IMDb user comments for
Missing (1982) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Index

62 comments in total

---

53 out of 69 people found the following comment useful :-
This film changed my life, 10 June 2002

Author: Ragnar Schwefel from Berlin, Germany

I was 17 when I first saw the film in 1982 and I can say, that it changed my life. Up to that I believe in my own government an I believe in the US, as a strong friend of all democratic countries. After this film I'd never take the things for real. I questioned everything and this is good. Use your mind, try to get informations from all sides. I think Chile is one reason, that the US doesn't sign the treaty for the international court, because guys like Kissinger had to be scared, that he has to take responsability for Chile and Vietnam. Everything was said of the great performance of the actors in this film. This is the best political thriller ever made.

---

58 out of 81 people found the following comment useful :-
Eye-opening and depressing, 23 December 2003

Author: jjj522002 from United States

Though I was 30 yrs old when the film came out in 1982 I didn't see it at the time although I was aware of its content. And, as is true of a lot of people my age (tho not all, of course), I toyed with liberal political beliefs when I was younger (1960's and 1970's), then gradually became more moderate bordering on conservative as I got older, onto where now I personally am not too sure where to stand. Well, I just saw 'Missing' for the 1st time. It brings back all my previous leftist 'paranoia' about capitalism and national interests. And causes me to wonder why I ever abandoned them. After the movie, I cruised certain sites on the Internet, one being a series of articles referenced in the misc. section under this movie on IMDb. They chillingly re-enforced the truth (?) that at the highest levels of our government there was complicity, even outright orders, to kill thousands, including American citizens, in the interest of capitalism, national interests and (so-called) 'national security'. I am sorry to say (sorry in the sense that with my limited personal intelligence, I am never completely sure if I am right and sorry to doubt my own government) that I am starting agree with some others, that our foreign policy has, is and probably will be be based, to the detriment of our national security, on the almighty dollar. I'm also sorry for the political comments on a movie site but, of course, the nature of "Missing" brought this on, and its very well directed, written and acted scenes. Please don't question things I have said unless you have seen the movie and read some of the articles. 10/10 ***new addition*** And I completely, of course, agree with lev_lafayette. Read the book, it is much better. I have read the book, 'Missing'. And as with most movies based on books, especially 'non-fiction' books, the content in the book is more detailed and hits you closer to the bone, heart, mind and conscience in many ways than the movie. And that is hard to believe in this case because Constantin Costa-Gavras (director) managed to create a movie experience that is nearly as moving as the work it was based upon. It was/is a great movie experience....sir. Thank you, CC-G. For those of you out there who have an easy criticism (one I agree with) now of the US (MY country and I care about it) because of Iraq, you need to watch this film or read the book. What can go wrong is deep seated (human instincts) and hard to root out. It can happen to you and your country and government. We are all human and capable of desire, greed and religious beliefs overruling true morality and an open mind and heart. Please, all of you, keep things in perspective. Fight for the right of anyone to truly express their opinion without fear of repercussions and fight for the rights of all peoples. Especially against government repression and government crimes against humanity. Bless your soul, Charles Horman, and Thomas Hauser, the author of The Execution of Charles Horman: An American Sacrifice (1978). Curse your souls, all those who contributed toward Mr. Horman's death. Including my president and his advisers. nuffsaid

---

46 out of 69 people found the following comment useful :-
Shooting people is wrong - even for governments, 20 July 2001
Author: Philby-3 from Sydney, Australia

During the Cold War (1945-1990) it was the policy of successive US governments to maintain authoritarian right –wing governments in power all around the world if there was a possibility that they might be replaced by one from the left, democratic or otherwise. As the US ambassador in this film reminds us `we act in the interests of the United States', not in the interests of the country which happens to be suffering under a fascist dictatorship. We can accept this on an intellectual level – how else can the US government establishment act - but in this movie Costa-Gavras uses his very considerable skills as a film-maker to rouse even diehard conservatives to anger over the methods used to ensure Pax Americana.

He does this by dramatising the real-life story of one of their number, Ed Holman (Jack Lemmon), a businessman from New York and a crusty Christian Scientist with faith in Truth, into the aftermath of a military coup in an un-named South American country the capital of which is called Santiago. (I think we can safely assume the country is Chile, though the locations appear to be Mexican.) His son Charles (John Shea), a vaguely left-wing journalist and writer, living in the city with his wife Beth (Sissy Spacek), has disappeared after being arrested a few days after the coup and carted off to a makeshift concentration camp in the National Stadium. Initially, Ed believes the people at the American consulate and embassy really are there to help him, but it soon turns out they have an agenda of their own. Ed and his son's wife start out on bad terms but Ed comes to appreciate her bravery in the face of a very unstable situation. He also comes to realise the moral worth of his son, who he had previously regarded as a bit of a playboy, much as he had loved him,.

An almost surreal feature of the movie is that people behave almost normally despite the obvious signs of murder and mayhem going on in the background. In fact the only time the `comfortable classes' are disturbed is when there is an earthquake affecting Ed's Santiago hotel. Otherwise, the guests are happy to watch from the upstairs terrace the military killing people in the streets. Of course General Pinochet still has considerable support in Chile, and in August 2000 your reviewer witnessed a large demonstration outside the Supreme Court in Santiago against a decision lifting the Life Senator's immunity from prosecution. It was a very well-dressed crowd.

Ed's odyssey through hospitals, morgues, police stations and the National Stadium is intercut with flashbacks which make it plain enough what has happened. Yet in classic thriller fashion we are kept on the edge of our seats with what will happen next. Politics aside, this film succeeds as a thriller involving believable people rather than stereotypes. Jack Lemmon gives the dramatic performance of a lifetime as Ed, the fuddy-duddy who really does care and leaves no stone unturned to find the truth.

Nearly 30 years later, Chile has a democratic government, Pinochet is too infirm to stand trial, Nixon is dead and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is an elder statesman on the celebrity circuit. The only communist regime in Latin America, Castro's Cuba, is still there. This film reminds us that immoral policy, whether or not it achieves its objectives, remains immoral. The fact that US foreign policy is regarded as being in the interests of the United States does not make it more moral, even if you happen to be a citizen of that country, where as Ed reminds us at the end, remains one in which you can at least sue for justice. Sadly, Ed did not succeed.

---

29 out of 38 people found the following comment useful :-
Costa-Gavras' first Hollywood film, bravely examined the US role in Chile's fascist anti-Allende coup of 1973…, 11 December 2005

Author: ironside (robertfrangie@hotmail.com) from Mexico

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Praised as a Political director, Costa-Gavras is of interest less for his finally unsophisticated analyzes of government intrigue than for the way he manages to frame his impassioned polemics within a popular and entertaining format…

Inspired by the disappearance of a young American during the coup, the film lacks moral complexity, but finds an admirable audience surrogate in the boy's Republican father, who is slowly educated in the imperialist hypocrisy of American foreign policy when he repeatedly encounters ambassadorial lies concerning his son's death… Most affecting is the evocation of a country under martial law falling apart at the seams: shots ring in the night, a white stallion gallops through the curfew pursued by a truck full of trigger-happy soldiers…

Not surprisingly, Costa-Gavras' "conjectural" film provoked the wrath of the US State Department…

---

33 out of 51 people found the following comment useful :-
Still has the power....., 2 August 2003

Author: Nolf_ from Hanover NH USA

A terrific and brutal political thriller. It's supposed to shake you up and it really succeeds. It's a shame that they don't make films like this anymore. Costa-Gavras's "Missing" is emotionally riveting and thought provoking. For it's time, it still has the power to change the views of todays movie viewers. A must see. 5/5.

---

19 out of 30 people found the following comment useful :-
It challenges democracy, 21 May 2005

Author: lev_lafayette from Australia

Very short review.

Aesthetically this film is very impressive. The narrative build up is both subtle and intense. The conclusion is a tragic let down - which may make many uncomfortable about the film. But it as about a real historical tragedy, one that challenges some fundamental assumptions of the principles of American democracy. Objectively, this is true story with artistic embellishments for narrative purposes only - it tells no lies. So objectively and aesthetically it is an impressive film.

But it is in the field of morals and politics that this film really shines. This is about Allende, a person who embodied almost a Jeffersonian style of democracy; popular democracy, locally organised. Yes, he was a Marxist, but also a person who had included the national liberation orientation of Boliviar, but also, as mentioned, the Jefferson notion of democracy. Allende _believed_ in democracy. He _believed_ that you could be elected, the State would say, "OK, because we're fundamentally a democracy and so are you so we'll let you implement a socialist economy". Of course, he was wrong and it fundamentally challenges one's belief in the democratic system being a government "of the people, for the people and by the people".

