User Reviews (35)

  • vtaltos7730 September 2001
    One of the better film examples of Urban Fantasy I've seen
    Truly coming from the genre of Urban Fantasy, this film belongs with stories such as Alan Dean Foster's "Into the Out of" or some of Charles de Lint's more horrific tellings.

    An anthropologist returns to the city after years of travelling and investigating, only to find that the spirits of the places he travelled have become aware of his probing eye, and have come looking in return. A balancing by the Manitou, as it were. The film has a heavy, oppressive mood to it, but leaves the watcher to figure out a great deal of the content for themselves.

    Coming from the same director as "Die Hard" and "The 13th Warrior", this is a rather surprisingly subtle film, and quite delightful in it's execution. Highly recommended, if you can find it.
  • one4now411 January 2004
    A great, eerie horror-fantasy
    This is a great horror-fantasy. It's very complicated and surreal, but, if you can dig it, it is a good one. I loved it. In it, Pierce Brosnan turns in an excellent performance as a French anthropologist in L.A. with his wife. He's brought into an emergency room after being attacked by unknown assailants, where he dies. But, before he goes, he somehow manages to pass his memories on to a doctor (Lesley-Anne Downe). She begins to slide into hallucinatory states where she sees how and why Brosnan was killed, with the dead anthropologist every step of the way in his flashbacks. For some reason, some streetpunks are very interested in his house and he finds that they have built a shrine to a murder in his garage. He begins to track them and study their behavior and how they live. It's not very long at all before he not only realizes that these people are no human beings, but also becomes the hunted as they begin to terrorize him. Then, the doctor finds that the mysterious, mystical demons known as "nomads" want her next. Some parts are extremely creepy, like the sequence with the nuns. Man, that was eerie. I liked this movie a lot, even if it was as complicated as it is. "Nomads" is, without a doubt, a thinking man's horror film.
  • sunznc9 September 2006
    Interesting theory in Nomads
    And the theory is, as spelled out by Chelsea Quinn Yarbro in her book of the same name, that there are earthbound, malevolent spirits who bring madness to any human that makes camp with them. That people don't realize that a percentage of what they see or hear is not.....there! Most people are luckier, they don't look so closely. But Pierce Brosnan's character, being the inquisitive person he is, has looked.......too closely. Now, these nomadic beings, who are attracted to places of calamity, have taken an interest in Brosnan and he is warned by someone, who may or may not be one of 'them'. Warned to leave, change his job and move away. It's all very interesting to watch. And afterward, you can't stop thinking about it. Yes, it contains flavors from the 80's but it is still thought provoking. Read the book too!
  • Raymond29 March 2012
    Original, not entirely flawless
    Got this cheap on a sale. I've been having this 80's season with watching movies and decided to purchase it without any prior knowledge of it. I was just surprised it's a McTiernan movie I hadn't heard of.

    I wasn't completely convinced at first and thought that it was 2 euros flushed down the toilet. The story picks up quite slow and the beginning is executed in a style I wasn't very fond of. Brosnan portraying a frenchman was a bit annoying too. But after 30 minutes or so, I was pretty hooked to see how the movie would eventually unfold.

    Even tho it turned out to be "ok", it's got a lot of flaws. It feels as if it would've needed a lot more substance in script. The whole nomad story is pretty vague and there's not much background info on Brosnans expeditions, which would've made this movie more gripping and interesting. The connection is there, but to me it didn't deliver. I was left a bit confused with a lot of things. It almost goes into David Lynch territory at times, which isn't a completely bad thing, but you need to have that "something" to pull off a supernatural mystery like this. To me this wasn't such a movie, even tho it may not be too far from succeeding. Something was missing from the story.

    I was also left wondering if the movie had worked better without the doctor lady completely, concentrating on Brosnans character. The whole flashback/hallucination thing was mostly just confusing. There was some nice editing at times and it added to the tension, but I still feel this movie would've worked better in a more linear fashion, dropping the doctor character completely.

    So, the initial story was interesting, but the execution made it a mess. Maybe I should watch it again to appreciate the structure, but at the moment I don't see myself spending another 90 minutes on it. I'll keep it in my movie library tho, just in case I wan't to revisit it at some point.

    As a side note, the movie contains one of the most brutal scenes I've witnessed on screen. It's not graphic at all and is portrayed from a distance, but it comes very unexpected. It really made me feel uncomfortable.

    6 points for the story and originality, may be a bit generous tho. Maybe it was worth the 2 euros I payed for it, but not more. McTiernan continues to be a mystery of a director, having made classics and my favorites Die Hard and Predator, but still capable of creating an artsy movie like this and some complete garbage like Rollerball remake.
  • R. Cody4 July 1999
    An intelligent and creepy ghost story
    I am a sucker for a well told ghost story and that's exactly what "Nomads" is. Pierce Brosnan and Lesley-Anne Down turn in powerful and convincing performances as the doctor and the anthropologist linked by a telepathic bond. The non-linear narrative in which Down relives the last days of Brosnan's life is brilliant and effective. An intelligent and creepy film that will not disappoint if you are looking for a change from the typical Hollywood shocker.
  • thogatthog14 November 2003
    An astonishing piece of work
    One of those rare fantasy movies that has the courage to be conceptually uncompromising with its audience, this plays with several layers of reality so that often one is uncertain if the particular scene currently on-screen can be taken at face value or not ... yet by the movie's end all makes perfectly coherent sense according to the movie's own internal logic.

    Brosnan and Down are not the actors you'd expect to find playing this sort of material, but Down turns in a perfectly creditable performance -- as does Brosnan whenever (which is, fortunately, most of the time) he doesn't have to speak: his French accent is lamentable. Prime acting honours, though, must go to Anna Maria Monticelli; her portrayal of a French academic's French wife in an unknown city is pitch-perfect.

    If you enjoy the best of written contemporary fantasy and are dissatisfied by how rarely screened fantasy matches it, usually as a result of Hollywood defaults, then you'll whoop with joy on discovering Nomads.
  • ma-cortes11 March 2014
    An anthropologist reveals a dark secret to a young doctor who investigates a strange group of demoniacal creatures
    A French anthropologist (Pierce Brosnan's first leading role in a feature movie) moves to Los Angeles and is followed by the evil spirits of an extinct tribe he once uncovered. A woman doctor (Lesley-Anne Down who married director William Friedkin) investigates and becomes the next target of a group of rare people with nomadic life .

    This is an eerie as well as supernatural chiller about a society of malevolent ghosts set in Los Angeles and dealing with a mysterious anthropologist well performed by Pierce Brosnan and the woman doctor finely acted by Lesley-Anne Dowen who investigates the weird deeds . The film packs gruesome images, grisly killings , amazing events , and intense horror sequences . It is a spasmodically effective thriller plenty of suspense , continuous flashbacks and nightmares , chills and plot twists . Nomads notables include pop stars such as Adam Ant and second screen appearance from legendary singer/song writer Josie Cotton . In addition , a cult actress , Mary Woronow and veteran Nina Foch . Director John McTiernan is an expert at staging action and thrills and here he has proved talent at concealing explosive final to individual sequences until it arrives . Catching score though filled with pop music and synthesizer was composed by Bill Conti of Karate Kid. Atmospheric cinematography by Stephen Ramsey , being necessary a correct remastering .

    The motion picture was professionally directed by John McTiernan , though has some boring and confusing moments . McTiernan's first efforts at filmmaking were all in the terror genre , and none too successful at all , such as ¨Watcher¨, ¨The demon's daughter¨ and this ¨Nomads¨ . McTiernan is especially known for directing violent, high-energy action-adventures and very active movement of camera . His movies have an explosive combination of suspense and dynamite action that make them irresistible , and boosted by big stars . McTiernan confirmed his ascension to blockbuster with ¨Predator¨ and ¨Die hard¨ , which few expected to be such huge hits , they are two violent , exciting thrillers , as he broke through to the big time . In his subsequent films used big stars as Sean Connery , Schwarzenegger , Willis , Travolta and again Pierce Brosnan , all of them appeared in ¨The hunt for Red October¨, ¨Medicine man¨, ¨Last action hero¨, ¨Die hard with vengeance¨ , ¨Basic¨ and ¨The Thomas Crown affair¨.
  • Nywildcat15 January 2012
    Some of the worst French accents you'll ever hear
    Warning: Spoilers
    "Nomads" really shouldn't be classified as a horror film, per se. I really consider it more of a Supernatural thriller since nothing horrific actually happens.

