Let me note this before starting my review: just because a thriller has a gimmick doesn't have to mean it's bad. If it's executed in a way that's thrilling or at least entertaining, it can work. Seven has the 7 deadly sins, Saw has the bathroom, Phone Booth has the phone booth, Buried has a man buried alive inside a chest...
Another thing that made me give this movie a chance: Al Pacino is my all-time favorite actor. I would watch anything just as long as he's in it. He manages to lift up a movie even if it isn't all that special, or bad even. Brittany Snow, adorable in Hairspray. Until now, that was the only movie I had seen her in, but recognized then that she had potential. Karl Urban was decent in Ghost Ship.
But this movie falls apart almost as quickly as it starts. First we have a car sequence, poorly shoot and indulgent. The cinematography, looks godawful. Editing is bad. I didn't give up there however, some movies get off on the wrong foot at first. Trust me, if I hadn't gotten past the first 30 minutes of Maps To The Stars, I wouldn't have come to realize what a genius satire on the Hollywood nightmare it was. With this movie however, your lack of patience is easily justified.
First off, the acting. The acting is terrible. There's really no getting around it. Karl Urban is more wooden than a teen who attempts planking. I swear to God, he has the EXACT SAME facial expression throughout the entire movie. There's one flashback where we see a little anguish in his face, but other than that it never changes. There's subtle acting, and then there's not even trying. He must have realized it's not a good script, since he doesn't convince me that he's feeling whatever he's feeling. The movie makes it a point to remind us that his wife was murdered, and yet it doesn't seem to affect him all that much, he just looks slightly frustrated and bored.
Brittany Snow is also very wooden. She tries to show a little more emotion than Karl Urban, but her line delivery is adequate at best. Her character also is the equivalent of crammed in. "Hey, you know what we need? A journalist character!" "Cool! Does she report on anything of substance?" "Report?" Sarah Shahi as Captain Lisa Watson, for the few scenes she appears in, is awful. Every time she gave out orders, it was so eyeroll-worthy I would rather watch my short films from when I was little. At least I tried to act.
I won't spoil who plays the Hangman, in case you somehow want to see this movie, but the guy who plays him once he reveals himself is the worst actor in the entire movie. Anyone who reminds me of the villain in Feardotcom is an instant no-no, and that is certainly the case here. I'll get more to that later. But by far, the biggest letdown in the entire movie?
Al Pacino himself. I've said before that Al Pacino can never do wrong in my eyes. Sure, he seemed a little confused in 88 Minutes, but he was still kinda fun to watch at least, and in the scene where he recalls a trauma he is great. When it comes to the Dunkaccino scene in Jack And Jill, I'm sorry, but that will always be hilarious to me. He made what could have been so awful weirdly funny.
So it pains me to say this is the first instance of "bad" acting from Pacino. Now, I say "bad" since it's not upsettingly bad, it won't make your heart tear apart. But it saddens me how lost he is in this role. He mumbles almost every single line, and doesn't look to believe the material he's given. Even though Pacino is tired in Insomnia, there is a nuance to his tired look there. You can tell he hasn't really lived life for years, there's years of rotten experience and pain behind those eyes. It's one of his greatest roles. He mentions in this movie as well how he barely sleeps, but it doesn't feel nearly as important. There's no real character purpose for him to be tired, other than the obvious "he's old". Is he tired because he's depressed? Because he's working a lot on the case? Because he feels like sleeping is a waste of time? We never know. So this is by far Pacino's weakest performance to date, and yet he's still the best actor in the entire movie. That kinda tells you how low the bar is set.
And now, the story. A serial killer constructs a game where he hangs his victims while filling out another letter on the hangman game. It sounds fairly interesting, but the execution is painfully dull. The implemention of the hangman game is not well-used. Sure, the victims (mostly) get hung and letters slowly are filled in, but otherwise this is nothing more than a standard cop thriller. We see the detectives doing incredibly simplistic police work and running around from place to place to check out who's been hung next. The dumbest part is when they save a woman from getting hanged, and we don't even see them asking her any questions about what she saw, if she knows how the killer looks like, the last thing she remembered. You're supposed to be experienced detectives and you don't go through basic police procedure?
The twist ending where it turns out Pacino (Oh, his character is named Archer by the way) mistreated the Hangman killer during a childhood trauma where his father hung himself, is so cliché and obvious it's actually kind of laughable. Not just a trauma, but the most obvious one you could ever think of! Originality is lowest on the list. The scene where Archer dies is meant to be emotional, but it's ruined by bad execution, and we then get Karl Urban attempting to look like a badass shooting the killer dead making a constipated face. And by the end? Karl Urban's character gets a note where it's implied the game is not over. OOOOOOOOOH! Fûck this movie. It's not quite as crappy as The Son Of No One, but it's pretty close.
