Five men wake up in a closed warehouse, all have amnesia, the mystery is that some of them are criminals, and some victims, the intrigue lasts almost to the end of the film, watching the developing events was interesting. . . 10 out of 10.
A good thriller, working on the principle of growth: everything begins rather sluggish and stupid, continues exciting (and it is not clear what exactly captures, but it is impossible to break away), and ends, so, in general, in the best traditions of the detective - a completely unpredictable twist. He (the final twist) probably defined the overall impression of the film. It made it difficult and complicated.
It seems to me that the identification of the main character was a little overdone. The final twist was already as if superfluous and too multilayered. And in general, during the viewing, the impression was that the writer slept through the entire film and woke up only to the end, deciding to pour a whole bucket of his ideas on the viewer in one fell swoop: not dosing and not dividing. Like a cook whose hand trembled at the end and a slide of salt poured over his neat dish. It was really too much. It's oversalted.
The tension of the film increased with every minute of viewing, the middle and ending looked absolutely inseparable - the plot dragged on, the director's task was completed. And by the end, I personally had already run out of strength, I relaxed, stopped thinking about what was happening - like the curtain, happy ending, hugs, all things are about to fall. And here - on you! - not just "unexpected" and not just "open ending", but a new plot twist, to think about which, frankly, was just laziness. This is almost the beginning of the second part, a sequel to the series “Our song is good – start again”. I think that was unnecessary. This twist made the main character a kind of Severus Snegg, whose personality is already just tired of solving and stupidly hammering on him - anyway, he is bad or good (I, by the way, do not remember - who he was, this Snegg). In general, you can not overdo it with intrigues - the viewer has an overdose and it becomes just purple to solve.
In general, the film left a good impression, it is quite possible to watch. It is not a masterpiece, but it is addictive. And I must say, the idea of the film makes it the best in terms of logic among its neighbors in the genre, namely: “Cuba”, “Exam”, “Death Maze” and others. “5 Unknowns” offers the viewer a story that could really take place in real life – the idea is beautiful, the characters gathered together in a closed room for a reason. But it turned out to develop this idea only partially - the screenwriter not only slept through the entire film, so he also forgot to add detective intrigue to all the characters, except the main character himself. Plus - prescribed completely stupid - sometimes ridiculous - dialogues.
It is worth paying tribute to the director - he managed to make an exciting film in such a weak scenario. The canvas of the picture is fertile - on this soil it was possible to grow a much more powerful film, but with a bad screenwriter this, unfortunately, is impossible. After all, even the most talented director will not be able to pull the entire film alone.
Summary: "5 unknowns" is compared with "Saw", with "Cube", with "Mind Hunters", but most of all it is similar to "Thriller". Yes, yes, the Thriller of Michael Jackson. He is also intriguing, and his main character is also multifaceted: then he is a good guy, then he is a werewolf, then again a good guy, then again a werewolf.
8 out of 10
In recent years, thrillers have become very popular, all the action of which takes place in one closed room. Closed and cramped spaces have a strong psychological impact, and therefore are ideal for creating the desired atmosphere of action films. The young Colombian director Simon Brand, inspired by the success of such films as Saw: Survival Game, Mind Hunters, and partly Cube, took his low-budget picture in the same direction. You didn't. I didn’t expect anything special before watching. I was very pleased with what I saw.
The film begins with five strangers regaining consciousness in an enclosed room from which there is no escape. They remember nothing, not even their names. Attempts to understand what is happening are the basis of the plot. In general, history is more than secondary and has been repeatedly exploited in world cinema. But there is a certain amount of originality. The picture looks very spectacular, despite one location. There are scenes of fights and shootings, although there are few. Sometimes there is a bit of drama.
In general, fully consistent with the genre of chamber psychological thriller, the tape is more inclined to the detective. Heroes are forced to piece together the overall picture of what is happening to get to the truth. It's not that simple. The story is a puzzle for the viewer, but not too complicated. It's a little timekeeping. In my opinion, the plot was not completed. It could have made the story much more confusing. The final, although unexpected, suffers from understatement. It smears the overall impression a bit. Although a strong intrigue will hold to the very titles, and the absence of white spots in the script will not let you get bored.
The picture will appeal to fans of the genre. It allows the viewer to play detective and test his own intuition. A competently built atmosphere provides the desired degree of tension and suspense, though only in places. The director simply did not have the experience to keep a high level throughout the film.
For the debut picture, the director got a very good cast. James Caviezel has a charming charisma and is able to play diverse roles. I can’t say that this role was a revelation for me, but it looked at the level. The rest of the cast in the face of excellent performers such as Joe Pantoliano, Barry Pepper and Greg Kinnear also maintains a high bar of acting.
5 unknowns is an original, intense, psychological thriller. With a very strong detective intrigue, unexpected plot twists and a curious denouement that allows you to rethink what you saw. The picture is not without flaws, but is a good example of an action genre.
