rfoster-06979 While Jim Carrey may not have much dialogue, the entire movie is lacking dialogue, narration and really anything to keep one interested. Because I sadly purchased the Jim Carrey Movie I forced myself to watch it but it took an entire week for me to finish it. Now it is a decorative disc hanging in my backyard tree to keep the birds at bay. Lol. Don't waste your time or money.

lavatch In the bonus segment of the DVD of "True Crimes," the actors and director struggled to explain the meaning of this strange drama. On the surface, the film was a thriller about the search for who killed Sadowsky with a zealous Polish detective seeking to reopen the cold case and solve it on his own. But on another level, the filmmakers appeared to have another goal that ventured into deep thinking about the nature of "truth" that turned into a muddled mess for the viewer to understand.One of the points made in the bonus track was that there exists "many sides to truth." But instead of exploring different perspectives on a complex murder case, the film focused on a single perspective from the point of view of the detective, then pulled the rug out from under him (and the audience) by way of a gimmicky ending.Tadek (Jim Carrey) is the grizzled detective who pursues a case that was long shuttered by the police department. While his career took a nosedive for apparent ethical misconduct, Tadek is not deterred from getting involved so personally in the case that he sleeps with the mistress of the suspect, a weird writer of novels who appears to have difficulty in differentiating reality from fiction.The pace of the film is laborious with the cat-and-mouse game between Tadek and the disturbed writer Kozlov unfolding at a snail's pace. Characters seemed to be endlessly opening and closing doors with little action. At one point, Tadek inexplicably enters the apartment of the mistress, voyeuristically observing the intimacies of the couple. The background on Tadek's past was never made clear, especially his relationship with his long-suffering wife.At some point, the audience needed a reason to care about the characters and to become engaged in the drama. This never happened in a film that had philosophical pretensions that were never made clear right up to the moment of the trick ending.

lovlyhero Jim Carrey is a big actor ... i don't know why he act in this movie ... bad story ... weak director ... awful casting ... totally waste of time ... i think its a falling in Carrey acting career ... i was trying hardly to open my eyes in almost the middle of this movie ... not recommended ...

3_the_monkey Doesn't everyone love Jim Carrey? I have to say I prefer him in this kind of film, one of my favourites being 23, it was so dark and he is so intense in it. I grew up on pet detective and the mask and I remember my cheeks aching from laughing so hard at the cinema, although this may not be any of those it's ok, it's worth a watch. It started off with a feel of 'Hostel' which to be honest unsettled me but luckily it's not even remotely anything close. The pace fits, acting as you would expect is good, Jim is just a bit muted.... Jim is better than the character and as such I think you expect him to bring more to the role but I think if he had it wouldn't have fit....