Nothing to see here really. Just a very generic and mundane by the numbers thriller you've seen dozens or hundreds of times already, and it isn't all that well made anyways.
I should mention, though, that you will probably see the wildest deductions you've ever seen in a movie in this film. For example, they find one victim in a freezer, and notice that he is more frozen than the surrounding meat. One of them has a bright idea that he was wet when he was put in the freezer because he likes to wrap his beer can's in a wet towel to make them get colder faster. So they deduce that the killer obviously wants them to look in a river for the next clue. I mean no mention which river obviously. The next scene is the police dragging out a car out of the river, which obviously contains the next clue.
Un film, une émission télévisée ou un artiste est introuvable ? Connectez-vous afin de créer une nouvelle fiche.
Vous souhaitez évaluer ou ajouter cet élément à une liste ?
Pas encore membre ?
Réponse de cpheonix
le 6 mars 2018 à 18h04
Yeah that deduction was pretty convoluted. Overall a pretty poor thriller, and both leads looked awful.
Al Pacino really seemed disinterested and it was like he was delivering his lines almost as if he was reading them from a card off screen.