Mysterious title of a mysterious movie about which I knew absolutely nothing, except that it is a thriller. The first time I watched it was at the end of zero on TV. I was hoping it would be worth watching. It turned out that this is a really good film, far from a masterpiece of course, but he never aspired to be such.
Room tense thriller with unpredictable plot twists is my favorite genre in cinema. The film “5 unknowns” is an excellent representative of this genre only, except that the desired level of tension in it is not enough.
The further I looked at this picture, the more it interested me and attracted me with its plot and characters. I was looking forward to the denouement and longing to finally understand who is good, who is bad, who is on whose side. Heroes themselves tried to understand the same thing and made guesses based on scraps of their memories, which of them was who. But they were only inferences supported only by circumstantial evidence, so they could be mistaken. Everything falls into place and the overall picture of what happened in the abandoned warehouse becomes clear at the end. And sort of, everything was resolved quite well and it seemed that the credits would go now, but then I was waiting for a surprise in the form of a kind of small final twist, after which it becomes clear that the central character is also not without sin behind his soul.
Perhaps the plot and characters are the main strengths of the picture in my subjective view. The plot is original, unpredictable, the characters are not cardboard, completely different, interesting, with their own characters, in which you believe. Actors in the main roles are not stars, are shot mainly in not very well-known films and most often play secondary characters. But I recognized some of them immediately and was glad to see them again. And they perform their roles with dignity, not below their level.
This is a strong room thriller of medium hand, with good actors, an interesting plot, adequate denouement. Absolutely not protracted, thanks to the almost complete absence of meaningless scenes. Goes straight to my collection.
Imagine the situation... You wake up incomprehensible where, next to three more bodies, one is very sophisticatedly tied to a chair, the second hangs from the second floor of the room handcuffed to him, and the third lies on the belly, head in a pool of his own blood and behind you shovel. Oh, yes, I forgot to mention, you don't remember a damn thing, at all, or your name, or the name of your beloved mother, or whatever the hell you're doing here!
... How did you introduce it? And the hero of our film and do not need to represent, the situation is one in one and so ladies and gentlemen, I present to your attention the film 5 unknowns!
From the start, the film doesn’t let the viewer know what’s going on and who’s who? For some heroes, distrust of each other is tantamount to distrust of oneself. And the revelations they have to make will surprise and inspire distrust of everything that surrounds them.
Later, they will find out what caused the amnesia, but there will be no more answers. And with each attempt to find a way out of the confined room, they will lose valuable time, and the inefficiency, albeit very justified, will do its job, and perhaps not in the worst of ways.
The plot in the film is not to say that it is very original, but presented in an interesting way. The chance to fix something that would inevitably lead to irreversible consequences, the chance that deep down, each of us, by nature, is not evil. What makes us evil is the circumstances and how we perceive them, how we live with what happened to us in the past, and based on that, what choices we make in the future! Perhaps some of us, at some stage of life, should take a time out, and see if circumstances have changed us, and if they have, then what this can lead to.
Another message of the film, in my subjective view, is that sometimes, simply because we don't want to understand or hear others, we don't hear ourselves, and we just pull the blanket on our side. 'All who are in the boat must be together and support each other' otherwise we will drown. . .
Overall, I liked the film. The acting does not bother the eyes, and not surprisingly, Jim Caviezel, Joe Pantogliano, Barry Pepper and a little Peter Stormare... The actors are not the last in Hollywood, and this time they managed to prove it, at least I did not see any significant shortcomings in their performance. And then, it is so good to show the whole essence of the situation they managed at the proper level. From the very first minute, the picture catches the imagination in such a way that you try to figure out what will happen by the end of the film. Well, the ending leaves a little perplexed, so I can say that I was to my taste, and several scenes in the film really make you empathize with the characters, which once again proves a good acting!
In short, the film is good, definitely not from the category ' once' If you want to spend the evening with an interesting movie, I recommend it!
Expected a little more from the film, but for a budget of 3.7 million, it turned out very well.
The plot of the film is quite long-awaited: 5-ro men wake up in a closed warehouse, and each of them has amnesia. Since then, the situation has manifested itself and they understand that both the perpetrators and the victims of kidnapping are locked up here.
It’s pretty intriguing at first, but in the course of the movie, you realize it’s not what you expected. All the main characters open in the first 10 minutes of the film, and it is quite easy to predict who is good and who is bad. In addition, the actors played their roles, say. . . not brilliantly, because in such films acting is very important. Flashbacks of the main characters immediately show everything as it was and DO NOT make the audience think, that is, everything immediately becomes clear as a day. The feeling of doom disappears when the viewer sees what is happening outside the warehouse.
What conclusions should we draw from the creation given to us? Or what I was able to say personally. I will discuss my thoughts briefly.
You can’t even trust yourself.
Second, be who you are and not be influenced by the herd. The main characters were sincere only when they lost their memory.
5 unknowns come to their senses in an unknown place after a series of unknown circumstances. The beginning is very similar to a number of well-known and already cult thrillers, but unfortunately, only the beginning.