    The movie starts off with Pierce Brosnan, who plays a French Anthropologist with the worst french accent this side of a grade school production, who winds up in the emergency room ranting and raving and dies while whispering something in Lesley Anne Down's ear, who plays the ER Doctor attending him. Her character going forward is pretty much used to tell his story leading up to his arrival in the ER in flashbacks, as it seems his spirit, or at the very least his memories, have taken her over.

    Though somewhat enjoyable,this movie could have been a lot better than it actually was with a few retweakings. Lesley Anne Down's character was completely unnecessary and added nothing to the final story, even at the end. They would have been better off just telling the story from the moment Pierce Brosnan and his wife move into the house. Also, the horrible French accents used by Mr. Brosnan and Ms. Monticelli (who portrays his wife) are so horrible, it adds an unintentional comedic flair to the film. There doesn't seem to be any real reason as to why their characters had to be French, other than to have Lesley Anne Down's character utter some french words while in a delusional state (perhaps to give the appearance that she's possessed)? Or maybe to stretch Pierce Brosnan's acting wings (since he was still doing "Remington Steele" at the time as was not, as of yet, a big movie star).

    However, a movie that shows Pierce Brosnan in a full frontal nude scene, that was completely gratuitous, can't be all bad. If anything, you have to give Mr. Brosnan some props for showing his junk during a time period when very few male actors would, especially television stars.
  • jirwah24 October 2005
    Uneven, but still interesting.
    Warning: Spoilers
    This flick has been knocking around on Encore for the last few weeks and, never having seen it, I thought I'd give it a look. My reaction was mixed. While Brosnan does a really ridiculous French accent, the acting was decent, and the atmosphere was genuinely creepy.

    This was one of those movies that, like 'Near Dark', assumes the audience has half a brain and makes them think a little. What exactly are the Nomads? It's never spelled out - it's left up to the viewer to decide. Now, while this can be a good strategy (it worked like a charm in 'Near Dark'), sometimes you can go a little overboard.

    This was one of those times. While I have my own ideas as to what the Nomads were and what they did, a teensy bit of explanation from Director/Writer John McTiernan would've been useful.

    But overall, it was a decent way to spend 90 minutes. And check out the last scene... pretty trippy.
  • Zeegrade29 March 2009
    Interesting storyline - Poor execution
    Warning: Spoilers
    John McTiernan's directorial debut has earned seven ten star votes along with a few nines and eights as of writing this review. I find it hard to believe that Nomads can be considered "brilliant" or a "masterpiece" more than his later works like Die Hard and the underrated 13th Warrior when he had more experience under his belt. The aggregate score of five is more indicative of where this film truly belongs.

    We are introduced to a bloodied Jean-Claude Pommier (Pierce Brosnan) a French anthropologist that whispers into the ear of his attending doctor (Lesley-Anne Down as Dr. Eileen Flax) somehow transferring his last memories to her just before he dies. Soon Dr. Flax is plagued by hallucinatory flashbacks that tell the story of Pommier's last days on earth told oddly enough from a third person point of view. Jean-Claude and his wife have just moved into a house in L.A. and becomes intrigued by the local ruffians that insist on congregating outside of his home. After finding graffiti scrawled upon his garage Pommier decides to pursue this group and analyze what sort of mindset drives these people to choose this kind of nomadic life. Soon Pommier becomes obsessed with observing these people prompting him to approach the nomads for an impromptu photo session. When the photos develop Jean-Claude realizes that these people are anything but normal. It then becomes the task of Dr. Flax to save Pommier's wife and flee their common supernatural pursuers.