Oh, the book is better. Much better.

---

9 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
Jack Lemmon proves that he can knock the wind out of those who like stellar performances., 13 March 1999

Author: Pelrad from Shanghai, China

Jack Lemmon, renowned up until this movie, for his comedic roles takes a very serious dramatic turn and proves that he can knock the wind out of those who like stellar performances. This political thriller involves a young American writer who goes missing in a Latin American country that is headed by a military-style government who like to execute people for the simplest things. His wife (Sissy Spacek) is joined by his father (Lemmon) who flies down from the States and they begin looking for him only to find that the American consulate is being very uncooperative and has its hands tied in politics and red tape. An excellent score by the master of New Age electronica - Vangelis ("Blade Runner", "Chariots of Fire") accents this historical film based on actual shattering events. (10 out of 10)

---

7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Powerful political thriller, 13 August 2000

Author: jhaggardjr from Chicago, Illinois

"Missing" is a strong, powerful political thriller about the real life story of a man and woman who search for their missing son/husband during the 1973 coup in a volatile South American country. Jack Lemmon and Sissy Spacek give brilliant, Oscar-nominated performances as Ed and Beth Horman, the father and wife of their beloved one who has disappeared without a trace. The film follows their frustrating search in a country (which is Chile even though the movie never reveals) that I would not dare live in. Things get more frustrating for the Hormans when they start to believe that the American representatives there are not telling them everything. Directed by Costa-Gavras ("Z"), "Missing" is an emotional film that keep me interested for its entire two hours. Lemmon and Spacek are great as usual, and there are supporting roles for Melanie Mayron and Joe Regalbuto, a couple of years before they turned up on TV's "Thirtysomething" and "Murphy Brown", respectably. "Missing" is one of the best, strongest political thrillers ever made.

***1/2 (out of four)

---

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Propulsive, Real-Life Political Thriller Shows Costa-Gavras and Lemmon at Their Peak, 19 October 2006

Author: Ed Uyeshima from San Francisco, CA, USA

Accomplished Greek-French filmmaker Costa-Gavras has a compelling way of bringing the emotional resonance out of stories with overtly political themes. He hits the mail on the head with this searing indictment of American involvement in the 1973 military coup that ejected Allende from power in Chile. Facts are not discretely presented, even the country in which the story takes place is not disclosed (except for specific references to the cities of Santiago and Vina Del Mar). Yet, Costa-Gavras creates an atmosphere of palpable tension that doesn't let up in this 1982 film, and the unraveling mystery at the heart of the movie echoes the unsettling political situation surrounding the characters.

Adapted by Costa-Gavras and Donald Stewart from Thomas Hauser's non-fiction book documenting the true case, the plot focuses on American expatriate Charles Horman whose sudden disappearance in the days after the Pinochet coup brings together two familial adversaries, his wife Beth and his father Ed, who has flown in from New York. Charles and Beth had been leading a vagabond existence with his work in children's animation and their relatively passive support of Allende's reform measures. Charles' back story is revealed in carefully constructed flashback episodes that show him to be curious about the presence of U.S. military personnel in the area. Once he disappears, Ed and Beth seek help from the U.S. Consulate but face a seemingly insurmountable wall of bureaucracy. Frustrated, Ed, a highly conservative Christian Scientist, lashes out at Beth for what he considers her undesirable influence over his son. However, as they absorb the scope of the violence and the culpability of the U.S. government, they bond intractably toward their objective of finding Charles.

For once, Jack Lemmon, unafraid to convey his character's prejudices, is able to use his neurotically coiled energy in a suitable dramatic role as Ed. The result is a startlingly raw performance that ranks among his best. Sissy Spacek is terrific as Beth, though her character does not experience as big an arc of self-revelation. In the elliptical flashback role of Charles, John Shea provides solid support, as do Janice Rule as a political activist and a number of familiar TV faces - Melanie Mayron as friend Terry and David Clennon as U.S. consul Phil Putnam, both from "thirtysomething", and Joe Regalbuto, Frank from "Murphy Brown", playing another Frank, a possible victim of the coup. There are unfortunately no extras with the 2004 DVD.

---

7 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Costa-Gavras goes to Chile - State of Siege and Missing, 20 April 2005

Author: TrevorAclea from London, England

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

When I was editing a magazine, the only review I ever regretted publishing was of State of Siege: I watched it only hours before the deadline and my review was based on my immediate impressions, when this is a film that really needs time to sink in. Partially its because there is so much information thrown at the audience but also because it's one of those films that doesn't wear its humanity on its sleeve, and it takes a while for its full effect to really permeate.

