Watch Secret in Their Eyes For Free

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Despite star cast, terrible Hollywood "make-over" of a great movie. No chemistry between actors, feels like a typical American run-of-the mill police movie whereas the original is much much more (Argentinian 70's era, love-story, human condition, ...). Kidman acts like a stiff wax doll (actually looks like one), and even Roberts completely over-acts. Besides the only saving grace Chiwetel Ejiofor, totally unconvincing. Go watch the original, incredible chemistry between Soledad Villamil and Ricardo Darín, great performances by Guillermo Francella and Pablo Rago, atmosphere, music. As usual Hollywood massacres a foreign movie.

This film was so hard to engage in that I almost turned it off. The only reason that I watched it to the very end was to see the performances by the cast. I feel like this is one of those movies that could have been a lot better had it not been directed by someone who did not understand its vision or story. The timeline is confusing to stick to (unless you can reference Nicole Kidman's long or short hair for time reference). The script is horrible at times, some of the scenes are unbearably amateur in storyline. I want to say that I enjoyed this, but it really sucked.

This was miserably confusing and I did not realize till the end when the male lead went to the house of the victims mother that this was a takeoff of the really very good Argentina film I had seen some years ago.Can't recommend it at all.

A girl is found in a dumpster fully clothed, but the girl has been raped and bleach has been poured on her and inside her to eliminate DNA evidence.Anyone with a background in criminology will tell you that the whole scene would have been highly unlikely. The guy had no real connection to her. The only reason a perp would put clothes back on a female after murdering her - cover up her body - is if they had some kind of connection to her (family, friend, partner). For example, Amber Hagerman, a nine year old taken off her bike in broad daylight was found with one sock on face down in a creek behind her apartment building. Similarly, Kristen French, a 15 year old after being held captive for days was found nude on the side of the road. Her head was even shaved to eliminate any potential evidence of carpet fibres. These victims are discarded like trash. A perp is not going to put clothes back on them, especially since clothes always has some kind of evidence on it (head hair,dog hair, feline hair, clothing/carpet fibre, pubic hair, the kind of forensic material that cannot be bleached away). Many people have been convicted of similar crimes on weak evidence, such as carpet fibres in a car matching fibres found within the inside of a girl's pants, for example, even after being submerged in a lake for some time. This is NOT always the case. Some girls are found partially clothed, but that is only because the unsub was in a hurry and didn't bother to remove all the clothing during the assault. In the case of this movie, the unsub bleached the girl on the inside and out. If he went to all that trouble, he would not risk putting clothes back on the girl, since clothing always carries some carpet, hair, clothing fibres on it. Also, he did a bad a bleaching job, since the clothing was not even bleached. The forensics in the case were pathetic, it looked the case was taking place in some poor country like Columbia, Mexico or the Philippines with no forensic team of specialists. She went into the dumpster and completely contaminated the scene and all the evidence at the scene. Any evidence on the daughter was contaminated at that point with fibres she brought on herself. (That is why investigators wear special clothing prior to going into these types of scenes.)They are detectives in a joint force on terrorism and yet they are asked to investigate a rape and murder of a female. This is also unlikely. There are HOMICIDE INVESTIGATORS for that, not the same thing as homeland security. Whoever wrote this movie really needs to watch some crime dramas and forensic files episodes because even in the 1980s, when DNA had NOT been used in court yet and was at its most early stages of development, there was still a lot of forensic data collected at a scene. The acting was good, but the movie was boring, jumped back and fourth, and was inaccurate/unrealistic.