An interesting detective thriller in which the viewer does not look for criminals, but watches the game of cat and mouse. The exposition touches on two people and the sound of a shot, in order to present completely opposite characters - classmates Michael Pitt and Ryan Gosling. The moment when Gosling plays a high school teenager, and you are used to seeing him already in adult dramas and author's projects.
A murder mystery falls on the terrain where lonely and strict detective Sandra Bullock collects evidence from the crime scene. The film is filled with a lack of awe and a thirst for deduction. Each key character hides a past that will be revealed in the future. Sandra's memoirs also contain murder scenes, which adds a rather grim tone to the picture.
The key to the film is that the viewer knows who the killer is. Yes, it is perfectly normal for two different guys to hide their communication in front of schoolchildren, but when you see guys plotting next atrocities under the guise of philosophical morality, you involuntarily notice that this is not the mind of a high school teenager. Pretty old guys came out to plan criminal offenses carefully. What causes this mania of death? This is the realization that human life is worth nothing without death and suicide.
While the intoxicated guys make next plans, the director of the film Barbet Schroeder adds to the main character certain traits of character and hidden injuries. The character is interesting: a woman not only lives alone in a boat on the pier, but also has certain needs of a temporary nature: sex, attention, dominance and frustration. Psychologically, her heroine does not fall under the template of an ordinary detective, which makes good work on the character loom, as well as obvious opposition to the plans of schoolchildren. The new (another) partner of the detective Ben Chaplin gradually reveals to the viewer this puzzle.
All the heroes are interesting to watch. Ryan and Michael do not go together, the characters and views are different: quiet Michael and rebel Ryan, macho and nerd, infantile nuisance and explosive dynamite. In this vein, the guys surprise with their messages about the knowledge of life through murder. The tape brings the police and criminals in the middle of timekeeping. Not early? This is where a new stage of the narrative begins – we uncovered the perpetrators and brought the authorities to them. Now the heroes understand themselves.
The relationship between Gosling and Pitt is very cool. When there is no trace of the past hype, when the crimes are solved, then what seemed hidden begins to protrude. Trauma, jealousy, rivalry, the threat of justice and the perfect final transformation of one and the withering of the other. But the film, even at the most climax, can change its attitude to the characters.
In parallel, the viewer reveals the story of a detective who has experienced a lot in the past, became a police officer, an investigator, so that the horror of the past overshadows some feelings and excites others. The heroine is interesting, Sandra plays perfectly, and the initial isolation only spilled out more in the naked soul. As a result, the film is harmonious, interesting, with unexpected turns. Yes, it is clear that the school registration for Gosling and Pete was only the background, and they did not pull at the students, but in general it looked beautiful. It was great to see Chris Penn on the screen.
Found in the woods the corpse of a girl leads the investigator and her partner to a couple of boys. . .
If you discard the details, Barbet Schroeder shot a remake of the Hitchcock Rope with time adjustment. If Hitchcock was based on a real case with 'fans' Nietzsche (and even Raskolnikova), then Schroeder introduces a relatively new motive for creating a puzzle and ' rolling a ball (investigator) into a pre-prepared pocket' without a special philosophy, but in new trends - in addition to the game as a meaning, a woman detective, which is itself a rarity and long before fashion on ' neofeminism' Bullock also ran a future nomination for an Oscar in Gravity, because the investigation runs into her psychological problems.
However, the main attraction for an almost ordinary thriller is the young (then) stars Michael Pitt and... Ryan Gosling. By the way, contrary to the claims, he doesn't have such a stone face. Both of them are confident.
In general, quite masterful, though not without flaws (sometimes the action hangs, the effects are clumsy, for some reason retreats from the intellect towards slightly tortured mental adolescents and not only complexes and torments, etc.) work.
The main question is still in another - why the hell is clearly intelligent, capable of a greater director with a stunning flair for actors and intellectual baggage once again shoots as if intentionally sloppy ordinary in general (despite the above philosophical and cinematographic references) thriller? Every now and then you come up with the subject of Hollywood devouring creators. Probably, this is the disappointment of critics - it would be a good job in the hands of another artisan, but the swing and performance from the new wave & #39; Schroeder's got a lot more to expect than coming out.
The image of Sandra Bullock in pants, with gum in her mouth, a gun in a holster, a badge of the guardian of law and justice, stuck to the actress exactly the same chewing gum. And most importantly, 'gum ' has not lost its taste and effect to this day.
A pleasant bonus in the cinema were young and starting at that time actors, who in our time are considered people successfully stepped on the alley ' reincarnations'.
The film will be remembered more as a drama about human delusion, easy suggestibility and other vices that move it, since the forensic and detective components were in the film at the level of scripted barely noticeable scenery to create an imaginary atmosphere of investigation. There was another point that gave the film a slight dissonance in the perception of the characters, this is a girl named Lisa, whose behavior, actions and decisions were somehow not associated with the general representation of her character.
In general, an interesting work with quite good quotes in a philosophical bias.
8 out of 10
And if the b not she, then and the film b was not...
Women in the FBI are not uncommon, but they are only allowed to investigate really complicated stories in the movies.
It so happened that the film “Country of murders” I watched after “Take lives”, in which the detective from the FBI played A. Jolie. There was something to compare... and it was S. Bullock in this film that played the detective from the powerful Bureau, in my opinion, a hundred times better. And not because the script (in general - the idea) of the "Counter of murders" is better. Nope! Without the character S. Bullock, the film would have been empty and dry. It has a lot of inconsistencies. Making a film about the perfect murder is difficult. We will not understand the absurdities of the film, because we will come out on a frank spoiler. I can only say that the criminal children coped with their task, but the writer and director did not. And if it wasn't for S. Bullock, or rather, not her wonderful game, I would even turn it off on the half. At some point I really thought that Bullock had real experience in the police - so she succeeded in the role!
In general, the film is addictive, at times, of course, lets go and even makes you yawn (a consequence of the director’s and screenwriter’s flaws). But only Bullock really holds it, I give her an A. Well, let the film also get a five, but this five is still not his.
5 out of 10
Romanticization of crime has always been one of the most interesting and popular tools in the hands of filmmakers. Bringing the process of committing to the elementary simplicity of execution, the crime itself is self-affirmation as a person, and these very criminals are the unwitting heroes of our time. A reference to all this is this film directed by Barbet Schroeder.
Unlike most other detective thrillers of the genre, the director of the film Barbet Schroeder did not keep the intrigue regarding the identity of brutal murders. Rather, on the contrary, revealing their identities at the very beginning of the narrative, the director of the film Barbet Schroeder reduced the main intrigue of the narrative to a completely different one. Thus, turning the film into a full-fledged game of cat and mouse between young killers and an experienced female detective, in order to find out who will win this game and who will get away with it.
The crime itself is played on the screen in a very interesting way. Impressive primarily by how detailed it is thought out and has an abundance of false evidence and moves for the investigation. However, the presentation of this material really pumped up. The creators of the tape could not play the whole story in an intriguing way. Thus, repeatedly creating the impression of sagging the plot or the actual appearance that the plot of the picture stands in the same place.
In many ways, such a picture is observed at least due to the script by Tony Gayton, how much due to the directing of Barbet Schroeder, who simply did not have the strength to realize the potential of the picture in full force. The film is certainly not bad and according to all canons of the genre. At the same time, repeatedly evoking analogies with the paintings of Lynch, Demme, Fincher and the series CSI: Crime Scene. However, it is so sterile, soulless and impartial that one cannot talk about any dynamics and exciting filling of the picture at all. Unless, unwinding and gaining the necessary rims closer to a perfectly executed climax.
Contrary to the opinion of most, the presence and play of Sandra Bullock in this tape, I personally consider not the best asset of the picture. Quite the opposite. The image did not fit Bullock at all and, alas, she failed to reveal the entire depth of her character. By creating only the dull appearance that a woman can become strong only by being a victim of violence or abuse.
Much more interesting was the film from the point of view of the antagonists of the picture. Since it is the creative duo Michael Pitt and Ryan Gosling worthily pulls the whole film on his shoulders, and also manages to pull most of the attention from Bullock to himself. Gosling is so young, but already damn convincing on the screen, and having a frankly "maniac" appearance Pitt perfectly beat his character and his ability to manipulate on the screen.
6 out of 10
The countdown of murders is a fairly ordinary and unremarkable detective thriller. Possessing all the qualities, data and content that would become if not an event, then a worthy representative of the genre, but not realizing its potential in half. In many ways, due to the not so “string” direction of Barbet Schroeder, from whom after “Lonely White Woman” certainly expected more.
Crime as philosophy, as freedom.
Homicide Countdown, I've seen this movie a long time ago, and I loved the plot, but I didn't remember the actors of the only guy like Leonardo DiCaprio, but it didn't make much sense. And when I recently saw the film again, I immediately saw a character similar to DiCaprio.
What I can say is that the film is superb to me from different points of view. Let me start with the fact that the plot is taken from the Hitchcock film and from one of the sensational cases of the 20th century about murderers who killed a person just out of interest. Two young guys decide to kill a complete stranger in order to feel adrenaline, feel like gods capable of taking life and just to kill. The film touches on many philosophical questions, can a person commit a crime and will he be tormented by remorse, and will he be able to escape from crime. Such a plot is in many detective stories and thrillers, but not in every film it is described as the main thread that can convey to the viewer the meaning of the film. Everyone, regardless of the amount of money and intelligence, will be punished for the crime committed. This same message was in such films as Silence of the Lambs, Seven.
Another similar feature of these films, the intellectual duel of a criminal and a detective, they are constantly in sight of each other, but to take a step towards exposure, the detective constantly lacks evidence.
Detective Casey, performed by Sandra Bullock, is a typical detective, she is serious, rude and sometimes cruel, but in all this there are echoes of the past. She is almost perfect, but she has a serious flaw - her unearthly insight and sixth sense, which makes her a genius.
Richard, performed by Ryan Gosling, is the most charming and charismatic character of this film. In front of his seductive charms, it is difficult to remain indifferent. He simply breaks the boundaries of an ordinary killer from a detective, bringing his character and the film as a whole to a high level.