The film's structure is shifting and driven by events rather than character – it begins with roadblocks and house-to-house searches before the discovery of the body of an American 'aid' worker (a quietly impressive Yves Montand in a complete reversal of his role in Z), then moves back from his funeral to his kidnapping, the gradual realisation from the press that he was rather more important than that and only some half an hour into the film introduces him as a character through a series of interrogations. Hopes are raised and dashed, the corruption of a dictatorship masquerading as a democracy is briefly threatened with exposure, American foreign policy motives debated (aid agencies being an excellent way of discovery the weaknesses of Latin American countries) and gradually the futility of the kidnapping and the inevitable murder become apparent as both kidnappers and victim come to realise that he is worth more to the government dead than alive.

All of this is played out with a number of memorable scenes (not least Montand's realisation that he is going to be killed in the film's most human moment, all the more so for being played with cold logic), some black humour (the taxi driver who has had his cab expropriated by terrorist before and knows the drill, the police childishly giving each other electric shocks with torture equipment or the businessman ignoring an escaped bound-and-gagged kidnap victim on his way to work) and a great eye for details (the too-expensive watch on a vegetable seller revealing him as a secret policeman). While the film lacks the immediacy of Z and the emotion of Missing, Costa-Gavras brings an overwhelming sense of impotence to the actions of both sides and adopts an interesting visual approach in the many scenes shot from rooftops looking down on the police and army about their dirty work, constantly panning and backtracking to reveal new details in every corner, giving a sense of omnipresent chaos and subjugation. It's genuinely impressive stuff.

On a historical note, this was the film that George Stevens Jr. and Charlton Heston successfully banned, initially from opening the Kennedy Center but eventually, such was the fallout, from US cinemas (it premiered on TV instead). The reason given was that the film 'encouraged acts of terrorism,' something which is patently absurd – the film very clearly and unequivocally reaches the conclusion that the torturer's murder is a backward and counterproductive step. It seems all the more hypocritical considering the Kennedy family's own financial and political support for terrorist groups such as the IRA, not to mention the large number of pro-IRA films (and even, in the 80s, pro Taliban and Al Quedah films) that have played the same venue without any protest from Messrs Stevens or Heston.

So why spend so much time talking about another film in a review for Missing? Well, even more intriguing is State of Siege's location – it was shot in Chile not long before the violent US-backed Allende coup. Maybe it's that familiarity with the locale that makes Costa-Gavras' Missing seem so authentic. More than just a startling vision of day-to-day life in the aftermath of a violent coup, there's much more of a feeling for the place and what ordinary people lost in the coup. This time confining his camera almost entirely to eye level, there's a real sense of chaos in its imagery – dead bodies littering the streets as people try to go about their daily business or floating by in rivers, soldiers chasing and shooting at a white horse through deserted streets or diners on a rooftop garden leaving their means to watch a helicopter gunship shoot at unseen curfew violators. The sheer casual and irrational nature of violence ("You Americans always assume there has to be a reason") gives the film a palpable sense of terror and dread: this is a place where even an earthquake can't get people out onto the dangerous streets after curfew.

The fact that this time round Costa-Gavras had a Hollywood budget to play with helps immensely, but he also has a script based around people who aren't defined strictly by their politics – indeed, the movie is basically a search for 'a political neophyte' by a gruff and unlikeable conservative (Jack Lemmon, on excellent form) and the missing man's wife (Sissy Spacek), a search that takes in embassies crowded with asylum seekers, morgues with hundreds of bodies piled almost haphazardly and the national football stadium that has been turned into a vast prison/torture chamber/place of execution. It's an outraged film but it's also one aware of its own impotence – this is a journey from hope to bitter and exhausted acceptance that there is nothing that an individual can do in the face of politically expedient mass murder. It's easily Costa-Gavras' real enduring masterpiece, having lost none of its power more than a quarter of a century on, and its sobering to think that there was a time when movies like this weren't just mainstream releases, they were also big box-office. It's just a shame that Universal's DVD is such a shoddy disc – it doesn't even have a menu page!

---

---

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Amazon.com summary	Ratings
Awards	Newsgroup reviews	External reviews
Parents Guide	Plot keywords	Main details
Your user comments	Your vote history