Chloe

2009

Action / Drama / Horror / Mystery / Romance / Thriller

72
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten 51% · 162 reviews
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Spilled 39% · 25K ratings
IMDb Rating 6.3/10 10 77620 77.6K

Please enable your VPN when downloading torrents

If you torrent without a VPN, your ISP can see that you're torrenting and may throttle your connection and get fined by legal action!

Get Guard VPN

Plot summary

A doctor hires an escort to seduce her husband, whom she suspects of cheating, though unforeseen events put the family in danger.


Uploaded by: OTTO
May 03, 2022 at 03:16 AM

Director

Top cast

Liam Neeson as David Stewart
Nina Dobrev as Anna
Julianne Moore as Catherine Stewart
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
886.61 MB
1280*690
English 2.0
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 36 min
Seeds 11
1.78 GB
1920*1036
English 5.1
R
23.976 fps
1 hr 36 min
Seeds 16

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by Quinoa1984 9 / 10

an intense drama about sexual identification and fantasy

Sometimes a story needs to just let its characters go where the situation takes them. A situation isn't always conducive to storytelling (telling a story vs. a situation), but in the case of Chloe it's the way to go. The situation here is this: a doctor (Julianne Moore) is suspicious, perhaps even certain in some way, that her husband, an opera teacher (Liam Neeson) is cheating on her. As a way to find out, or just out of curiosity as to what he'll do, he approaches a call-girl (Amanda Seyfried) who has a knack for fulfilling any client's desire. When Chloe asks this woman about her husband being the client, she says he isn't. Her job will be to approach him, simply, in a cafe and see what he does. But according to Chloe, an innocent conversation (him being "friendly" as he is with a lot of women) turns into something else entirely... or is it?

This situation unfolds in a manner that is less about the conventional 'what will happen to their marriage' than what will happen to Moore's character, and Seyfried's Chloe, in relation to one another. It's one thing to have a character having sex with one spouse, but then having it with the other is something else. But that's not even what Atom Egoyan, the director, is fully interested in (although the sex scenes, when they do come up, usually from Moore's gynecologist imagining what her husband has been doing - and then herself actually with Chloe, are the most seriously erotically charged ones seen in a while). His concern, as a storyteller with this 'situation' is what is in the mind, what perception does to a married couple over time.

Catherine can imagine David doing these things, and we as the audience accept this as what really happened because Chloe, as the in-charge girl of the fantasy, makes it so. What do we perceive as who's wrong or right here, or is there even that issue? Eventually the movie Chloe turns into an obsession kind of story, where Chloe becomes enraptured with Catherine and their tryst together. A third-act revelation (I hesitate to call it a twist) makes things a lot more clearer, but does it matter if one sees it coming (I didn't, but I can see how suspicions can be had right from the beginning). It's Egoyan's way of seeing these people in these situations, how serious everything is taken but how it doesn't become too trashy; only the music by Mychael Danna sees to make it more of a sleek erotic drama when it doesn't need it (the best music cue has nothing to do with him, but rather the cutaway from one crucial scene to the next where Catherine/David's son is playing a perfectly somber piece of piano at a recital).

One part of it is the camera, sliding along and pairing up the imagery in certain scenes (watch as Catherine is excited in the shower of the image of David in the botanical garden, their juxtaposition is interesting). But another crucial thing is the performances. Moore and Neeson deliver the goods, and we hope they always do (Neeson especially has a very hard part, despite the supporting role as the husband, since he has to reveal what is necessary for Catherine to perceive, not so much what is fully realistic), and the actor playing the son fares less well, though that may be due to him being underwritten (or just not well written enough). But it's Seyfried who comes away here the real winner; she's naturally sexy and appealing, and can convey Chloe's ability to play Catherine so well because it's what she does. She's younger but wiser when it comes to intimacy and the power of suggestion, and the details in her descriptions, in the writing and the acting, is totally solid. We've seen Seyfried try, and sometimes succeed, more or less with material (i.e. Mean Girls and Jennifer's Body), and here is where she really, fully gets to shine in a three-dimensional character.

We know the players and we know how it might turn out, but you can't be sure. Egoyan eschews a Fatal Attraction third act turn for something a little more dangerous and exciting. I wasn't sure if Chloe was nuts, or just got off on her own superior way of playing this family of bourgeois Toronto-ites. It's about knowing what we know, and what we choose to do with that information as a sexual partner, a lover, a person, a friend, whatever, and that intimate fantasy element. It comes close to trash, but it really isn't. Taking its flaws aside, it's one of the smartest adult (though not pornographic) thrillers in recent memory.

Reviewed by Leofwine_draca 2 / 10

One of Hollywood's dullest

I hated CHLOE with a vengeance. The plot of the film sounds good, a little like the Richard Gere vehicle UNFAITHFUL: Julianne Moore and Liam Neeson are playing an unhappily married husband and wife; Moore employs the beautiful student Amanda Seyfried to seduce her husband, with unforeseen consequences for all three involved.

Now, I know there were difficulties with this production. Neeson's real-life wife died halfway through shooting, thus curtailing his presence in the film, which required rewrites. Even so, this doesn't excuse almost the entire production consisting of Moore and Seyfried just jawing together, which makes for exceptionally boring viewing.

I've always found Moore one of the most depressing and 'samey' actresses out there, even though the Oscar guys love her. This was another role where I hated her character with her stupid histrionics and selfish, 'me me me' attitude. Seyfried is better, but given too little to do, while Neeson barely registers. I sniggered at the scriptwriter's attempts at shockingly explicit dialogue, and I snoozed through 90% of the running time where absolutely nothing happens.

Reviewed by SnoopyStyle 6 / 10

a bit too chill

Catherine (Julianne Moore) and David Stewart (Liam Neeson) are a professional upper class couple with teenage son Michael. It's a perfect life on the surface but Catherine begins to suspect David cheating on her. She hires call girl Chloe (Amanda Seyfried) to test his fidelity. Chloe reports her encounters back to Catherine. Chloe is complicated and has a sexual tryst with Catherine.

The three lead actors have amazing pedigrees. Atom Egoyan has directed sexually ambitious movies before but this one has no heat. I do like the performances but Egoyan has instilled a coldness throughout the film. It keeps the sexual tension down when it should be boiling over. Although it could be argued that Egoyan wanted a chilling effect for this overheated premise. I don't buy it but I do still love the actors and it's beautifully shot.

Read more IMDb reviews

2 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment