PRISONERS : Official Reviews ( SPOILERS!!)

[jo]

I had earlier downloaded Richard Roeper's video review -- but when I read his written review of PRISONERS ( featured prominently today in the weekend features of my local subscription), I looked for one and found it with the SunTimes --

www.suntimes.com/entertainment/movies/22609890-421/story.html

‘Prisoners’: The tension stays with you

By RICHARD ROEPER Movie Columnist September 19, 2013 2:28PM


‘PRISONERS’ ★★★1⁄2

Keller Dover Hugh Jackman

Detective Loki Jake Gyllenhaal

Alex Jones Paul Dano

Grace Dover Maria Bello

Nancy Birch Viola Davis

Franklin Birch Terrence Howard


Warner Bros. presents a film directed by Denis Villeneuve and written by Aaron Guzikowski. Running time: 153 minutes. Rated R (for disturbing violent content including torture and language throughout). Opening Friday at local theaters.

Updated: September 20, 2013 2:27AM

*******************************************************************************************

You will be drained.

Emotionally spent, intellectually fatigued, give-me-a-moment-to-recover-before-I-get-out-of-my-seat drained.

That’s not the kind of filmgoing experience everyone desires, but if you’re up for the ride, “Prisoners” is a white-knuckle, near masterpiece of a thriller. It falls short of greatness mostly because of too much editing-room generosity, with a running time of 153 minutes when about 130 minutes might have been more effective.

In an electric performance, Hugh Jackman delivers grounded, intense work as Keller Dover, a devoted family man who tells his teenage son the best advice he ever got from his father was to “be ready.” Keller isn’t some doomsday survivalist spouting theories about the end of days, but his basement is stocked with packaged goods, jugs of water and gas masks.

You know. Just in case.

It’s almost always cloudy, raining or snowing in the working-class Pennsylvania suburb (Georgia stands in, convincingly so) where Keller lives with his devoted wife, Grace (Maria Bello), and their children: 14-year-old Ralph (Dylan Minnette) and 6-year-old Anna (Erin Gerasimovich).

Their best friends, the Birches, live just around the block. Franklin (Terrence Howard) is an easygoing nerd who pulls out the trumpet after Thanksgiving dinner; Nancy (Viola Davis) is his loving wife; and they have two daughters: Eliza, who’s about the same age as Ralph, and Joy, who’s Anna’s age and is her best friend.

The table is set beautifully in these early passages. Even as the Dovers and the Birches enjoy a warm holiday gathering together, we feel the danger closing in. Something as simple as the choice of music emanating from a beat-up old RV parked in front of an abandoned house, or the way a tree is framed in a shot of the Birch’s home, feels ominous.

It’s an hour or two after Thanksgiving dinner when Anna asks if she and Joy can skip over to the Dover house on a quick mission. A simple act of miscommunication sets off a chain of events that results in frantic searches of the two houses, parents running up and down the streets calling out their daughters’ names — and then calls to the police and swarms of volunteers walking through the woods with flashlights.

Someone has taken the girls.

Your heart drops as you watch the mothers fall into near-catatonic states of despair. Nancy Birch sits mute in the kitchen, the dinner dishes untouched. Grace Dover curls into a fetal position, prescription medication on the bedside table.

Franklin Birch is desperate to find his daughter, but Keller Dover is a man possessed. The man who always told his family he’d protect them, the man with the motto of “Be ready,” allowed his daughter to be stolen, and he’s not about to stand by meekly and wait for the police to do their job.

Paul Dano, whose very presence in a film practically shouts “Disturbing Creep!,” is Alex, an adult with the mind of a 10-year-old who is the prime suspect in the case, but there’s no concrete evidence to charge him. (Melissa Leo, who has become a go-to character actress for a certain kind of role, is a standout playing Alex’s aunt.) Jake Gyllenhaal’s Detective Loki, a loner with a strange, brooding manner, pleads with his captain to keep Alex in custody just one more day past the normal 48-hour waiting period, but Alex is released — and then Alex disappears.

The masterful script by Aaron Guzikowski takes us through a maze of plot complications and possible suspects, including a hooded weirdo who shows up at a candlelight vigil and a drunken former priest. Meanwhile, Keller is convinced Alex knows where the girls are, and he’ll gladly trade Alex’s suffering for that information.

