George Taylor Excellent performances all around, especially by Angelia Jolie, who won't give up the search when her son is kidnapped. Her dismay and anger at the lack of interest by the police comes across quite true. Really a nerve wracking film.

eric262003 Let's see if I got this down correctly, it's Los Angeles in 1928, a young boy raised in a single working mother household disappears while he's left at home unattended. Months later, the police desperate to keep their decaying reputation intact because their so corrupt, lazily claims that they found her child. When she confronts them and tells them that's not her child, the lazy asses say she's making thing up. When she refuses to dismiss the case, the cops end up locking her away in an asylum. While this is happening, some graphic details involving another child abduction case catches their attention feeling that the misfired details to the story is more macabre than the one's been uncovered. Why would anyone want to see this exhibition of manipulative cheapness? All it delivers here is just showcasing children's lives being threatened. In a nutshell, all that this movie stems down to is fear-mongering and the audience is just simply biting into it. From what I gathered this story was based on actual events and yes I admit it's sad that these cases do happen. However, at the same time, the movie is so one-sided it's preposterous. Aside from that the events following the case lack in anything uplifting, energetic or eye-opening or any other terminology words that the Oscar hacks like to utilize. This movie fails miserably that can't be repaired. Angelina Jolie stars as single-mother Christine Collins. She works as a telephone operator and is one of the best workers on the staff. When she gets called into work one fine Saturday she leaves her son Walter (Gattlin Griffith) at home by himself. When she returns home, the boy has vanished. Five months has passed, she gets the news that the cops have found a boy located in Illinois that suitably matches Walter's description. When she arrives that the station, she is surrounded by reporters and police who are just trying to conceal their corrupt reputation as they reveal the boy to her. When she sees the boy, she confirms that this child is not Walter. But the cops knowing they goofed still want Christine to take the child anyways. She then tries to take the case even further with the chief of police Captain J.J. Jones (Jeffrey Donovan) that even though the proof that the boy they found was not Walter, he declares that Christine has serious mental disorders. And when she refuses to dismiss the case, the LAPD have her institutionalized to an asylum. While there she's befriended by fellow inmate named Carol Dexter (Amy Ryan) who instructs her on getting by in the loony bin. Meanwhile on her side, a local Reverend Gustav Brieglab (John Malkovich) who opposes corruption stands up to defends Christine's case while the token good cop Lester Ybarra (Michael Kelly) makes a grisly discovery involving a tip about a missing child who was abducted by crooked Canadian criminal. This movie clearly is every mother's worst nightmare. When we go to the cinemas, we want to be entertained and thrilled and to chase our troubles and insecurities away. So why do we need to watch a movie where real events like this one could happen to anyone at any time? What makes matters worse is that it is so surreal to actually think the cops even back then would be so corrupt and uncaring it makes this true story feel as though the production never once took this subject matter very seriously. It just never felt convincing. Sure director Clint Eastwood's intentions were good and Jolie did quite well in her respected role and had the emotions accurate in how any mother would react when faced in this dire situation. But the film quite insufferable and very painful to watch. When the final credits roll, there was no justice that truly prevailed. No feel-good moments were delivered here and it took a ton of excruciating frustrations for common sense to get through. And then some important details that could've been utilized to good effect were thrown out the window. Like why didn't they question the neighbours who were checking up upon Walter? That could've been a potential lead, but it was neglected because common sense was nowhere to be found. After all is said and done, "Changeling" is two hours and twenty minutes of torturous manipulation that took a serious story and made very little progression to make this story enthralling.

Jawbox5 Clint Eastwood is a great example of an actor who made a smooth transition into directing. His films are always fluid and visually gripping, direct and deceptively simple, told with a straight face whilst retaining emotional weight. Though some of his directorial work doesn't quite achieve what it set out to, it is it is nearly always gripping on some level and interesting to watch. Whenever he delivers on a script that that allows him to use all of his expertise then he usually provides something engrossing. Never is this clearer than with Changeling, based on the true story of the disappearance of Christine Collins' son and the Wineville Chicken Coop Murders. Here you have a period piece that is tailor made to Eastwood's understanding of human struggle and involving story- telling. The relatively straight-forward story is set in 1928 and mainly details Collins' struggle against the LAPD after her son Walter disappears. The boy they return to her 5 months later isn't hers. Her protests fall on deaf ears as the police insist that she's just in shock and that she should give the boy a trial run. The film continues to build tension and unease brilliantly until Collins is sectioned, which leaves a crusading Reverend and a detective on a case as her only hope. Eastwood had shown previously that he could handle both mystery (Mystic River) and drama (Million Dollar Baby), so a story featuring plenty of both his right up his street and it certainly shows. He handles this story with delicacy and emotion, developing characters and their feelings without letting the story itself become unfocused. The deeper we get into Christine's plight, the more we want to know the truth.The further the film progresses, the more impressive Angelina Jolie's performance is. I was sceptical that should could carry such a film on her shoulders, but she brings everything needed to the role. What she does that is most striking is give us a woman who appears vulnerable on the surface yet contains an inner strength that cannot be broken. I believed every act of defiance and cry of anguish, as much as I believed every tear and melancholic expression. Above all she manages to make Christine authentic. Her reactions are just as you'd expect a real mother to act in such a situation. This isn't an easy performance to play off and carry with conviction given its complexities, I think Jolie did an extremely noteworthy job and received a deserved Oscar nomination.The film develops the themes of female disempowerment and corruption of the law with an appropriate subtlety. We see Christine's worries dismissed by men in charge, whether they are doctors or police chiefs, and just how easy it is for them to make her life even more of a struggle. The two high ranking police only appear to care about the public's image of the LAPD and Christine only finds support from a radio reverend. All of these roles are played with dependability, Jeffrey Donovan and Colm Feore as the seedy cops, John Malkovich going against type as the generous Reverend Briegleb. The film does well to reflect the nature of its period. There is an authenticity and stark beauty to the visuals, almost as if they were painted. You get a feel of the time and you never question it because it washes over you. The score provided by Eastwood fits the mood too, somewhat stark and lead by a sombre piano, it suits what is happening on screen perfectly. As the film builds we discover all kinds of secrets and corruptions. The film leaves you thrilled and shocked, upset but hopeful, it manages to bring in so many emotions without making them feel forced like so many films of its style do. Eastwood is clearly in his element with films that tell deep stories about people, he gives them heart without losing sight of the story that he is trying to bring to life. In Jolie he has an actress who handles the material with grace and courage, who becomes the person we care about and want to succeed. There is a mystery that unravels excellently and Christine's case becomes all the more engaging as it does. Most importantly the film very rarely sags or loses focus, I was completely engaged from beginning to end. It gave me plenty to be entertained by, be involved with and finally reflect upon.

CheshireCatsGrin As I sat down to write this review I was going to give this a 9. I started my mental list of issues with this film. I couldn't find one issue against this film and not one. It's very hard for me to score a ten (except Gone With the Wind), I rate on the low end generally. So here's what I was thinkingCinematography- Check Costumes-check Casting- check, Plot- check, direction-check, Acting-check Strong emotions without being manipulative - checkWhen I go to the cinema I have a choice - a movie or a film. With this I expected a movie, I ended up seeing a film. This should be shown in film courses. It reminds me of Chinatown. It transports you to the place where the screen takes you, and when characters cry their makeup runs.