PRISONERS
PRISONERS
#1PRISONERS
Posted: 9/21/13 at 1:11am
I'm very curious what other people thought of this movie because honestly, I don't really know what I thought. I know that I thought the film was probably way too long (I was in the theater for around 3 hours, including previews) and I think it could have been done in 2. It felt like it was trying to be as ambitious in scope as ZODIAC was but it lacked....something to make it that. Maybe the story was just too thin and stretched out? I don't know. The one thing I took away from it was this
I can't stop thinking about that tattoo. I'm obsessed and want to taste it. Don't judge me.
#2PRISONERS
Posted: 9/21/13 at 2:37pm
I saw it this morning and thought it was like a two-part season finale of Criminal Minds with some extreme luxury casting. Hugh was very good, but he was the only one who had much of a character to work with. Jake G had plenty of screentime, but we didn't find out much more about his character than he was a cop who was really good at his job (and liked to blind a lot).
The problem with these types of movies is the writers sometimes don't know how to write themselves out of certain tangled situations they set up. If you replay the movie knowing everything you find out at the end, you're left with some plot holes.
Once the pieces start coming together it's VERY easy to see where it's leading.
Despite it being 2:20 the pacing was brisk and I don't think it ever sagged.
SPOILERS*************
Once Hugh abducts Paul Dano and begins trying to make him talk, the torture goes behind anything you see in Zero Dark Thirty or the like. This was the biggest plot problem for me. Dano didn't harm the girls, but he did see them and left them with his aunt. There is no way he would have been able to stand up to the level of torture he was receiving without telling what he knew. (He already wanted to confide in Hugh when he whispered to him in the police parking lot. It makes no sense that he was able to endure that torture.)
END SPOILERS******************
#2PRISONERS
Posted: 9/21/13 at 3:46pm
I saw Prisoners at TIFF, and during his introduction the director acknowledged that it was a long film--but that every scene was needed. I disagree. It was way too long, with many things to trim. Also, the plot was so full of red herrings to mislead you into thinking this guy was guilty, no it's this guy, no its that guy. But when you add them all up, they make no sense.
At times I wondered if the film was meant as an allegory. SPOILER: Distraught father, Hugh Jackman, kidnaps and tortures the man (Paul Dano) he thinks is involved in his daughter's abduction, while Terrance Howard and Viola Davis don't condone the violence, but don't object, either (their daughter has also been abducted). To me, this is like the way society may allow the torture of suspected terrorists (or other evildoers). We don't condone torture, yet we allow it in our name (that it *might* actually help is our justification). But are we ourselves being reduced to villainy by our actions--perpetrating, or allowing torture or illegal confinement of people who might actually be innocent? Paul Dano's character was a victim himself, yet he suffered merciless torture at the hands of otherwise "good" people.
#7PRISONERS
Posted: 9/21/13 at 5:34pmI found it densely plotted, engrossing, and very satisfying by the end. Jackman is excellent, though I was distracted at times by how bad his American accent is here.
#9PRISONERS
Posted: 9/21/13 at 6:06pm
Questions with SPOILERS*********************
Why did Melissa Leo (and her then alive husband) allow Paul Dano and the other guy with the snakes to survive/grow up, and in the latter's case go live on his own?
How did the older boy function in society? He obviously had a house, earned enough money to frequent the store to buy kids clothing and be with it enough to attend the vigil for the missing girls and elude Jake during the backyard chase.
END SPOILERS**********************
#10PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 12:06pm
I thought it was an incredibly well-made genre movie. I also thought it was way too long, and I wish they had spent less time with certain plot lines and given Viola Davis a bit more to do. Overall though, I disagree that it's like watching a CRIMINAL MINDS episode, just because it felt like a cinematic piece throughout and it was expertly made, from the editing to the shot compositions. It's by far Hugh Jackman's best performance, he brought so much realism to the part and he disappeared in the role. It's also the only time I've thought Gyllenhaal was able to disappear into a character, and I know he has his fans here; I liked how little we know about his character, he was able to bring enough history without the movie spelling things out. Davis and Maria Bello are spectacular in smaller turns, Paul Dano does a fantastic job too. I didn't like Terrence Howard, who has consistently phoned in his performances since he got an Oscar nod, and I know everyone will praise Melissa Leo but I'm not a fan.
****SPOILERS****
And I actually liked the multiple red herrings, since they were all connected at the end: the Father has Melissa Leo's body in his basement, the guy who shoots himself is one of the victims, Paul Dano is the son of that woman and responsible for taking the kids, and Melissa Leo of course is "the bad guy." I thought the film connected all the threads in a very smart, entertaining way. I do wish it was 30 minutes shorter, you feel that last half hour at the end and just want it to be over.
********END OF SPOILERS*********
WiCkEDrOcKS
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/13/04
#11PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 7:08pm
Just got back from seeing it and thought it was excellent. It's one of the best police procedurals in a long, long time. Ace performances (this is Jackman's best screen work to date), a tightly-wound, intense, and carefully plotted script, and direction with an immaculate eye for detail all came together here and make this film absolutely well-worth seeing. With any high-wire act of a movie like this, there are bound to be a few missteps and minor moments where you think afterwards "oh, wait...," but this movie's missteps (for me) are few and far between. I bought myself a bag of Twizzlers beforehand and didn't even open them! I was so engrossed in the story that I'd be surprised if I even blinked. I saw a few of the twists coming, but I wasn't expecting a majority of them.
