charlytully Out of thousands of movies I remember, DOWNLOADING NANCY has the most blatant product placement by far. Cans of Pepsi Cola are visible in nearly half the scenes. Characters even ask each other, "Don't you want more Pepsi now?" Since Pepsi is used throughout this film as a metaphor for infamous "People's Temple" pope Jim Jones' lethal Kool-Aid (a registered smiley face trademark) concoction a few years back during his 900-person mass suicide stunt in South America (from which the ubiquitous expression "Don't drink the Kool-Aid," meaning 1)"don't be bamboozled," and 2)"hang in there" derives), a savvy viewer can only conclude that COCA COLA paid the entire budget of this movie. A word to the wise, then: if you don't want to barf during your next round of the "Pepsi taste test" due to the subliminal anti-Pepsi message of DOWNLOADING NANCY, then do NOT download this flick into your brain! On a related note, the actress playing the title character here is clearly anorectic, as anyone pausing the film at about the 57:05 mark will surely deduce. Please, someone, buy Maria Bello a REAL milkshake before she goes the way of Karen Carpenter.

TheHrunting When the printing press was invented it spread media quicker and farther than ever before. Fast forward to the information age where written documents as well as ways of communicating went digital from the invention of the computer and then a way to connect them to others: The Internet. Writing letters turned into e-mails and inked articles went way of text on a blog. This story uses the modern way of communicating and connecting to others but as an outlet for darker reasons rather than opportunity or forward outlooks. And what makes this tale so haunting is that is was inspired by real events with some cinematic liberties altered from a 1996 case about a woman named Sharon Lopatka who went by the name of Nancy over the computer."Downloading Nancy" is about a down-on-this-world woman, played by Maria Bello, who searches for someone on the Internet that would take her life as she's tried herself with scars to show for it. Not to mention going to therapy sessions to resolve her long list of deep-rooted issues without any substantial luck. She's married and unable to have kids due to being abused and suffering physical pain as a little girl. Her husband Albert, played by Rufus Sewell, doesn't understand her need for infliction during intercourse, and after 15 years of marriage is fed up with her immature and selfish ways of dealing with problems. He has golf and other hobbies to keep himself distracted, not to mention they sleep next to each other, yet are worlds apart. Nancy finds her guy, or so he says, and takes off with only a nondescript note left over to her husband. The newly met man from online seems the perfect match to give her the rough stimulation she feels she needs. Nancy has her highs and lows, from emotional to withdrawn, giving a torn decision to the man who's now infatuated with her.Slow, serious, subtle, "Downloading Nancy" builds up by showing rather than telling how this woman got to the desperate, manic, end-all state she's at. There are loose, hand-held camera shots that put you there. Sometimes hiding behind something to give the point of view of witnessing and experiencing it first hand. The settings are dulled with drab colors and neutral furniture to give an oppressive tone without overdoing it and trying to be creepy. Maria Bello does an excellent job of playing a pessimistic woman with more than one troubling issue to contend with. Her impulsive ways make her unpredictable and unlikable, though there is a feeling of pity as she can't even help herself.This doesn't have the typical amount of hope or resolve that you see in Hollywood pictures, but it's filled with real feelings of emotion that radiate from the screen. The film doesn't have any good guys or bad guys, and it isn't a horror tale as it won't happen to you due to both individuals being willing participants. It just unfolds this strange tale of how the Internet brought these two together, who would have otherwise never met as they're several states over. Though Nancy had stacking problems that were becoming too much to handle, and this was her way of finding an answer to solve it all by including this man to take charge of her life without question. The amount of blind trust she put into him might say more about herself than him. (If you missed 'em see my profile and click chronological for first review "Grimm Love" or the second "Cannibal.") (Also submitted on http://fromblacktoredfilmreviews.blogspot.com/)

