SnoopyStyle In 1969, Faith (Cameron Diaz) went to Europe and disappeared when her sister Phoebe (Camilla Belle) was 12. In 1976 San Francisco, Phoebe (Jordana Brewster) is haunted by Faith's suicide but still looking for her. Her father died of leukemia and hated his work. She fights with her mother (Blythe Danner) and travels to Europe following her sister's old postcards. In Paris, she reconnects with Wolf (Christopher Eccleston) who had traveled to Europe with Faith. Eventually, he tells her that Faith had joined the Red Army group.It's a slow moving coming-of-age movie. Brewster is beautiful but somewhat empty. Diaz is a bouncing floaty flower child and an unconvincing anarchist. The start teases something more than what is actually delivered. Phoebe is not compelling enough and her journey is less exciting than 'National Lampoon European Vacation'. The idea of discovering Faith's journey keeps my interest but the final reveal is rather disappointing.

Gordon-11 This film is about a young woman trying to find out what really happened to her elder sister who was found dead at the bottom of a cliff in Portugal.I was hoping it to be a touching and engaging movie. I just expected something better especially when Cameron Diaz is in it. Unfortunately, the plot is slow and fails to engage at all. Jordana Brewster's emotions seems shallow and even restricted. I did not really care about any of the characters either, as they all seem irresponsible and dispensable. In such a plot and character driven film, such flaws are fatal. Hence, even the good lighting, cinematography and amazing European scenery cannot save this film from being a waste of time, and money.

annevejb I find the story magnetic and the key to that, for me, is the soundtrack, the parts with new music. It links with the story and there is a blend of sheer magnetism that draws me along. Secret Of The Andes 1999 has the music of Bakalov. Argentinean music fitting in with a story set mostly in north west Argentina. That has an okay-ness multiplied by its natural value to make that special. Invisible is nothing like that, it has a soundtrack of pure power for me, simple and direct. I had understood this to be a story about a group of people who are all hurt. In chains. The two main males that is obvious. The females do better, but just why Faith died is an enigma to ponder. Phoebe is a more approachable problem to me, her way with Wolf. For me, a big interest in this story is following that tangle and the clues are not as blatant as in many stories, this is not too simplistic. From other comments it helps to have been in the sixties, but that is just in order to recognise the illegal drug use and stock footage. * My big qualm comes from reading the comment that applauds how Phoebe catches Wolf, calling it love. To me that is applauding disaster that shows both are sinking. It is an opposite of love. It does nothing to help either to be able to stand on their feet as people, it is Wolf standing on his feet as a broken pet and Phoebe standing on her feet as a pet owner who has lost a big chunk of what is worthwhile. Phoebe is skilled at sending out icebergs. Titanic Wolf has already become proficient with a key to a lifeboat. Except now I can watch it and miss the intensity of the aspects that lead me to that conclusion. The last time, for the purposes of drafting this, I was revelling in the visual quality and Phoebe's approach felt like love, Wolf appeared as gradually being healed. This comment has to be based on the first few times I saw this. How widespread is the approach of Phoebe in that taming of Wolf I noticed? What leads her to consider it as good practice? I currently have a problem posting an IMDb user comment on Cammie's Secret Of The Andes. I have a real love for the strengths of the film, it occasionally gets near the level of Cammie's Annie 2 1995, just Andes has some weaknesses too. Weaknesses that I also notice if I look back on my own past. I am finding a comment on this to be worthwhile to try to do, we have things in common, but I hit against the quality control criteria as if what I write is deemed to be offensive or not relevant. Just getting a blank response means I really do not know what is what. After two attempts I am stuck. The blank response of Phoebe was different, she went cold and ran away. But the issues were clearer. When Wolf went back to her he showed that he had gotten hopeless at defining what the day to day issues were, to me he was looking back to frozen ideas of good and bad and demonstrating that he had gotten stuck, tied up. He was also freezing when Phoebe needed his help re Faith. With me such is not something that one is often tooled up for getting healed and when that happens healing ways tend to become disaster. Phoebe's response felt like disaster, as if she held out for him as her toy, and he had skills for going along with the cues to do that. If she had love for him it was a very hurt love. Two dogs could do better. The zero tolerance of IMDb and the error response I noticed in Phoebe have common ground. I am finding that there are ways to face it, but not with all situations. For me, zero tolerance is not about leading people away from chains, to more worthwhile paths from the recipients view. I am drafting this comment as a way to try to say that. For that purpose, this links with my comments on Mean Girls 2004 and Angela 1994 or 5.

leonardozeligbrazil I won't lie to you guys but this movie it's boring and dull.The plot is empty and there isn't even what I call `story'.A piece of trash is a good word.The only thing that matters is the younger and talented Jordana Brewster which I like very much.She's in somehow brazilian cos' she lived in Rio de Janeiro for a long time.And she's my hope to bring the fame to Brazil that we have a lot of talents here.Could open many doors to the artist in Brazil.I really like her ,not only because she's from my country.She made a fine job in this picture and I believe that she'll grown professionaly in the future.But let's talk about the boring Circus.The story could be written by a 10 years old boy.It's very senseless and without connection with the things.Everything is twrown to the viewer and he must understand those crazy facts in the plot.Cameron Diaz commits suicide and hurting a lot her younger sister played by Brewster.So when she turns 18 she decides to do the journey that her sister made before diying(?!).Why would she do something like that?If you knew that somebody die you would understand!Hurts!But what can you do?She thinks that discovering facts of her sister would bring her back?And what is the connection with the title and the story?And why such good artists played in this drama?The end is cruel to the cinema history.And Adam Brooks had a terrible idea to develop this project that maybe only works on the book,which the movie was adapted.It's a story for crazy people!Don't watch!It's too bad!... I could give millions of bad words to describe the piece of trash that this movie is!Two thumbs down!