    Nomads sadly reflects the era it was made in when it comes to the absurdly dressed gang. They appear like glam-rocker extras from a Mad Max movie. Mary Woronov bares the brunt of this as her heavy makeup and teased hair make her look like a transvestite. It's just very hard to take them as a serious threat. The Irish born Brosnan and England bred Down both constantly slip in and out of character making me wonder why they had to play a French man and an American doctor respectively. The ending is a bit of a disappointment as it seems even ghosts must respect state jurisdiction. Nomads starts with promise and tails off drastically toward the end. Not a bad movie by any stretch of the imagination just not as good as some reviewers would have you think. But don't take my word for it, rent it yourself and give me your thoughts.
  • Chip Gallo (cgallo)2 February 2008
    Transcends the Genre; genuinely eerie moments
    If you are in the right mood, this movie can really creep you out. Plot wise it's not perfect and the French accents are best viewed as comic relief. But some films have a moment that rises above the norm, and there are several in this piece. In a way I'm happy that every little loose end isn't tidied up and explained.

    Wondering if Pierce would consider appearing in a sequel. After all, his wife could have had a baby that would want to meet daddy. There is a whole new generation of annoying music to license. A gritty, hand-held update (shot on HD video) could hit the spot.

    Anyway, relax and suspend disbelief. It will all be over in 90 minutes anyway ...

    [2015 update -- a U.S blu-ray release has been advertised for August. Hoping they will give it a 5.1 sound upgrade!]
  • gavin69422 July 2013
    Not For Me, Maybe For You
    A French anthropologist (Pierce Brosnan) moves to Los Angeles and is followed by the evil spirits of an extinct tribe he once uncovered.

    Despite the incredible Adam Ant, and starring Pierce Brosnan (as a Frenchman?)... and being written and directed by John McTiernan, master of the action film, this movie has received overwhelmingly negative reviews.

    Jay Scott is the exception, as he described Nomads as "a breathlessly unself-conscious film (there is none of the self-congratulatory stylization of Blood Simple), the tone alternates maniacally between scaring the audience and making it giggle." Scott said McTiernan "has brought to his project a staggeringly resourceful technique. The sharply unpredictable editing, the hypnotic use of slow motion and rack focus (that's when the background and foreground reverse in clarity), the ominous rock music - everything adds up to a debut of singular confidence, full of fun and creepiness."

    Scott may be alone. I was not all that thrilled by the film as a whole, neither a horror fan nor as someone who has otherwise enjoyed McTiernan's work. Perhaps I need to give it a second chance, but this is a largely forgotten film that has probably earned its place in the memory hole.
  • haildevilman15 July 2006
    Warning: Spoilers
    An early McTiernan flick.

    This is not the most coherent film, but at the same time, the pacing and frantic build-up more than make up for it.

    The best scenes are when Brosnan's character suddenly realizes he's been following the Nomads for 30 hours and they haven't stopped to sleep once.

    Then, when he's hiding in the dark alley, and trying to take pictures of No. 1, (Adam Ant) they make it clear they know, and knew all along, he's been watching. At this point everyone was wondering who, or what, these people are.

    The biker/punk look was a new twist, even if it looks dated now.

    And Brosnan should really avoid French accents.

    I'm also pretty sure that was Paul Bartel's voice on the phone. The fact that longtime friend Mary Woronov is in this film makes me all the more sure.