Raymond I'm gonna start out by saying that this may be the most depressing and distressing movie I've ever seen and I've seen a few. It hit me from behind, I had no idea what I was about to watch. Sure, there are movies about for example the holocaust(s) and some powerful horror movies, but this movie managed to beat them to it. I was a bit surprised about the low score, as this really is such a well crafted movie that it deserves better. Altho I understand some may be put off by it's absolute bleakness. It's slow, and it's very hard to watch. On the negative side, there is a tiny amount of exploitment, as the story is said to be inspired by true events and the direction does underline a bit. This is where I drop the score one point. It's a difficult scenario with (inspired by) true stories, as you can't really know what the directors motive was to put this on screen. Is it his affection for subjects portrayed here or the fact that he wants to make people think about unfortunate people you don't often see on the media.Maria Bello portrays an utterly depressed woman who has been abused as a child and can no longer connect with her husband (Rufus Sewell). She then contacts a man (Jason Patrick) online who agrees to kill her. The story jumps right into it and is not 100 % linear, which is a bit distracting here and there, but also works for the benefit of the dark story.There are as many sides to the story as there are characters involved. It could be seen as a directorial success that even tho the story is partly seen thru his husband, it still manages to keep him as a bit of a mystery. The focus is always on Nancy. There are a lot of scenes where Nancys husband is shown after Nancy leaves to meet her killer, but we are never really let inside the husbands thoughts. On the other hand, Nancy's character may be underlined too much. Is this a directorial decision to focus on Nancy's need for attention or just to have as many scenes as possible to show Nancys downfall, I don't know. I'm guessing it's all intentional as the movie is quite well crafted and every detail seems to be there for a reason.There is one scene in particular which had a tremendous impact on me. The one where she starts a food war during a bleak dinner. This is probably the only moment in the movie where you can see a spark in her eye. Only to be shot down immediately by her husbands reaction.Where this movie may fail a bit is that it is easy to see the husband as a baddie. Or at least this is how I take it from the reviews written here. Had the story been portrayed from another perspective, we could've seen a tormented man who has focused on his hobby to stay sane in a non working, infertile marriage. There are people who are unable to show their feelings. Nancy had a tragic past, but this could also be a case of bad matchmaking to begin with.A word of praise must go to Jason Patrick, who makes an unbelievably chilling role. It's completely new, never seen a character like his played on screen. There are scenes where his eyes show zero emotion, yet at times you can feel his empathy and care. I read he replaced Ray Liotta and this is a small victory. Liotta has played so many psycho roles that he would've watered down the whole movie. Jason Patrick hasn't been in a lot of movies and thinking about it now, he's a perfect choice for the role.I read somewhere that the director credits his homeland Sweden. He points out that only Finnish people may be more depressed than they. Maybe it is the fact that I'm Finnish that I really felt this movie and didn't see it pointless and slow waste of time as some have said it to be.

Sissy K Admittedly, there were some scenes I simply could not watch. Let's face it, we who chose to view this one are probably not fans of the pat Hollywood ending. Please keep that in mind as you digest my confession that I found some scenes too viciously depraved to view. While I knew, after reading the DVD blurb, this was going to be a dark odyssey, I had no idea I'd signed up for this. Just because a movie is "the most disturbing film I've ever seen" (attribute to follow), does not mean it has redemptive value. Since 1/2 watching it, however, I simply cannot get it out of my mind. That this is based on true events should come as no surprise. Sadly, incest is not rare. Its effects linger and certainly alter a person for life. Clearly, Nancy was viciously abused as a child, and not just by her mother's brother. At one point, the audience is made aware that, upon learning the extent of her daughter's damage, her mother blames her and calls her a slut. This suggests a legacy of child abuse. Which makes me think this could have been an important movie. Not just a nightmare.Sessions with Nancy's therapist are annoying. Too little, too late. The happy-faced key to the restroom is strange. Look good (Smile) and everything is cool. No. Would a trauma specialist really be that clueless? I guess the stupid audience needs to be slapped in the face with irony. Insulting. This could have been a powerful movie-one that enlightened, rather than just shocked. Why is it that damaged men are portrayed with a certain nobility, but their female counterparts are just annoying, hateful, and pugnacious? Her character, like the entire cast, is unsympathetic. She's so over the top at times, it's almost funny-every nail, staple, sharp object-she's on it. It is filled with caricatures. Also, since when can you smoke on a bus? Point taken-she's plum lost it, but it's just another unrealistic scenario. And suicidal desperation is just not this loud. The most disturbing part of this is how shocked the audience is meant to be-and apparently is-that this is based on true events. First, that phrase is extremely loose. Secondly, are we not already aware of the staggering statistics? Thirdly, if the cited case is, indeed, the event upon which this is based, haven't the filmmakers further exploited her? I hated the voyeuristic quality of this tragic movie. That it's been described here as soft core porn (ReaLLY?) and/or S/M is further testimony that the filmmakers failed.