CHLOE 3.0 (but barely) ****
What would you do if you were fairly sure your husband was having an affair …check his shirt collar and boxers for lipstick or perfume or sneak peeks at his iPhone or BlackBerry for hotmails…maybe. But no such mundane things in this movie… this wife may surprise you.
Dr. Catherine Stewart (Julianne Moore) is a fortyish, classy, professional gynecologist who loves her college professor husband, David (Liam Neeson). They live in a wonderful home just outside of New York. They have an ambitious and horney 15 year old son who has recently discovered the sexual pleasures of ready-and-willing teenage girls….and the horizontal part of these hook-ups occur in his parents’ home !! But the major problem for Catherine is that there is no longer is any intimacy or sex with her husband, David, and Catherine suspects that her handsome, professor husband is getting too close to and bedding down young college coeds. That’s when she decides arranges to meet Chloe (Amanda Seyfried), a beautiful young call girl whose services she enlists to tempt her husband (as a young single hottie..not as a call girl) to see if he will take the bait and cheat on her. At first, all goes as she expected and Chloe reports back to her that her husband eagerly responded to her temptations and had sex with her. Catherine, out of a titillating curiosity, has Chloe continue the affair and requires Chloe to report back to her in detail what goes on..a “blow by blow” account, so to speak. It isn’t long before the relationship between Chloe and David — and for that matter, the relationship between Chloe and Catherine — spin out of control in ways that Catherine could never have imagined.
Moore and Neeson are such classy actors that they can’t help but elevate a somewhat weak story. And Amanda Seyfried is so well cast as the young sexy call girl…the alluring temptress… she’s sensuous and voluptuous, as in really “hot”. She does amazing things with a difficult, elusive–at-times character. Like the illicit liaisons shown in the movie, Chloe, both the character and the movie, are guilty pleasures.
At a running time of just over one and one-half hour, “Chloe” is a tightly wrapped seductive and intriguing erotic thriller that, unfortunately, loses some steam, but not necessarily its steaminess, towards the end as it goes for a surprise/Hitchcock type ending that doesn’t quite matchup with the earlier parts of the story. Fortunately, Amanda Seyfried’s sizzling scenes as Chloe along with Julianne Moore’s raw, brave and honest performance as Catherine help to maintain your interest and keep your eyes glued to the screen.

This has an “R” rating because of the heavy sexual content..not all that much nudity but very suggestive and steamy.

Clark