Justin-Michael Pitt, a quiet, modest botanist who is divorced from society and communication with peers, an example of an unfree person who, on seeming detachment from the world, is in dire need of communication and friends, who needs an example to follow. To do this, he chose Richard, free from the principles and morality of the guy.
The film is very intense both in terms of finding the killer and sexually. Richard and Justin are classmates, but they know each other better than others, they are connected by secrets and shared ideas. Crime as philosophy, as freedom. Between them is just a wild bond, they are close but do not go beyond reason. There are no obstacles except their doubts and fears.
The finale is intense and unpredictable. If you decide that everything is familiar and follows a pattern and a trodden path, then you are very mistaken, the director provides one secret after another without letting you relax and predict the outcome.
For me, the film is firmly among the great thrillers that are interesting to watch both with friends and one to reflect on life. I highly recommend it.
In the classic detective, the viewer learns about each of the links in the chain of crime at the same time as the detective. In the famous detective series, the approach was reversed, and the viewer knew the same thing as the criminal from the beginning. This film uses a mixed approach, designed to simultaneously and immediately reveal the motives of the killers, and preserve the classic intrigue until the very end.
Let me tell you right away that the film does these two things.
However, what Lieutenant Colombo coped with perfectly in an hour and a half, Mayweather requires as many as two, of which the detective component itself takes no more than one, and the rest of the time is devoted to completely unnecessary storylines and characters. And if a peculiar Justin-Richard-Lise triangle somehow reveals the villains, and Lisa as a character acting on the screen is unnecessary for this (although Agnes Bruckner became one of the decorations of the film), then the entire intimate scene between the detectives and the gloomy plume of the past (although in the finale he gets his own denouement), stretching for Mayweather, do not carry any semantic load regarding the main plot of the picture, as if the writer in this way just tried to drag the film. In the series I mentioned earlier, the plot did well without such techniques and did not get worse from this. As if the detective is a woman, then it is impossible to do without bed scenes.
The detective component of the film, at the same time, is at a decent level. In any case, the villains with schismatic motives were preparing for the murder, committed it and covered up after the traces very plausibly. Investigative actions against this background look noticeably weaker, but still cope with the suppression of distrust. With the exception of Mayweather’s final insight, which, in light of everything shown to the viewer even through the prism of her earlier vision, looks frankly far-fetched. The way she used it turned out well, but the way she came to him suddenly looks like a piano in the bushes.
Look at the starry sky! It's so starry! It's really strewn with stars! You know what it looks like? The film industry. So many films have been shot, and to find among them one extraordinary, outstanding, you need to put a lot of effort.
“Homicide Countdown” is boring, ordinary, even more than ordinary – a flat, unimaginative film with your Sandra Bullock, who plays herself everywhere. This movie was so damn boring that two hours seemed like a whole day; and it's true that when it finally ended, I sat so deep in the phone that I didn't notice the credits. Everything in it is so ill-conceived, no, colorless - from the title to the details of the plot. Murder by Numbers? What's that supposed to mean? That teenagers (who, as usual, look like big boars, because we have all accelerates in America) committed a clever, insidious crime and fooled the whole police station? No, they just killed the girl, wrapped her in film and conjured up the evidence, ostentatiously burning any nonsense that could lead detectives to them: from gloves with which the murder was committed, to books that simply lay on their desk and did not touch anyone.
The action develops painfully, slowly and boring; the heroine of Sandra Bullock is a preoccupied lioness, then a business sausage, who distributes donuts to all her colleagues, only to get away from her while she works. Of the entire brave police station, where two stamped bosses are in passing, only she alone discovered that two completely random boys were involved in the murder. Back to our rams: Michael Pitt, all such a shaggy teenager with a claim to genius worthy of some Jim Moriarty, leads a homoerotic friendship with a clumsy giggling Ryan Gosling, who is the whole film and giggles. He (Michael Pitt) is supposedly a manipulator who makes cunning plans and wants to arrange his own Clockwork Orange for the whole town, only his actions do not go beyond the moronic curiosity. What’s more, this smart guy, taking care of an impenetrable murder suit and crime scene, manages to puke within walking distance of the corpse. A friend of his six seconds in the film has difficulty overcoming the indifference that his parents give him. In passing, he seduces girls and flaunts in expensive clothes, and everyone says: oh yeah, this is Richard, such a smart and cool guy, the favorite of all the girls in school! Have you seen this Richard? He has a watery face, an elongated nose and a constant idiotic grin on his lips. I'm sick and tired of these Canadians being taken to second-rate cliche roles of unmotivatedly glorified beauties. It is now Gosling on either side is good, and then it was still like a lanky log in which two holes were hollowed out, and it all kills me.
That’s how you watch the movie and think: well, maybe in the end there will be an intrigue that will save everything. But no, the killers are clear from the start. The only question that remains about them is why they decided to kill anyone, what brought these two posers together at all, and why children, even if spoiled, have no conscience at all. That is, zero level of empathy or some kind of remorse, it simply does not exist.
The only exhilarating detail is the backup of the heroine Bullock. A storyline completely unrelated to the film itself, which is used to explain that women are only strong if they are raped / betrayed / robbed / humiliated / abandoned. They don’t, of course, are women. Look at Lisa being seduced by Ryan Gosling in this movie. This is the model of a movie girl from the beginning of zero.
When you start not only watching movies, but also interested in them, in a short time you catch the difference between good and third-rate. After a good film, unforgettable impressions remain, it arouses interest and charges emotions that can affect the state of mind.
As for Murder Countdown, I love such films for their kind of shooting – without too much pathos where everything seems to be true, where everything looks like a real investigation. The truth can be seen that detail that is already worn in many American films is that the authorities are always bad, always sticks a stick in the wheels and causes the viewer anger and outrage on them.
The first thing that the film bribes the viewer is an intriguing plot, to the smallest detail a well-thought-out plan and a scrupulous investigation. Equally important is the disclosure of the images of the two teenagers. I assume that their plan was doomed to failure in the beginning – they did not trust each other and their whole plan turned into a game of who or who is stupider or somehow similar but the essence remains the same.
As for Richard, I know his memory diary from the film and he is brilliant at acting in films. Here he is assigned the role of a negative hero - insidious, dishonest and cynical, he to prove his supremacy over Justin breaks such tender feelings that he had between Lisa.
Such a film shows us not only about the threat of killers to society, but also that indifference in any of its manifestations, especially in education, is no less a threat. Richard’s example is proof of how money spoils and everything allows a person, because of which such a path can lead to a trap from which it is quite difficult to get out, and on the example of Justin we see how wonderful abilities are lost, he could make an excellent careerist, scientist or perhaps inventor, but he missed his chance, the game he played was fatal, and if he came to repentance at the right moment everything would be fine.
The phenomenon of youth crime is a cult of cinema of the intersection of millennia. Teenagers not only do not want to live, but also actively send peers and adults to the next world. Motivation can be varied. From the revenge of a schizophrenic eyeglass, the complex of the victim of domestic violence, the inability to remove acne, to the megalomania, the permissiveness of a genius and the father of a millionaire.
The Hollywood writers deserve credit. With the tenacity of a man earning a huge hamburger, they grind old stories, mixing hellish salads from Craven, Lynch, Demmy and Fincher, and manage to get a completely digestible dish. You look at it, and you think it's clear, it's clear, you can go to the bathroom without stopping the recording. You come back and it's different. You have to rewind it.
For fans of the genre of psychological detective, that is, the thriller, Sandra Bullock as Clarisse Starling, Chris Penn (half-minute role), the talent of young Michael Pitt and Ryan Gosling. And in general, everyone who wants to feel smarter than everyone for two hours, and after time, count how many times you were deceived. From 0 to 2 – write your script, from 3 to 5 – try to sell it, from 5 – review the film again. Personally, I've reviewed ... Now I'm writing...
Countdown of murders is a beautiful film, with the participation of no less beautiful Ryan Gosling, at such a young age, which especially stirs interest in viewing.
I liked this film with its storyline, its riddles, its sudden turns of events. Throughout the film, I tried to understand what pushed the teenagers to such cruel entertainment, who was the initiator, why they were doing it. But I never discovered this secret until I watched the movie. And it's great, it's intriguing, it's exciting, it doesn't let you get distracted from viewing, it's addictive. In general, the story is very similar to the story of the great Dostoevsky and his character Raskolnikov. Although, despite all their external gloss, in the end we learn that they were not so confident in themselves, they are not so ruthless, although ...
I can't help but say a few words about Ryan Gosling himself. As always, beautiful, as always, insanely attractive. He was born to create, and each character has something new. Even if the plot of the film is not close to you, Gosling will not let you get bored, it is interesting to watch.
The 1990s and early 2000s gave us a lot of great detective thrillers, which flaunted a beautiful atmosphere, powerful acting work, wrapped in a beautiful wrap intrigue, and of course, a great suspense, tension that lasted throughout the viewing. This film could also be a worthy representative of this interesting genre. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out.
At the heart of a high-quality genre thriller or detective has always been three things: suspense, intrigue, worked out and interesting protagonist. Surprisingly, this tape managed to miss almost every one of these three parameters. The killer is known at the very beginning, and therefore there is only a tiny intrigue about how the teenagers were able to pull off this case, but it turned out, to put it mildly. The creators could compensate for this with a suspense, which would hold the viewer’s attention, but there is a misfire: the narrative is very relaxed, I would even say too long, and therefore no tension or empathy does not arise at all.
As one viewer said here, the plot is more like a series of a detective series than a story for a full-length movie. There is no depth and scale that has always distinguished a high-quality full meter from the usual series of some “CSI: crime scene”. Events are very easily and effortlessly revealed, and the denouement still smells of second-hand and tedious moralizing.
Negative add and absolutely unnecessary this story emotional torment of the main character, which apparently were designed to somehow deepen her character. In fact, her story turned out to be a banal set of cliches, which, moreover, practically lead to nothing. There is no integrity, the relationship between heroes and history, which has always been inherent in high-quality genre cinema.
On the acting part, everything is not quite smooth either. If Michael Pitt and then unknown Ryan Gosling played simply magnificently, displaying all the traits of character and internal conflicts of their heroes, then Sandra Bullock in her role was absolutely not organic. Moreover, if anyone could somehow improve the banal image written in the script, then only the right actress, suitable for the role. This did not happen here, and therefore there can be no talk of any empathy.
