‘Chloe’ lacks compelling punch

For a while, “Chloe” looks like the long-awaited return to form by Canadian filmmaker Atom Egoyan, whose early films (“Exotica,” “The Adjuster,” “Speaking Parts”) were often absorbing character studies cloaked in the guise of a thriller and spiked with sexual tension.

Unfortunately, the wait continues. This remake of the French-language hit “Nathalie” eventually becomes the sort of laughably naughty picture you’d normally find on late-night Cinemax – complete with a gratuitous girl-on-girl sex scene – only infinitely better acted.

Julianne Moore is terrific as Catherine Stewart, a gynecologist who’s suspicious of the long hours her college-professor husband David (Liam Neeson) is keeping.

When she intercepts a text message on his cell phone – “Thanks for last night!” – from someone named Miranda, complete with incriminating photo, she’s convinced adultery is afoot.

So Catherine does what any other woman in her situation would do: She hires a beautiful hooker, Chloe (Amanda Seyfried), to come on to her husband and see if he takes the bait.

Yes, the premise sounds a bit far-fetched. But Egoyan sells the concept by allowing most of the film to unfurl exclusively through Catherine’s eyes.

Seyfried, all grown up (seriously) from “Mamma Mia!,” does what she can with the role of the ethereal prostitute, hinting at potential malice – even madness – beneath her angelic face.

But as the movie goes on, her character makes less and less sense, and Egoyan resorts to some cheap business involving an ornate hairpin that is, quite frankly, beneath him. What has happened to this smart director’s ear for resonant, compelling stories?

Taking a cue from its title character, “Chloe” skillfully seduces you, then leaves you feeling hollow and a little used.