Even though “Prisoners” revisits one ongoing confrontation one time too many and spends a little bit too much time on a particular red herring, there’s not a single scene that doesn’t contain great acting.

Hugh Jackman is such an effortlessly graceful onscreen presence, such an old-school movie star, he might not get enough credit for being a fine actor. If Jackman’s ever given a more impressive performance, it doesn’t immediately spring to mind.

Everything in “Prisoners” is filtered through the lens of the legendary DP Roger Deakins, who favors blacks and blues and dark browns, often shooting through rainstorms and giving us the same distorted perspective of Keller, whose grief and desperation are taking him to a point where he might be beyond redemption even if he saves the girls.

“Prisoners” is built on biblical themes of faith, fallen believers, revenge and the nature of good vs. evil. Crucifixes dangle from rearview mirrors. Prayers are said before acts of violence. That disgraced priest is a key character in the puzzle. Two of the purest characters in the story are named Joy and Grace.

And many a house in this story is filled with warmth and light on one level — and much darkness and doubt literally beneath the surface. There are three dwellings in this film with basements and/or cellars you’d never want to visit.

Even with the stretched-out running time, “Prisoners” is one of the most intense moviegoing experiences of the year. You’ll never forget it.

Email: [e-mail]

Twitter: @richardroeper

I am glad that he fully acknowledges the acting ability of Hugh Jackman! It is not based on the brooding school of acting favored by the likes of Jake Gyllenhaal et al ( no offense meant but this kind of performance ala Brando and James Dean and favored by supposed young film buffs who "adores" the likes of Gosling, Phoenix, etc., has never impressed me), but one that shows the full range of emotions - warmth, contentment, chill, despair, and full blown anger, all in equal measure! Maybe Hugh is of the old school type of movie star when it comes to acting -- but this is what I like in my actors!

Jo

[jo]

Here's a review that places Keller Dover's story and Hugh Jackman's portrayal as the beating heart of this movie --

www.thefilmchair.com/wordpress/index.php/2013/09/22/review-hugh-jackmans-performance-elevates-prisoners/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=bufferd33b1&utm_medium=twitter

Review: Hugh Jackman’s Performance Elevates PRISONERS


Posted by Dan Stasiewski on Sep 22, 2013 in Big News, Movie Review | 0 comments



Prisoners (2013) — ***

When it comes to thrillers, there are the ones that feel so thoroughly contrived that it’s hard to accept them as legitimate pulp entertainment. (Think anything adapted from James Patterson or Dan Brown.) Then there are the ones that take themselves seriously enough to engross an audience with the artistry of the pulp narrative that contrivances don’t matter. (Think David Fincher or David Mamet’s films.)

Prisoners is could have easily fallen into the first category, but doesn’t quite commit itself to the genre enough to fall into the second. And though comparisons have been made to Mystic River since the film debuted at the Telluride Film Festival, Denis Villeneuve’s English language debut isn’t nearly as clear cut a revenge drama. No, there’s a subtlety to the character development that plays in tandem with outsized performances, all of which makes this thriller, like Steven Soderbergh’s Side Effects from earlier this year, much better than it has any right to be.

The story starts out simply enough. On Thanksgiving, the Dover family heads over to their neighbors, the Birches, for a holiday meal. At one point, the Dover’s daughter and the youngest daughter of the Birches get permission from their parents to go over to the Dover’s house. And the girls never return.

When the police are called an a Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) is put on the case, they quickly apprehend Alex Jones (Paul Dano) whose RV was mysteriously parked on a neighborhood street before the girls disappeared. But there’s no evidence that Jones, who has the mental capacity of a 10-year-old, took the girls and the girls are still missing. To Loki, he has a greater mystery to solve. To Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman), Alex is the only suspect.

At this point, there’s a great divergence in the narrative. All at once, we are watching Loki’s investigation take the twists and turns expected of a genre film like this one, while following Dover’s search for his own answers by way of kidnapping and torturing Jones. It’s Dover’s story that makes the difference here.


As Keller Dover, Hugh Jackman unquestionably give the performance of his career. He has a character that must be played with the hamfisted machismo and uncontrolled rage of a father (and survivalist to boot) dealing with the fact that he could not protect his family. Yet, he must also carry the subtle guilt, despair of a man who has a reason to be concerned with that legacy. Dover’s a recovering alcoholic who, as we learn after one encounter with his son later in the movie, betrayed that family long before the movie starts.