Country of murders is a potentially very decent thriller with a good idea, which the creators did not pull, having made a lot of mistakes in building the storyline, working out the main character, and of course in terms of casting. As a result, we have an extremely weak representative of the genre, which can only be seen on the fishless. From the point of view of quality, it cannot be called a complete failure, but at the box office the film failed quite naturally and deservedly. I am glad that just on the career of Gosling this did not affect and did not prevent his development in the future. The film is just like me, like him:
6 out of 10
I have to admit, I don’t like to draw parallels between films (especially starting with this review) as a rule, it does not lead to anything good. But when I started watching Countdown of Murders, I immediately realized that it would not do without a sense of deja vu.
The film is insanely reminiscent of the British thriller of 2006, in Russia released under the title “Reading Thoughts”, but the mystical explanation of what is happening Schroeder prefers more earthly, human motives. In fact, the question that the viewer asks during the viewing (which I first asked myself) is why? The causes are primary, the murder committed by the heroes is just a visible result that interests the viewer only as one of the links in the chain. And that makes Countdown more of a psychological drama than a detective or thriller. However, the director is trying to squeeze the film into the framework of a classic detective, and, to be honest, it is difficult to call these attempts successful - the fact that the names of the killers are known to us from the first minutes negates all his efforts. A thorough study of the actual “process” of murder very little brings us closer to understanding the heroes as individuals and understanding their motives.
However, it seems that in order to make the film closer to the “criminal” genre, the director introduces the heroine of Sandra Bullock. And then, as if grasping and realizing how flat it comes out, sweepingly fits into the script a personal drama that relates to the main storyline, to put it mildly, very conditionally. Or rather, it looks like a completely foreign element.
Much more interesting is the relationship between the main characters - Richard and Justin. It would seem that there is nothing new either in the story of the strong and the weak, or even in how bored teenagers, trying to prove their worth, commit crimes. There have been a lot of films about this, not only the notorious “Reading Thoughts”. However, the motives driving the characters, and the very nature of their relationship is much more complex and ambiguous than it seems at first glance. And Richard is not the king at all, and Justin is not the soft boy he appears to be at the beginning of the film. However, this line, it seems, is not very interested in the director, he outlines the characters very schematically, leaving the viewer to guess about the rest himself. And this, of course, is very sad, both characters have a psychological depth that was not dreamed of so lovingly written out, but remains through cardboard character Bullock.
Particular attention should be paid to the cast, very unexpected, as it may seem - as, at least, it seemed to me at first. Sandra Bullock played quite well - her fault in the absence of the character at least any features of a living person, except for the dubious background, no. Although, of course, Sandra’s potential would allow her to play a much more interesting and ambiguous role. The discovery for me was Ryan Gosling - I, to my shame, have not seen a single film with him. And I must admit, he surprised me pleasantly. Beautiful, arrogant, self-confident - the whole film he behaves, as befits the school king, the "golden boy", whom it is impossible not to love, so good he is. And then his face is transformed, turning into a mask skewed by cowardly fury, and the viewer shudders with disgust, wondering himself how this person could evoke any warm feelings. For all his apparent strength, Richard ends up being a dummy, unscrupulous coward, worried only about his well-being. As for Michael Pitt, his acting talent never ceases to amaze me. The range of roles chosen by him is very wide, and he copes with them equally brilliantly. Justin is a strange combination of softness (mostly, of course, only external) and a cold but fierce willingness to go all the way. Coupled with a brilliant mind, this makes Justin a much more dangerous rival than Richard. Therefore, it does not cause disgust - looking at it, you feel fear and, perhaps, bewilderment.
Countdown is a film, although it does not claim to be the only one of its kind, but still not a bad one. Events, how protracted in the beginning, in the second half develop quite dynamically and unpredictably - the director several times throws the viewer "deception", making you believe that what seemed obvious from the very beginning is not so obvious. Among the advantages is an excellent selection of actors, each of whom is in its place and brings to the overall picture those colors without which it simply would not have come out. Of the shortcomings, I would note the director’s excessive attention to the line, which is worthy of being only a sideline, and the desire to chase two birds with one stone, shooting both psychological drama and a detective. The resulting story lacks depth and, in my opinion, some logical completeness.
The question I asked at the beginning was never answered.
I love thrillers and have watched a lot of them, this one is not the best. The detective line is weak, although it is probably not the main one here, the main line is psychological. I can’t say that the film is bad, although I honestly was bored.
Two teenagers decided to commit a "perfect" murder so they wouldn't be found. They carefully planned everything, but on the way they came across detective Cassie Mayweather, who, coming out on their trail, realized that the guys are lying and now she must find the evidence and force them to confess to what they did.
The intrigue is that we ourselves are not completely sure whether the teenagers committed this murder or not. And if they did, then who strangled the victim, which was the cause of death. And of course, will Detective Mayweather prove their guilt?