    Creepy flick.
  • jtownsle20 August 2013
    Awful, slow, confused, terrible choreography
    The movie starts out slow and confused. Perhaps I'm simply imposing a 2013 movie-watching experience on a 1986 film. But I've seen plenty of pre-1986 films that were great. This one is awful. You occasionally get glimpses of a plot, but it's rare. Brosnan is a decent actor, but I could barely stand to watch the film because of his farcical French accent. And while he has a nice body, I don't know what the rear and frontal nudity has to do with the movie. In another scene, he defends himself against an interloper (Adam Ant), and while his swings all look like they miss by a good foot, the attacker still goes down, even though for one of the blows there is a lamppost between the Brosnan's arm and Ant. People appear in and out of nowhere and switch bodies--perhaps it's real, perhaps it's part of a transcendent consciousness, or even just a dream--who knows? Certainly not the audience. How could anybody think this was a scary movie? When the movie was made I was 10--perhaps I would have thought it was scary then.
  • durante-luca5 November 2002
    An interesting experiment
    I think this is a very interesting movie, basically for two reasons: 1)The fear atmosphere is strong around all the time, the horror plot is suggested but almost never showed, and it increase the suspence and the desire to discover the end. 2)It's a low-cost movie and I appreciate it for this. There isn't special effect, gore or whatever but the odiens are still disoriented by a mysterious direction. This is a clear foot-print of a talent director! Good interpretation of Pierce Brosnan (too much better than 007!!). Enjoy it!
  • tab-915 October 1998
    A Fantastic Haunting Experience
    "Nomads" is one of the best movies made. It successfully captures Pierce Brosnan and Lesley Ann Downs in one of the most unusual yet polished performances about a cultural anthropologist and a doctor's intimate experience of his last few days in tracking down a strange group of young wanderers. This is a haunting movie that will leave you with a striking bittersweet final image for the rest of your life.
  • preppy-329 August 2009
    Silly movie
    I caught this in a movie theatre back in 1986 and I remember being less than thrilled. Pierce Brosnan plays Jean Charles Pommier (with the worst French accent you ever heard) who is tracked down and killed by some tribe he uncovered. Before he dies he whispers their name to doctor Flex (Lesley-Anne Downe) who is in turn hunted down by the tribe.

    The movie is boring and pointless with no scares and a stupid plot. Also just try to imagine Brosnan trying to play a French guy! Brosnan is a great actor but his French accent is downright hilarious. Downe does what she can with a seriously under written role. However it was fun seeing Adam Ant and Mary Woronov as part of the tribe (even though they have no dialogue). I will admit that this film had one scare--when you find out who is riding the motorcycle at the end. Still, that one scene doesn't make watching this any easier. Mostly forgotten--for good reason!
  • slayrrr66627 September 2008
    Has it's moments, but not all that much
    Warning: Spoilers
    "Nomads" is a terminally boring and barely worthwhile effort.


    Working a grueling hospital shift, Dr. Flax Stafford, (Lesley-Anne Down) begins to feel very weird after meeting Jean-Charles Pommier, (Pierce Brosnan) an anthropology professor and begins to suffer from a series of strange visions. When it soon gets to be a little more than her friends can bear, she is tested by the staff for signs of what's happening while she begins to experience his life through some strange means. She begins to realizer that she is being possessed by him in order to find out his obsession with a specific roaming nomadic biker gang that's been terrorizing people for a long time until she realizes what the connection is between the two of them. Finally understanding what's going on, she vows to get away from the horrifying truth and solve the mystery of the gang.

    The Good News: There's only a few moments here that actually work. The early scenes, where it's hard to determine what's going on and are based around the confusion over what's happening, is actually not that bad and generates some decent moments, especially with the flashing images that appear to be from one source but come from another set, leaving this part feeling rather creepy and interesting. That's it all done in the first half of the film, with the wild hospital scenes also coming into play as well making really enjoyable. The chases at the end are also really good, with it's fun setting and only real use of putting in something with some adrenaline into it, which the rest of the film sorely lacks and manages to get something out of it. The only other part in here that manages to get anything decent out of it is the single sequence where, confronted inside a singularly creepy-looking house by a similarly creepy-looking apparition, is told the truth about what's happening and then disappears off into the darkened house, forcing him to chase them through the house. It's a long, creepy chase that actually does a lot of good and manages to have some really tense moments. Frankly, though, these are all the film has going for it.

