Simpatico

2000
Simpatico
4.7| 1h46m| R| en| More Info
Released: 28 January 2000 Released
Producted By: Fine Line Features
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

As youths in Azusa, Vinnie, Carter, and Rosie pull off a racing scam, substituting winners for plodders and winning big bucks on long odds. When an official uncovers the scam, they set him up for blackmail. Jump ahead twenty years, Carter and Rosie are married, successful racers in Kentucky about to sell their prize stallion, Simpatico. Vinnie is a drunk in Pomona. Vinnie decides to make a play for Rosie, lures Carter to California, steals his wallet and heads for Kentucky with the original blackmail material. Carter begs Vinnie's friend, a grocery clerk named Cecilia, to follow Vinnie and get the stuff back that he has in a box. Will she succeed?

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Fine Line Features

Trailers & Images

Reviews

HauntedMansion666 I really enjoyed watching "Simpatico". I liked it so much I bought the movie. Jeff Bridges, and Nick Nolte are at their best. At times my heart did bleed for Nolte. Yet Jeff's character too drew my sympathy, but it was the horse who I felt the most saddened for. Even though it's an excellent movie, I would caution a parent against letting a child watch it, if the child was unable to tell the difference between reality, and fiction. It pulls at the heart strings in much the same way as "Old Yeller". It covers love, lies, greed, and true friendship in one brilliantly wrapped package. It is a beautiful, heart warming, and intriguing movie. A must see if you are a Jeff Bridges fan.
Jugu Abraham This is not a great film but it deserves some attention.I am an admirer of Sam Shepard the writer, not necessarily the actor. And even though his contribution to the film is not direct, his subjects make an impact on me. I am surprised the director did not involve him in the screenplay. Of course, Shepard is more a playwright than a screenplaywriter...I loved all the main players, especially Sharon Stone. She had a small role that was impressive.The camerawork of John Toll always impresses; this film was no exception.One thing was clear; the direction lacked experience--but for a first film, the output is creditable.
deltadave669 You'd think that a movie with the acting power of Nick Nolte, Jeff Bridges, and Sharon Stone would be one to watch. Well.......it is and it isn't.First off, I'd never in my life thought I'd see Nolte and Bridges in the same movie. Talk about an odd pairing!With that out of the way, they both put in good performances, as does Stone. The star of this movie though is Albert Finney. His performance is the best of all the parts in this movie.Unfortunately the plot, involving a racing scam many years ago which resurfaces, is only mildly interesting at best. It seems almost a shame to have such good performances wasted on such a story. Still, it's worth a watch if nothing else is on.
tedg Spoilers herein.This film has gotten beaten about by critics. IMDB voters rate it lower than `Harley Davidson and the Marlboro Man!' Wow.It doesn't bother me that the older actors are on automatic pilot, because that's the point. No, nor does it annoy that the perspective is deliberately lacking energy, especially considering the life that Shepard spanked into theater in the 80s. Because that was deliberate. This hand shakes. Why shouldn't a play about decomposition show cracks?I don't believe Shepard can do no wrong. `Paris' was too artificial for me. `Renaldo and Clara' was a goof.But the writing here is so tight, so self-aware, so self-reflective that the force of it transports. Two elements are notable. A writer lives through his work, IS his work. As the work breaths so does he. As he ages and develops an awareness of the price of past excesses, of cheats and shortcuts, so should the work, if it is real. This does. Perhaps the audience for the living word is scanty. But this is real art, real control.The other element that impresses here is the art of slowly spinning the story. There is a tradition of withholding key threads when weaving a story. It is a game between writer and reader, each trying to outguess the other. The detective story is the simplest form, where you and the writer are engaged in a game of wits. Engagement.You become engaged not because of what you know, but what you do not know, and -- in this subgenre anyway -- a pact is established early that you will get all the pieces you need, but not without some work. This kind of storytelling, when it does not rely on convention, is very hard to manage. And the actors who do the real work must be obtuse, a particular challenge. I suppose that flies in the face of today's TeeVee watchers who want it all to make sense from the beginning, and who want to ‘understand' characters.(A plea: eschew your TeeVee. It numbs.)This is not of the caliber of `State and Main,' for instance because Mamet understands writing to the light which this adapter/director lacks. He does well enough with folding time neatly, but not with mastery as in "The Limey.' It does not have the integration of writer vision and actor expression of "The Pledge."But see it for the engagement.