What’s worth watching this movie for is the performance of actors, Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt. They play the same teenagers and their talent keeps the viewer in suspense. Justin (Pitt) – withdrawn, unsociable, Richard (Gosling) – popular in school, the son of wealthy parents. They seem to be full of opposites, but they have a common passion - murder - to commit it, for them it means to be free. I don't quite understand their philosophy, but I wonder if it's possible to commit a "perfect" murder and escape punishment. Although the characters did not cause affection, so during the viewing I wished that their plans would fail.
In the forest ditch of the resort California town of San Benito found the corpse of a murdered girl. The investigation is entrusted to an experienced detective from the murder squad Cassie Mayweather (Sandra Bullock) and her new partner Sam Kennedy (Ben Chaplin). Cassie goes into the investigation with her head. She carefully collects all kinds of evidence and on their basis compiles an approximate portrait of the killer. Sam is smart and energetic. Finding the killer is not easy.
This 2002 film, shot in the genre of thriller/detective, disappoints, first of all, with its script. The film does not leave when watching thrills, it is known in advance who the killer is and all the rest of the time the viewer has to wait for Sandra Bullock to unravel and punish the perpetrators.
But it's not all that bad. The whole film is being rescued and dragged on their shoulders by strong and charismatic young actors Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt. They were more interesting to watch than Miss Congeniality. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wanted to push Bullock into some far corner and give two guys free rein. The so-called "screen chemistry" between the two young actors is visible to the naked eye. And I don’t even want to wonder which one of them plays better, just want to sit and watch them for two hours.
“Countdown of murders” in its genre, of course, is not included in the list of the best films. The film is not only rather boring, but, unfortunately, disappoints with its finale, where instead of a psychological drama, we were presented with an ordinary action movie. To watch this picture is necessary solely because of the pair Gosling/Pitt, they are the best that is in this film.
6 out of 10
Two unusual schoolmates decided out of boredom to do something crazy. The first thing that comes to their mind is to commit a well-planned murder, which will clearly dispel boredom and bring a large amount of adrenaline to their lives. As a result, the plan was carried out and the murdered victim was found neatly wrapped near the reservoir. Arrived at the scene of the crime, Cassie immediately discovers on the body some evidence, including various fibers and a strange kind of hair. No prints were found at the site. Together with her new partner Sam, the heroine must find out who is to blame for the death of an innocent woman and why it was necessary to do it. Now begins the game of “cat and mouse”, which is perfectly planned bored schoolboys, for whom it is a real test of strength. But is everything so smooth in their cunning plan and can they win this insidious game against one of the best detectives in the country?
In the late nineties, the number of fascinating and exciting detective films, just skyrocketed. Such projects not only received positive feedback from ordinary viewers and critics, but also collected an amazing cash register, bringing their creators unprecedented money. It was on this wave of success that this good detective thriller was released, which was unlucky with many points. First of all, this is the year of release, because at that time the demand for such products fell. To top it all off, Murder Countdown can’t please with an enchanting storyline that could really hold the audience’s attention for the planned two hours. As a result, the quality of the film is clearly lower than that of competitors, and even in the money battle was stated a complete failure.
In retrospect, the tape is quite a good representative of its genre. Yes, it smells of some second-rate and underdeveloped, but nevertheless, everything looks quite easy and pleasant. Some moments are protracted, but in general it is tolerable. The main story is too stretched by the creators and probably would be more suitable for one series of an average series about a cool policeman, for whom it is quite customary to press all sorts of arrogant and self-confident killers to the nail. At first, I did not quite understand why this creation is not known, because it seems that the genre is usually not ignored by the audience due to its intrigue, and the acting ensemble is selected very bright. After viewing, everything fell into place, because the Countdown of Murders turned out to be simply unremarkable and gray, although there are certain habits for something more serious.
In general, I liked what I saw to some extent. Well, I like simple stories where the intrigue is kept until the very end and suspense is pumped. Maybe the storyline is a little primitive, but its psychological side is shown very well. In the film, much time is devoted to revealing the inner world of two school friends, for each of whom murder meant completely different things than just wanting to increase adrenaline levels in the blood. A little boring and banal turned out the image of the main character, who is all so cool and impenetrable, but in fact keeps a lot of hidden grievances from the past. And the man-like detective from the too pretty Sandra Bullock certainly did not turn out to be reliable. Too uncertain the famous actress looked in the frame, and in scenes with weapons and did look ridiculous.
If we are talking about actors, we should also focus on two negative characters. The role of one of them was played by the then completely unknown Ryan Gosling, who turns out to be very suitable for the roles of bad guys. Looking at the blond hair of Gosling and seeing his deceptive charm, you realize that nothing good should be expected from him. He handled his role perfectly. Like his friend, the charismatic Michael Pitt, who played a similar persona in the remake of Funny Games. Only there he showed only one facet - madness. Here, Pitt's hero is inherent in both humanity and prudence. But it is not as simple as it seems at first glance. In short, out of this unusual duo came a killer pair of young criminals.
As a result, the Countdown of Murders boasts a more or less intriguing story and an excellent cast. It’s not a great movie, but watching it once is fine. Cinema is not the worst, just not very remarkable. Impressions after watching, mostly only positive, although in my memory what I saw could not linger for a long time. But still, my assessment is:
There are thrillers and detectives where the killer is labeled "X", he is unknown to us, it can be any of the characters, and catching him will be unexpected and exciting. And then there are the ones like Countdown, where the perpetrator is known to us, where we watch him commit a crime, how he plans it, how he covers his tracks and then hides from the police. In such films, the viewer is given the opportunity to trace the contact between the killer and representatives of the law, which is also no less interesting.