And lastly...
Ruiney.
Karl Urban plays a character who literally calls himself Detective Ruiney.
Boy.
But this movie falls apart almost as quickly as it starts. First we have a car sequence, poorly shoot and indulgent. The cinematography, looks godawful. Editing is bad. I didn't give up there however, some movies get off on the wrong foot at first. Trust me, if I hadn't gotten past the first 30 minutes of Maps To The Stars, I wouldn't have come to realize what a genius satire on the Hollywood nightmare it was. With this movie however, your lack of patience is easily justified.
First off, the acting. The acting is terrible. There's really no getting around it. Karl Urban is more wooden than a teen who attempts planking. I swear to God, he has the EXACT SAME facial expression throughout the entire movie. There's one flashback where we see a little anguish in his face, but other than that it never changes. There's subtle acting, and then there's not even trying. He must have realized it's not a good script, since he doesn't convince me that he's feeling whatever he's feeling. The movie makes it a point to remind us that his wife was murdered, and yet it doesn't seem to affect him all that much, he just looks slightly frustrated and bored.
Brittany Snow is also very wooden. She tries to show a little more emotion than Karl Urban, but her line delivery is adequate at best. Her character also is the equivalent of crammed in. "Hey, you know what we need? A journalist character!" "Cool! Does she report on anything of substance?" "Report?" Sarah Shahi as Captain Lisa Watson, for the few scenes she appears in, is awful. Every time she gave out orders, it was so eyeroll-worthy I would rather watch my short films from when I was little. At least I tried to act.
I won't spoil who plays the Hangman, in case you somehow want to see this movie, but the guy who plays him once he reveals himself is the worst actor in the entire movie. Anyone who reminds me of the villain in Feardotcom is an instant no-no, and that is certainly the case here. I'll get more to that later. But by far, the biggest letdown in the entire movie?
Al Pacino himself. I've said before that Al Pacino can never do wrong in my eyes. Sure, he seemed a little confused in 88 Minutes, but he was still kinda fun to watch at least, and in the scene where he recalls a trauma he is great. When it comes to the Dunkaccino scene in Jack And Jill, I'm sorry, but that will always be hilarious to me. He made what could have been so awful weirdly funny.
So it pains me to say this is the first instance of "bad" acting from Pacino. Now, I say "bad" since it's not upsettingly bad, it won't make your heart tear apart. But it saddens me how lost he is in this role. He mumbles almost every single line, and doesn't look to believe the material he's given. Even though Pacino is tired in Insomnia, there is a nuance to his tired look there. You can tell he hasn't really lived life for years, there's years of rotten experience and pain behind those eyes. It's one of his greatest roles. He mentions in this movie as well how he barely sleeps, but it doesn't feel nearly as important. There's no real character purpose for him to be tired, other than the obvious "he's old". Is he tired because he's depressed? Because he's working a lot on the case? Because he feels like sleeping is a waste of time? We never know. So this is by far Pacino's weakest performance to date, and yet he's still the best actor in the entire movie. That kinda tells you how low the bar is set.
And now, the story. A serial killer constructs a game where he hangs his victims while filling out another letter on the hangman game. It sounds fairly interesting, but the execution is painfully dull. The implemention of the hangman game is not well-used. Sure, the victims (mostly) get hung and letters slowly are filled in, but otherwise this is nothing more than a standard cop thriller. We see the detectives doing incredibly simplistic police work and running around from place to place to check out who's been hung next. The dumbest part is when they save a woman from getting hanged, and we don't even see them asking her any questions about what she saw, if she knows how the killer looks like, the last thing she remembered. You're supposed to be experienced detectives and you don't go through basic police procedure?
The twist ending where it turns out Pacino (Oh, his character is named Archer by the way) mistreated the Hangman killer during a childhood trauma where his father hung himself, is so cliché and obvious it's actually kind of laughable. Not just a trauma, but the most obvious one you could ever think of! Originality is lowest on the list. The scene where Archer dies is meant to be emotional, but it's ruined by bad execution, and we then get Karl Urban attempting to look like a badass shooting the killer dead making a constipated face. And by the end? Karl Urban's character gets a note where it's implied the game is not over. OOOOOOOOOH! Fûck this movie. It's not quite as crappy as The Son Of No One, but it's pretty close.
And lastly...
Ruiney.
Karl Urban plays a character who literally calls himself Detective Ruiney.
Boy.