one results in an evil act. DePalma's film focuses on Danielle (Margot Kidder), a young woman who apparently murders her date, and Grace (Jennifer Salt), a nosy reporter who sees the whole thing. Things get strange when it is revealed that Danielle is a Siamese twin, and her nasty twin sister may have something to do with the murder.This remake lacks engaging characters, which is not to blame the acting but the directing. Stephen Rea as the psychiatrist Dr. Lacan and Lou Doillon as the "slave" Angelique give themselves completely to the performances and keep you connected, but that's about it. Character arcs are weakly resolved and therefore so is the drama of being a Siamese twin. The plot's dramatic story is not explored in depth and is unfortunately not saved by the murder subplot.Lou Doillon's acting is perfect�she handles the schizophrenic role of Angelique/Annabelle with a perfect blend of charm, vulnerability and complete wackiness. She took over from Asia Argento who was initially cast as Angelique/Annabelle but dropped out at the last minute. Shooting took place in North Carolina and Vancouver, British Columbia and explains the Canadian money used in the birthday cake purchase scene.The bloody stabbing and the scalpel absurdity at the end creates a superficial yet childish gore without showing what is at stake for these characters. When the last shot which is the same as the opening sequence fades to black, moviegoers leave without an emotional connection to what just happened. The entire film seems to be a pretext to practice directing skills for director Douglas Buck. Apparently the director, impatient to launch his film career, settled for redoing a classic horror film.While the film is good enough for general distribution, one would think that with the amount of dollars committed to the project, the final product would have had more depth of character.Sister Directed by Douglas BuckLou Doillon, Stephen Rea, Chloe Sevigny, William B. Davis, Gabrielle Rose, Talia Williams, Erica Van Briel, Dallas Roberts, Michael Curluck and Dylan Basu

Separated conjoined twins are investigated by a diligent reporter in this pointless and plodding remake of a mediocre yet vastly superior Brian DePalma film. Horridly acted with characters that one simply can not care about. The more well-known actors that appear in this mess should feel ashamed. I'm more than a tad angered that I waisted my time on this one. I guess I was sucked in by the usually dependable Stephen Rea. Consider this a lesson learned to steer clear of Douglas Buck written/directed filmsMy Grade: D-Eye Candy: Lou Doillon shows T&A; Chloe Sevigny gets topless

Redo of Brian DePalma's "Sisters". Reporter Grace Collier (Chloe Sevigny) witnesses a murder from a computer cam and a window (don't ask). She gets involved with a creepy doctor named Phillip Lacan (Stephen Rea), his ex-wife/patient named Angelique (Lou Doillon)...and the murderer.The original was no masterpiece but it was a quick strong thriller. There was no reason to remake it but that never stopped Hollywood. It starts off OK but falls to pieces as it goes on. For starters the acting is terrible. Sevigny and Rea can be good--but not here. They seemed drugged and just walked through their roles. Doillon is OK but she can't carry the whole movie. There are two VERY bloody murders that liven things up briefly. I saw the original so I kept comparing them and this one kept coming up short. Everything seems to be just going through the motions--there's no action or urgency in this. They make a few changes in a nod to modern technology but it doesn't help. To make matters worse the ending is completely changed...and it makes next to no sense! Why follow the old movie so completely and then just veer off into a completely different resolution...and a bad one at that? I wasn't even aware that this even existed till it popped up on late night cable TV. Obviously it bombed badly. Avoid this train wreck and seek out the original.

The starting seemed like this will be a nice slow thriller flick that'll be interesting to watch. Boy was I disappointed. Sometimes you see such movies and realize that "not every time a director can carry the beginning to the ending". This movie is a disappointment. The acting - the least said the better. The background score didn't help. The story line was one of those where you knew what was coming your way and you would expect some nice ending to it to be a saving grace for the flick. Nah!!! The ending was the worst I have seen in any movie recently. It was like the writer or the director had no clue what to do and how to end this. Leaving much to be desired, I should have realized it midway that this was not what I was looking for, I have seen many story lines like these, but certainly treated better and finished better than this. One of those movies you would start scratching your head 20 minutes into it and barf at the sheer pathetic acting and storyline rendering. No wonder it took ages to complete this film and see the light of release. It was better left unreleased rather than putting us through this torture of pathetic story, acting, direction and all.