The plot is simple, the acting is discreet, the scenery, of course, zero, events, in principle, too. Action seems to be present, but some crumpled, sluggish, not catchy. Of course, there are interesting moments, and the ending in such films is always interesting, and in this case it is also twisted several times.
In principle, you can look once, for general development, or out of boredom. In general, it turned out quite well, but the details were sometimes boring or not quite clear, or not always logical. But the intrigue is present, there is no tension, the atmosphericity is appropriate. It's such a thriller.
5 out of 10
The film is a symbiosis of Saws and Mad Dogs. The plot tells about five men who alternately wake up in an abandoned building, from which it is almost impossible to get out. Everyone wakes up in different ways, someone is tied up, someone is shot and handcuffed, someone has a broken nose, but as it turns out, they do not remember anything, the fault of which was some gas that they actually inhaled. When inspecting the premises, it turns out that two are abducted businessmen, and actually 3 kidnappers, and along the way the body of a security guard was found. Slowly, memory returns to everyone, abruptly, but it returns and then action, mutual suspicions, threats, fights, etc. begin. Well, in addition to everything else, by dusk, superiors should come and kill businessmen. What to do, to identify who is who, will unite, this is what the film tells about.
What I liked is a very good script, where in places he turns everything upside down and most importantly he keeps in suspense, which is very important for a thriller. I also liked the performance of the actors, played at the level, especially James Caviezel. And the ending was very unexpected.
What didn’t like is some flashbacks, which by the middle of the film show who is good and who is bad and to some extent kill intrigue, in the definition of hu is hu. Also did not like the parallel line with the search for the leader of the gang and the pursuit, could be more interesting to beat.
In the end, we have a very good thriller.
An abandoned, tightly closed room somewhere in the American desert, inside which there are five people of varying degrees of bruise (Caviezel, Pepper, Kinner, Pantogliano and Sisto). They don’t remember who they are, where they came from, why they came here, and they don’t know what to do. Soon it turns out that a criminal group led by a charismatic leader (Stormare) kidnapped a large businessman and his assistant, brought to this hangar and left guards. Now the unlucky five have to figure out who their kidnapper is and who the victim is.
This film immediately attracts attention not even with its rather original plot plot, but with the cast, which included albeit not super-duper-top Hollywood stars, but very, very strong middle peasants. Caviezel we know from the image of the tormented Jesus in the “Passion of the Christ”, Pepper for excellent roles in the “25th hour”, “Iron grip” and “Green Mile”, Pantogliano very well lit up in “The Matrix” and “Remember”, and on account of Peter Stormar are listed roles in “Fargo”, “Dancing in the Dark” and “8 mm”.
In general, the actors and the plot are quite at the level. "5 Unknowns" is a cross between "Reservoir Dogs", which also for a long time was not clear who is who, and "Saw", where people just woke up in an abandoned basement. However, the blood, horrors and murders in this film is an order of magnitude less than in the epic about the Designer. In this case, we are dealing with a psychological-detective thriller with a rather unpredictable ending. You know how much scriptwriters can do, having a plot about people with a gradually returning memory in their hands.
It was pretty good, but nothing special. A standard such thriller, a rather clear ending and good acting work. To watch a movie at once, in the evening, for entertainment – that’s it.
7 out of 10
A great strong story about men who came to their senses in a strange place, beaten, remembering nothing. The idea of memory loss is not new at all, but in thrillers - always works with hurrah and gives room for imagination.
1. The plot is well twisted and not prolonged. Unexpected things will catch you until the last minute of the movie. Don’t relax, even when you think you understand.
2. Acting, I personally felt weak. In some cases, it was over.
3. General impressions - the film did not scare. But the plot was fascinating, I wanted to get to the bottom and understand what was happening. There is no blood or intestines, which I personally think is a plus. It's a matter of taste, though. There's not much morale here, but there is. Make your own conclusions, perception is always very individual.
A good movie is worth your attention.
And saw here nothing at allSaw" the first, seems to capture its atmosphere. But only before the first appearance in the frame of the other participants of this film, who are outside this warehouse. It turns out that our heroes are not in such a hopeless situation. About unpredictability and who is who I would argue. If you take purely acting roles of all the characters, you can safely predict who is good and who is bad. In order to really mislead viewers need excellent acting skills. The main character - James Caviezel - is a typical good man. So you don't really believe his confusion from one side to the other. Barry Pepper liked it. Maybe he doesn’t look very convincing either, and that’s just my sympathy for this actor. What spoils this film is that it’s not entirely confusing. Or rather, everything is confusing, but somehow not clear. These flashbacks of the main characters turned out to be ineffective. They do not lead the viewer into thinking, rethinking their assumptions, they simply clearly point to the truth. Moreover, every hero almost always tells the truth about his memories to others. So towards the end, you're waiting for this to be over. And then, boom, the director gives us a pig in the form of a different ending, which no one could even imagine. Again, there is meaningless entanglement with an undisclosed meaning. Think as you wish. In general, a serious thriller about “closed” people did not work. But you can kill time. 5 out of 10 Original