    The Bad News: This is a thoroughly disappointing and disjointed effort. The fact that this one is so dull is one of the greatest problems with it. Nothing in here happens, as it's mainly just a bunch of scenes of him running around the gang trying not all that greatly to incorporate himself amongst them, which isn't exciting. Watching him walk around doing his worst at being incognito around them with some of the lamest tricks to try to hide the fact that he's spying on them is some of the lamest stuff around and offers up nothing interesting or exciting about these things. Since they're so flawed, it manages to make for some really lame sequences and are just so dull that there's nothing at all so impressive about the scenes, which take up nearly all the scenes in the middle of the film that there's nothing worthwhile in there. The other flaw in here has two big parts to it, the film's sheer incomprehensive storyline. This one has one of the single hardest plots to figure out in the world, making it nearly impossible to figure out or understand. It has something to do with an Eskimo spirit that only they believe in tormenting the professor, but even that's a stretch to fully use in here, it's so hard to understand. There's also the fact that it's nearly impossible to figure out if what we're seeing is even real or not. This has an ability to show the scene as being through the one person's eyes, then switching it around to show that it's really about the person possessing the other one and seeing life through their eyes. It's all done in a very confusing manner and it's impossible to figure out. The inherent dullness, though, constitutes the biggest flaw.

    The Final Verdict: Barely features anything worthwhile at all, and those few good moments are so beaten down by the negatives that it all falls apart badly. If you want to give it a shot, go ahead, but keep expectations low, but those who know this won't appeal to them shouldn't waste time on it.

    Rated R: Violence, Language, Nudity and a mild sex scene
  • Bob-454 January 2005
    There Are Worse Things Than Death
    If you want narrative plot summary, read the one posted on the IMDb. However, here are a few observations about "Nomads." o The most annoying thing about Brosnan speaking with an accent was not that he frequently slipped out of it. The most annoying thing is that both Brosnan and his wife were frequently unintelligible.

    o The movie slips into its plot so quickly, it doesn't really allow you time to develop empathy for the characters.

    o Most viewers are probably not familiar with entities of varying physicality. However, there are recorded cases of these.

    o The writer-director rarely raises much suspense. However, the closing scene was chilling enough to be worth the watch. There are worse things than death.

    I give "Nomads" a strong "6".
  • Backlash0076 March 2005
    "They're nomads."
    Warning: Spoilers

    Watch as Adam Ant and Mary Woronov chase Pierce Brosnan to an 80's soundtrack with guitar licks provided by Ted Nugent in Nomads. I really have no idea what I just watched. Let me see if I can attempt to make this thing make sense for myself. Pierce Brosnan is a French anthropologist who studies nomadic tribes around the globe. He moves to California and, at the film's opening, we find him at a hospital. He dies there and whispers his last words to nurse Leslie Anne Down who then becomes possessed by his memories. Through flashbacks she witnesses Brosnan's last days as he tracks a modern nomadic gang through the city. However, these nomads may not be human. They may be mythological spirits who have actually been tracking Brosnan all along. Sounds complicated, no? Well that's not really even scratching the surface with this movie. There's a lot more going on but I'll leave it to you to answer some of the more nerve-wracking questions. Let's just say there's no linear narrative and the convoluted script is unapologetic. We see twist after twist after twist and hope the end is in sight soon. I must confess, I was getting really restless towards the end of the film. I can say that the end image does bring some coherency to the first 90 minutes, but I'm still missing a piece of the puzzle. It's not at all what I expected out of director John McTiernan (Predator, Die Hard). Surprisingly subtle stuff for a McTiernan film. Nomads is a film that will benefit from repeat viewings.
  • drystyx10 September 2012
    experiment that fails
    The late eighties was very experimental and risk taking in films. And that's why I'm not going to lambaste this movie.

    This is an experiment that fails.

    It probably should have been good, but this has to be one of the worst 100 directing jobs ever.

    It's too confusing to tell you what it's about. You won't be able to stay awake for any ten minute stretch, so you will have to watch it in chunks. "Plodding" is the huge understatement for this movie.

    It's a supernatural piece about a woman who hallucinates seeing a man who has died, and what occurs in the movie is something you could never possibly guess without looking at the "plot synopsis" in the guide. There's nothing in the movie to tell you what it is about.

    The mistake here is that the director tries too hard. Technically, things look good. The women who occupy most of the screen time are very pretty. There is some good scenery in rare spots.

    Technically, the dramatic suspense is text book, but it isn't inspired. It simply drags and drags. And the good scenery is rare compared to the bland city scenery. Hospitals, cars, streets, homes are dull. Making them duller with actors plying their "suspense" acting makes it a debacle.