On top of that, Dover’s a devout man, who must have turned to religion as part of his recovery. This fact, further complicates his struggle as he must convince himself that, like hunting for food as he does in the beginning of the picture, his torturous ways have a greater purpose. And Jackman plays this all perfectly.

Dover’s story is exceptional in a film that has a pretty standard crime thriller at its heart. Loki, for example, is a stock character, the savvy, lone wolf detective encumbered by incompetence and bureaucracy. And though brilliantly acted by Viola Davis and Terrence Howard, the Birches have their tragedy made into a mere plot device in Dover’s story. Only Melissa Leo, who plays Alex’s aunt, truly stands out, but that’s mostly because of a conversation she has with Dover over what it’s like to lose a child.

I don’t want to minimize Villeneuve’s achievement here, though. He’s directed a film that, as it progresses, makes the audience bear the weight of the situation as much as Dover. It’s as enthralling a dramatic thriller as you’re ever likely to see in a cinema, one that would almost be called epic were it not for the singular nature of that label.

Of course, I’m referring to Dover because without him and without Jackman’s performance, Prisoners would likely have been dismissed as just another September thriller. Instead we get a sort of miracle: a genre film elevated not by artistically handling its cliches but rather using the strongest dramatic elements to overshadow those cliches.

[jo]

An interesting and different kind of review --

sketchy-reviews.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/new-release-review-prisoners.html

I do like a good thriller. They're rather rare. What trips most of them up is the third act: the moment that all the plot threads get tidied up and explained away. Come the credits the ground is usually scattered with red herrings that added little, thematically or otherwise, and numerous instances of characters behaving moronically to make sure the plot keeps moving forward. The best thing most thrillers can do is to treat the mystery like the villain in a horror movie: the less you can make out, the less you can see, the more fascinating it is. Once we see it in the cold light of day it's almost always disappointing, plain, and drab. So when you watch a story that not only hangs together, but also engages you, there's a good chance you've experienced something rare. That's how I felt watching Prisoners.

Denis Villeneuve's first english language film is as effectively restrained in its pacing as his last effort (Incendies). Waiting for the answers to Prisoners mysteries is agonising, and that burning desire for an answer will make us complicit in some dark things to come. The story: a pair of young girls disappear just outside their homes, right in broad daylight. In no time at all Alex (Paul Dano) is arrested, and never has a man looked more guilty, all greasy hair, ill-fitting glasses and - worst of all - a parka. But he isn't forthcoming and there's no proof with which to hold him. The man heading up the case, the rather incongruously named Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal), is forced to let him go. Keller (Hugh Jackman) - father to one of the girls - knows it was Alex that did it. Or, rather, he 'knows' he did it in that 'my-gut-tells-me-so' fashion. Time is ticking on and the odds of a kidnap victim being found alive after 7 days is... Not good. So Keller kidnaps the supposed kidnapper and begins the task of breaking a man with the IQ of a 10-year-old.

It's a pulpy setup, but it's all so soberly shot (by the ever-brilliant Roger Deakins) and seriously acted that if often feels more like a straight drama than a thriller. Jackman gives his best performance since his criminally overlooked turn in the The Prestige. His coiled rage - at himself for losing his daughter, at everyone else for not finding her - gives every scene an edge of violence, even when he says or does nothing. Gyllenhaal is effective as the Detective, but I'm not sure his tics (particularly his hard blinks) add as much as he thinks they do, but he's never less than watchable. It's unlikely that Dano, as the possible culprit, will ever be better cast, having slowly dialled up his awkward and greasy persona that he first trialled in There Will Be Blood and has since tweaked and built upon (Cowboys & Aliens, Ruby Sparks, Looper).

The one thing that tarnishes the film is how slow Villeneuve makes Gyllenhaal's detective. There's a clue (that we're not supposed to realise is a clue) that we get at the same time as Gyllenhaal, and it's a striking enough visual that you won't forget it. Unless your Gyllenhaal. When another clue crops up that directly links to it (quite obviously), Gyllenhaal does little but blink hard and move on. I had to fight the urge to yell at the screen as if shouting at a would-be murder victim about to be stabbed. For a moment it'll look like he's got it, because how could he not? He's closed every case he's ever had. He's a supercop. But no, he just blinks at it even harder and wonders just what it's all about. Why can't he work it out? Because Villeneuve needs other things to happen first. It's the only moment the plotting slips up.