Two talented, intelligent teenagers Justin (Michael Pitt) and Richard (Ryan Gosling) decide on a crime, namely murder. They choose the victim “at random”, but the course of this terrible event is carefully thought out to the smallest detail. Their murder would have been perfect had it not been for Detective Cassie (Sandra Bullock). Her instinct, intuition, intelligence and just love for work will hit anyone. To me, Cassie seemed both strong and weak. In the past, she suffered from her strength (Cassie will tell the viewer her story), but now she really wants to be weak, broken by a courageous reliable man, but something still prevents her from doing this. Maybe such a knight has not yet been found, or maybe its overwhelming nature does not allow the slack to pass. In any case, behind her stone heart there are qualities inherent in a girl, a woman.
You know, throughout the film, I didn't have a single negative emotion about the killer boys. The reason for their action was clear – they wanted to be noticed, wanted to become something significant in this vast indifferent world, wanted to prove to themselves and others that they were talented, strong and intelligent. Of course, the path that the guys chose is absolutely unacceptable, because teenagers could devote their lives to anything, positive, good, but Justin and Richard did not do it. Part of the fault of the desperate act of the boys was the lack of parental attention, affection, care and warmth. None of the parents have never been interested in the life and affairs of their son, they only “feed” the children with money, but this is not what the child needs, alas, not this.
So I believe that external factors have induced young people to commit a crime. Richard and Justin wanted to be strong, but they were weak. And as a result, we have two lost young lives, two murders of innocent people, a team of prolific “cops”, an interesting thriller and a group of talented actors.
10 out of 10
The plot of the film promised us murder not so much out of boredom, but rather an intelligent, elegant and philosophically based murder. But in fact, I didn’t see anything smart and special, except for all-round savvy, in teenage murderers. The story did not conquer me, as it is a bit banal.
Psychological portraits of the characters are well drawn, in particular, the storyline revolves not only around juvenile criminals, but also around the detective. In terms of film types, I liked it. Not to say it's boring. Definitely exciting.
Well acters, perhaps, is the most worthwhile thing in the picture. Gosling in the role of a bad guy is simply unmatched. Sandra Bullock, as always, gives a beautiful performance. Although I still think her roles are funny girls. She's great in comedies. I really liked Michael Pitt. Very talented guy. In "Dreamers" he didn't really like me, and here he is very much even. I think he was the brightest.
In general, "Homicide Countdown" is a very average detective with a good cast, but not the original plot. That's why.
7 out of 10
To begin with, I have a very unpleasant impression of the film. I understand that the purpose of the plot was not to entertain the audience, but, frankly, sometimes you just want to turn away from the screen.
But despite all this, the film teaches that we need to face our fears, there is no point in running away from them or hiding, otherwise they can simply cripple life completely.
It is not clear what the plot was, because we knew the killers from the beginning. Perhaps the main line was to be a story from the past of Sandra Bullock, but it was very predictable. In my opinion, this is the main problem of this film - there is no intrigue.
The only thing that pleased - another facet of the acting talent of Sandra Bullock. I've never seen her in such a role, but, surprisingly, she fit perfectly here. This is the only thing I can do.
5 out of 10
Sandra Bullock I became interested after the release of the film "Network" in the 90s, where she conquered me. At the time, I didn’t really follow her filmography, but I didn’t miss the opportunity to see her as she is strong in both romantic comedies and dramas. This detective thriller was seen on TV many years ago. But the plot remembered vaguely, so I decided to reconsider again before evaluating.
If I already started the review with Sandra, then it is worth noting that she played well. The role of the guardian of order for her is not new. Before that, she had already starred in Miss Congeniality, where she was also a guardian of the law with a heavy character. Really, there's no room for jokes. This is a typical detective thriller in the best traditions of the genre. Found the girl's body. The evidence slowly but surely leads to the suspect. But it's all too smooth. Cassie is sure that the suspect is innocent, and two schoolchildren are involved in the murder. All that remains is to prove their guilt.
Not a bad story. It’s not a big deal because we know the killers from the beginning. However, this does not prevent you from watching the intellectual battle between two young geniuses and an experienced detective, which gradually restores the events at the scene. And a good cast even more decorates this film. Michael Pitt I do not like, but he looks like all sorts of freaks. It was nice to see the young Ryan Gosling. He's changed a lot in recent years. And here's a boy. But the image of a bad guy suits him.
Of course, the movie is old. And it affects effects that now seem cheap. But it was nice to remember the past. Now such detective thrillers are rarely removed. And if you like something similar with the participation of Morgan Freeman, Ashley Judd, Samuel L. Jackson and other stars of the genre, then be sure to add Sandra to this list.
The firm decision to kill predetermined your fate. The choice was made and there is no second chance.