    I don't care about the accents. The actors try, and that's the problem. It's all "trying". The director extends every scene to make it last forever. Roughly 90 minutes is what this runs. It should have been 8 minutes.

    The experiment here, by the director, was to suspend everything, to try to make the most out of a simple movement. There was a popular poet-teacher who held a "Writer's meeting" in Louisville named Leon Driskoll, who loved that sort of boredom, but it bores me to tears. Still, I realize there are people like him who love boredom.
  • xlucasthebandx23 October 2005
    Pierce Brosnan is haunted by ghostly bikers.
    Warning: Spoilers
    This movie was simply crappy. First off I was expecting something else entirely, some one told me this movie was like The Road Warrior or something along the lines of post-apocalyptic future. Pierce plays a french anthropologist who is being harassed by metalhead/punk bikers who may or may not be some kind of ghostly creatures. Its a pretty stupid concept which is not scary at all and also can be a little confusing at times. I really don't find the concept scary at all, so If I hang out with these ghostly metalheads (like I would hang out with metalheads in the first place) I will go crazy? Lame dude. Nothing about this movie was scary at the least, and it never properly explained how this so called nomads, came to be. You've got better stuff to do, trust me.
  • dew5522 August 2004
    obscure jewel
    A very well acted and directed movie. There was very little bad to say about this movie, so on to the positive.....Dark, concise, with a few twists that still are a bit on the provocative side, nearly 20 later.

    I don't like to comment to much on the contents of a movies plot, as not to give anything away. Suffice it to say if you enjoyed 'Identity' with Cusack, Liotta, And Amanda Pete, you likely will enjoy the ride that this future 'Bond' takes you on.

    This movie ranks much higher than the stars assigned to it. I like the fact that this movie cannot be pigeon holed nice and neatly into a category, although the tag is 'horror'. It is not a slice and dice ho-hum, but a tight psychological thriller. ENJOY! (adult viewers)
  • gridoon26 September 2004
    If Brosnan somehow transferred his memories to Lesley-Anne Down, then why do we mostly get a third-person's point-of-view of his life in the flashbacks, with only brief and random intervals of his own point-of-view? It may sound like a small quibble, but think about it and you'll see that the device simply doesn't make any sense. McTiernan fails to bring out the supernatural elements of the Nomads (who come off looking more like your standard street punks - "they don't live anywhere, they don't work anywhere, they resort to violence at the slightest provocation"), and the movie drags. The ultimate point seems to be that Brosnan's character should never have bothered thinking about The Nomads, just as you shouldn't bother watching this film. (*1/2)
  • tho-327 September 2006
    a great movie
    certain movies sit with us like old friends or lovers, or even family members... we remember every nuance, every scene, every sound with fondness and delight... movies like Star Wars or The Wizard of Oz, or even offbeat movies like Alien or The Usual Suspects or Independence Day or Seven Samurai or Jaws or many others... i'm naming my personal favorites, of course, it's different for all of us... but these are movies we carry in our hearts, we can replay vignettes from them as personal remembrances...

    other movies are great works of art, maybe not so personally felt, but their greatness is breathtaking, we love them for their sheer magnitude and scope and beauty... again this varies from person to person, but movies like The Ten Commandments or Spartacus or The Wizard of Oz or Gone With the Wind or many others... these are cultural icons, touchstones of our common humanity and vision...

    and then there are the movies that are just plain ol' flat out works of art

    as with any form of art or beauty, it is all within the eye of the beholder of course, your mileage may vary, taste is subjective etc. etc., but art is art


    i consider Nomads to be one of those flat out works of art

    cinematic art

    those who left kvetches and bad reviews about Nomads here on IMDb are entitled to their opinions... i'm not saying they're wrong... but i'm definitely not gonna say they're right... they don't get it... too bad, move on, don't bother to bitch and moan... i personally can't stand Middle Ages Christian art... it bores me... but that's not a criticism, it says more about my tastes than the art... art is art

    Nomads is art

    (i happen to think it's great art)
An error has occured. Please try again.