Also it's unclear what Prisoners is trying to say about vigilantism. Is it condoning Keller's actions? He wrestles with what he's doing, but not all that much. Plus it produces results, of a sort. As a study of a family torn apart and a man on the edge, the film's damn good. As a mystery thriller, it's pretty damn good too. But what it actually has to say thematically, about religion, family, intuition, and many other things besides, is less resonant and well thought out than I might have hoped.

Overall, despite its flaws: 8/10

Ish-Spoilers! (highlight to read):

There's a lot that's unclear, at least on first viewing, but the film's various plot threads just about hang together when you take the time to parse them. The visuals of the snakes and the mazes, Alex and Bob's real backstory (Bob being a sort of red herring, that actually isn't a red herring), are explained so briefly (and hazily) that they can be easily missed. I won't go into the whys and wherefores here, as I think most of you would prefer to work it out for yourselves - if you haven't already. I just thought it'd be worth noting that the film has fewer plot holes than has been suggested. It does have the odd narrative hiccup, but they're slight and do little to mar what is one of the year's better films.

Very Spoilery!

That being said, it was more than a little irksome when Gyllenhaal just walked into the actual kidnapper's house and caught them red handed because they left the door unlocked and suddenly went deaf - somehow failing to hear him knocking and shouting for them.

Oh, and how does Alex have a driver's licence? Or any identification? When he was arrested shouldn't the police have found themselves chasing a false trail of IDs created or bought by Alex's 'Aunt'?

LOL - I had the same thought about how a super-detective like Loki could not piece the puzzle together faster! He didn't really solve the murder trail, until he accidentally came over to inform "Aunt" Holly that Alex has been found ( the only thing he really caught on to fast). He was hard-working and heroic at the end, but Loki was not as smart as I hoped he would be. But as the reviewer says, it is Villenueve ( and Guzikowski) who may have wanted to lay down more clues and red herrings.

PS: I can't understand the drawing of the first clue - any ideas?

Jo ( a true whodunit fan!)

[Jamie]

Oct 1, 2013 17:34:00 GMT -5 jo said:

An interesting and different kind of review --

sketchy-reviews.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/new-release-review-prisoners.html



LOL - I had the same thought about how a super-detective like Loki could not piece the puzzle together faster! He didn't really solve the murder trail, until he accidentally came over to inform "Aunt" Holly that Alex has been found ( the only thing he really caught on to fast). He was hard-working and heroic at the end, but Loki was not as smart as I hoped he would be. But as the reviewer says, it is Villenueve ( and Guzikowski) who may have wanted to lay down more clues and red herrings.

PS: I can't understand the drawing of the first clue - any ideas?

Jo ( a true whodunit fan!)

Jo, It's the necklace with the maze

[jo]

Lol - I thought that that was the second clue ( the squarish pendant-looking thing with a maze) ...Of course, as it pertains to Det Loki, it has to be the pendant as first clue. Arghh-- the second clue, on closer inspection, was a box of snakes.

But there was another clue which most missed -- I heard it said only after my second viewing. When Det Loki visited the real mother of Alex, she said "that her little boy was playing on the front yard where an RV was parked".

Could that have alerted Det Loki that the RV ( which showed its age at the time of the Anna/Joy kidnapping) might have a link to the disappearance, no matter that they scoured it clean. Could the RV have brought back Alex and the little girls he invited to play with to the house of Aunt Holly?

The use of the RV for the kidnapping was actually confirmed when Holly was chatting with Keller ( on his first visit) when she said that in earlier times "they were driving during summer in that RV" before God took away their son. They changed after that.

Jo

[jo]

www.tvandfilmreview.com/2013/10/04/prisoners-review/

Prisoners Review

Posted on October 4, 2013 by Kate McCall • 0 Comments • Tags: Prisoners



Two families unite on a Thanksgiving evening in a small American town, whilst the two youngest daughters go outside to play. And they just vanish. Suspecting a mysterious RV parked down the street earlier that day may be involved, the families call the police and Detective Loki responds to the call. The young man inside the RV is caught and arrested, but subsequent searches and questioning of the suspect throw up more blanks. As the police and Detective Loki continue to pursue all leads as vital hours pass by in the girls’ disappearance, one of the distressed fathers takes matters into his own hands and kidnaps the released suspect. Adamant that this man knows where the girls are, he delivers his own brutal form of interrogation to get the answers out of him.