My mother has a really good cinematic taste, and mostly prefers plots whose centrifugal power is crimes and their investigations. She likes not even physical confrontation – chases, shootouts, pursuit and capture – she likes an intellectual duel, a fight between criminals and the police strictly within the framework of the law, which is based on the notorious presumption of innocence, gives suspects rights, and requires an iron evidence base for pressing the scoundrel to the nail.
With such a database, problems arise when cops are faced with a so-called “perfect crime” – there is no circumstantial evidence linking the suspect to the crime scene (traces, hair, fingerprints, etc.), and there is no most important motive. As for the lack of motive, back in 1951, Hitchcock brilliantly played the subject in Strangers on a Train, where two young men agree to make an exchange of murders, during which, accordingly, the suspect has an ironclad alibi, and the killer has no reason to kill. In any case, the motive is the most important part of the modus operandi / corpus delicti, for the absence of which the whole case often collapses. What's all this about? Oh, thank you, Mom. Thanks to you, I watched this strong, tenacious, really interesting film.
Here we are dealing with the “perfect crime.” Two young high school students are obsessed with the almost Nazi idea of their own intellectual superiority. But what is the best way to prove your exclusivity and dominance? Commit a crime that the police are unable to solve, and, accordingly, expose the villain. At the same time, watch the futile attempts of detectives to get to the truth and comfort their own vanity. After studying a forensics textbook, thinking through every detail, they randomly choose a victim – a young woman in the parking lot who returns home with paper bags for groceries. They grab her, brutally kill her and present the police with a kind of quest, full of clues leading to a front man - a sucker who had a previous criminal record. And in order to be able to be aware of the case, to get in touch with the investigation of face to face, flash to flash, they throw up a small detail – a reason for questioning one of the killers, which, as they think, will not arouse special suspicions in their address. So Detective Casey Mayweather goes out on Richard, and then, digging a little deeper, on Justin.
Another reason not to suspect the guys is the complete lack of communication between them. One is Richie Rich, a star and authority at a local college. The other is an introverted nerd, whom Richard openly mocks. On the one hand, it’s a good thing – who would suspect that they have such a close relationship? “Be careful when choosing a partner.” It is the differences between the natures of the guys that give the very crack, the very trace that Casey Mayweather grasps. She sees that Richard is a smug, brave and agile little bastard who will twist and deny everything to the end. And Justin is weaker, so you can pressure him.
The most important component of this film is the moral assessment, which after the fact gives the viewer the action of the main characters. I just read a review that said: The finale is quite tragic, and it’s a pity if someone thinks it’s logical, they say, “so they should.” Too bad. It was these words that made me move my chair closer and sit at the keyboard. Richard, the leader and most powerful member of the tandem, did not allow any remorse because of his rotten, completely spoiled nature, but Justin is another matter. Barbet Schroeder introduced Justin almost tragic character who repented, regretted what he did and asked not to ruin his life because of one mistake. What other factors justify guys? Both of them are abandoned children with gold credit cards whose parents don’t care about them, so their actions are just an attempt to attract attention. Yes, in a number of episodes, including the final, Schroeder blatantly tries to exonerate them, especially Justin, and Richard’s beauty and charm alone tilt many to his side. How can you hate him even when he's a scoundrel?
In the end, any viewer needs to make a maral-ethical decision – harshly sentence the killers to death or pardon because of their youth and the subsequent repentance of one of the guys. By giving the viewer an excuse for their behavior, arousing sympathy for them, Barbet Schroeder complicates this task, especially for young girls who like both guys. But be careful! Think of the sacrifice, and then all these snots in their defense will seem to you pathetic attempts of cowardly, pinned to the wall bastards of their fear of escaping punishment. They killed a girl. A young, simple girl who wanted to live, wanted to have a family, who had friends and relatives, for whom her death is a terrible wound. They beat her to death without showing any human emotions, cold-blooded, mechanical, completely abstracting from what was happening. To them, it was an inanimate object, like a watch they had thrown off a shelf to riddle the time of a murder. It's monstrous. The pinnacle of atrocity. While both of them, Richard and Justin, are not lunatics, psychopathic maniacs with saliva at the mouth, who cut and tear in a fit of insanity, they are sane, self-controlling people who took life by denying its value through sophisticated, unjustified play. A man they didn't even know.
I am not an opponent of the death penalty, not a pacifist, not even a good soul, a person who resents any murder, regardless of the degree of guilt of the subject. Not at all! I don’t think we should always be on the side of the victim. If the victim is a hundredfold guilty, he deserves punishment both within the law and beyond. But if the victim is innocent and the perpetrator acts willfully, he must be punished, no matter how young, unhappy or repentant he is. And I'm raging with impotent rage that someone in the audience might take the side of the killers because "they're so cute and basically good boys." These people might have been in the place of the snails someday. Woe to us in this case...
The finale is quite tragic, and it is a pity if someone thinks it is logical, they say, “so they need it.” Very sorry.
Outcome: They're right, no doubt about it! My position is next to the electric chair switch. I remember the victim, I mourn her. The movie itself is good. A great detective story that ultimately gives justice. Goslin is the strongest young actor, ahead of him is the future of Tom Cruise, and Bullock is a talented actress, whose familiar melodrama image was slightly tarnished by alcohol, casual connections and a sharp character, but from this he became only more realistic and attractive.
10 out of 10