**SPOILERS** I thought the ending was just brilliant. Can't believe no one has discussed that yet on here. Do you think Loki saves Keller? Or do you think, after all he has gone through, that he's beginning to question what to believe? He's clearly incredulous to hearing the whistle at first, but the last look he gives seems to be pretty assured. **END SPOILERS**
Updated On: 9/22/13 at 07:08 PM
WiCkEDrOcKS
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/13/04
#13PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 7:26pm
^ YES, this too! I didn't find it so obvious, I felt like it was kind of open-ended and ambigious, which I loved but my audience clearly didn't, with half of them moaning and groaning when the screen went black. Not sure if they were expecting a big dance number or something, but I thought the ending was perfect.
And random, but does anyone else agree with me that Paul Dano tends to be one of the most grating actors of the last few years. You can tell the kid is exceptionally talented, but he overacts like no one else. He reminds me a lot of Sean Penn in this way...when Penn overacts (see ALL THE KING'S MEN and GANGSTER SQUAD), it's almost embarrassing. But when he reins it in a little and doesn't go balls-to-the-wall, he's truly incomparable (see his Oscar-winning work in MILK and MYSTIC RIVER). I thought this was one of Dano's better performances (he really doesn't say or do very much), but in general I wish he'd just rein it in a bit.
#14PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 7:33pm
****SPOILER*****
Also, I haaaaaate movies and TV shows where characters as evil as Melissa Leo* are are just killed in the end. I much prefer to see them captured alive so you know they have the rest of their lives in prison to look forward to. Whenever they're killed, I just feel like they've "won", in a way. Gyllenhaal could have shot her in the hand or the shoulder to make her drop that needle. He didn't need to kill her.
*I really don't like Melissa Leo. I think she's a decent community theater actress who really got lucky. Speaking of one-note actresses, I think she's their reigning queen.
WiCkEDrOcKS
Broadway Legend Joined: 6/13/04
#15PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 7:48pm
Leo is overrated, I agree. She was incredible in FROZEN RIVER though.
And here's a pretty interesting discussion about the ending: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392214/board/thread/219945366
Updated On: 9/22/13 at 07:48 PM
#16PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 8:50pm
I found the movie to be a nasty piece of work, Jackmans character was nasty even before the girls went missing.
Spoliers.
Still can't understand when the other family got there daughter back that none of them told the cops about the boy Jackman kidnapped. Not one single person in that film was likable.
A nasty little overlong film.
#17PRISONERS
Posted: 9/22/13 at 10:11pm
"And random, but does anyone else agree with me that Paul Dano tends to be one of the most grating actors of the last few years."
YES! I really enjoyed his work in L.I.E and liked his performance in THERE WILL BE BLOOD but he has pretty much annoyed me in everything else I've seen him in. But I admit that he was very good in this.
It could have been shorter but it kept me entertained and guessing throughout. That being said, I expected more. I don't know what exactly but I was a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I went in with too high of expectations. I had really been looking forward to this film.
One theme I found in the film other than the complacency of torture was the question of faith vs. despair. The films opens with the prayer and and becomes a true fight between good vs. evil.
SPOILERS***************************
The thing that confused me most is why Melissa Leo and her husband let the boy go who grew up to be the suspect with the snakes and bloody clothes? Did they allow him freedom once he was grown? Why was he so intent on getting clothes from the victims? If he was well enough to live alone and attend the vigil why couldn't he tell Loki about his own abduction and give him a lead? That was the plot point I had the hardest time buying.
***********************END OF SPOILERS
#18PRISONERS
Posted: 9/23/13 at 12:00pm
*****SPOILERS*****
Jordan, I wasn't sure if the ending was trying to go for something like SEVEN, where the serial killer does kind of win in some way because they die. Otherwise, I definitely agree with you that I always wish the killers ended up in prison, or had some other type of horrible demise that doesn't include dying. Also, couldn't agree more with your take on Melissa Leo as a community theatre actress that got lucky, there's just so many actresses I'd have rather seen in the role.
Wicked, I loved the ending as well. I thought it definitely was set up so that we assume the Gyllenhaal character saves Hugh Jackman, but then the question is what will happen after that. It fits with the theme of the movie, what would be the ethical thing to do here? Save this man who has been through hell and back, or put him in jail for putting Paul Dano's character through all that (and Paul Dano wasn't even fully innocent).
#20PRISONERS
Posted: 9/23/13 at 12:25pm
But Paul Dano wasn't fully innocent. He knew bits and pieces of what happened to the girls and didn't talk. He was originally victim, but he evolved into an enabler for the crimes.
It goes back to the question I asked earlier: Why didn't Dano tell Jackman what he knew when he was being tortured? No person untrained to withstand that type of interrogation, regardless of how brainwashed they may be, could ever stand up to that level of torture without talking.
Wynbish
Broadway Legend Joined: 4/27/12
#21PRISONERS
Posted: 10/4/13 at 11:46pm
Sorry to bring this back up after so long, but I just saw this tonight.
Remind me again about how we know the snake guy was originally a victim? I thought he just was obsessed with the "invisible man" in that book and became somewhat of a copycat, especially since he didn't do anything apart from steal the girls' clothes, buy others, and beat up some mannequins.
Videos