Main Cast

Hugh Jackman (Les Miserables, The Prestige)

Jake Gyllenhaal (Zodiac, Brokeback Mountain)

Paul Dano (Little Miss Sunshine, There Will Be Blood)

Viola Davis (The Help, Doubt)

Terence Howard (Iron Man, Crash)

Maria Bello (A History of Violence, Secret Window)

Melissa Leo (The Fighter, Frozen River)

Written by Aaron Guzikowski (Contraband)

Directed by Denis Villeneuve (Incendies, Maelstrom)

What Did I Think of the Film?

Prisoners is the visual equivalent of someone thumping down a great big, pulpy page-turner on the table in front of you. Daunting, but meaty – it’ll be fine once you get into it. And the chunky 158 minute run time of Prisoners soon flies by once the drama begins to unfold. Central mystery, crazy townsfolk, inscrutable detective, moody wintry suburbia. I’m in a happy place.

Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) is an all American, devout Christian, always prepared in a time of crisis – from natural disaster to war. “Always be ready for anything,” he tells his son in the opening few moments of the film. With an ugly irony, we get the sense he’s not ready for what’s about to come. The same evening, relaxing with his wife (Maria Bello) and friends the Birch’s (Terence Howard and Viola Davis) after Thanksgiving Dinner, his young daughter Anna goes out to play with the Birch’s daughter Joy. And they don’t come back. But this is not a simple missing person’s case in a small town – as the plot expands, so we have Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) tracking several lines of inquiry at once, all of which seem to lead back to the disappearance of the two girls.

This is one of my favourite genres. The presence of Jake Gyllenhaal gives obvious comparisons to David Fincher’s Zodiac. But if you throw in the likes of Mystic River, Gone Baby Gone, and Top of the Lake – titles which looking back I universally gave top marks to – Prisoners more than excels in the company. One of the reasons I watched the US remake of The Killing was for the melancholic, rainy backdrop of Seattle. And in Prisoners, Roger Deakins brings the unnamed, grey suburban town where the families live into something that’s stunningly beautiful in its bleakness. Use of tree imagery – from a branch piercing the windscreen of the RV to a dense forest as the police search-teams comb the area for the little girls – is so exquisitely done. For a desolate landscape, the characters appear so much more clear and salient. But there are mesmerising scenes of colour too – particularly a thrilling sequence towards the end in a car, with the neon lights of the street and traffic lights shimmering on the rain slicked tarmac. Gorgeous.

Guzikowski’s script is fascinated with mazes, and the plot itself is its own labyrinth. Densely layered, with hints and clues dropped deliberately as the information slowly weeps out in every scene. The subplots are not only crucial but separately interesting on their own merit – there’s enough here to make an epic TV series. From early on we get the sense that there’s a bigger evil at work here, and this case with the two girls will allow its untangling. Though I’m a fan of the genre, I’m absolutely rubbish at second-guessing it, so for me the finale was one of genuine surprise and growing satisfaction as the pieces fell together. This does mean the plot falls into contrivance a few times – Detective Loki has some very convenient slices of luck thrown his way (a vital clue! Just when all hope is lost!) but I’ll forgive it as the central story is so involving, I’ve already moved on and am engrossed in the next scene. There are moments of horror (Jake Gyllenhaal really has issues with basements), nastiness (don’t give Hugh Jackman a hammer) and deadpan humour as well – but only for a flash before things get very grim and very tense again.

Villeneuve has no problem adjusting to a bigger budget and American studio. He balances the characters smartly, and his use of camera at times belies a hidden presence – just watching – particularly at the beginning of the film. He often skips over exposition and denouement and I enjoyed being treated as an intelligent audience. We don’t always need to be told what the characters know; we assume they are on the same page as us.

The acting is universally excellent. Hugh Jackman is the standout – the raw emotion he captures as an anguished parent living in hell whilst his daughter is out there alone is frightening, as is the lengths he will go to to get answers. He deserves to get some awards attention for his performance as Keller Dover. Jake Gyllenhaal also delivers – he’s so great in these kinds of roles, fantastic at wringing out the relentless obsession in a character. But I don’t think Paul Dano is getting enough praise – I thought he was so terrific as the emotionally stunted Alex Jones. Though he doesn’t get a lot to do in the second half of the film, he can seriously work a role with just his eye. The rest of the cast are strong, though this is a Jackman and Gyllenhaal two-hander and they have a lot less to do – but still committed and convincing performances. Melissa Leo is completely unrecognisable!

I wanted the ending to be brave and deny the familiar conclusion everyone wanted – and it chose to meet us in the middle. Whilst audible cries of “what the hell!” rang out in the cinema screen behind me, I couldn’t help but smile to myself. The ending – which perhaps faults with a little overacting from Gyllenhaal – is beautifully haunting, and poses a question from its continued religious symbolism and allegory: this man is a sinner, should he be punished? There may be an obvious answer, but as the film cuts to black we’ll never actually know.

Stylish visuals, complex characters and a smart, twisty script – Prisoners is a moody dream of a film, and one of the best of the year.

Watch if: it’s a dark and rainy night outside, and you need a rich drama with appropriate pathetic fallacy

Don’t watch if: you like your mystery thrillers with less of a slow burn, and a more economic running time

Overall Rating: 9/10

Kate McCall – @_culturemouse

[jo]

From Africa -- an insightful critique of the movie :


mg.co.za/article/2013-10-11-00-the-all-consuming-rage

Movie of the week: The all-consuming rage in 'Prisoners'

11 Oct 2013 00:00|Joonji Mdyogolo

Hugh Jackman finally gets a movie to sink his claws into. In "Prisoners", he plays Keller Dover, the archetypal patriarch.

He looms large and bearded. He teaches his son to hunt, loves his daughter and takes care of his wife; this, as you can see from their surroundings, while living a working-class existence, especially when compared with their neighbours and friends, Franklin and Nancy Birch (Terrence Howard and Viola Davis). Dover hunts for sport (and food), whereas Birch spends his free time learning to play an instrument.

What they have in common and what holds this Pennsylvania community together are good old-fashioned values and, for Dover, a steadfast belief in God and family.

Then, during Thanksgiving at the Birch household, the families' young daughters, Anna Dover and Joy Birch, vanish, and everything Dover holds firm is shaken to the core. The police apprehend a mentally ill young man who owns the van the children were seen playing around. They cannot hold him for longer than a day because of a lack of evidence – and the boy, Alex Jones, won't talk.

Desperate as the days tick on and believing that the feeble-minded boy is guilty, Dover kidnaps him and hides him in an abandoned house, where he tortures him. You'll find these scenes hard to stomach, because the audience does not have the conviction of Dover. Alex seems to fit the bill: he's physically repulsive, a gangly and dirty, unfeeling boy, who is seen yanking a small dog by the neck when no one is looking. But is he guilty? And why won't he say something – anything?

The Birches don't agree with Dover's methods, but they won't stand in his way because they also want their daughter back.

In a way, the fire and force of the rage in Jackman's character is all-consuming and steals some energy from the rest of the movie. It can sometimes feel as though the brilliance of Maria Bello (remember her in A History of Violence?), who plays Dover's wife, as well as Howard and Davis, are a little wasted. But Jackman plays Dover well – he lets us in on his pain, his sense of helplessness and his rage at the injustice of it all.

In this thriller, Dover is both the villain and victim. The hero here is played by Jake Gyllenhaal, and you won't tire of watching him play the studious and perceptive Detective Loki. He, like Dover, has conviction, but his is built on a combination of solid fact and intuition. He is racing against time, to find the girls and to save Dover from himself in a police department that takes a lackadaisical attitude to the troubles that taunt its community.

Prisoners is shot exquisitely. The details are crystal-clear. There is a beautiful bareness to the movie, which is shot by cinematographer Roger Deakins, who shot No Country for Old Men.

Yet the story feels lush because of the changing landscape, the rain followed by the thickening snow as the movie gets chillier.

The clean shots make the characters stand out so that you can see the tortured soul behind Loki's every twitch and the fear underneath Dover's violent might and clenched jaw.

It also helps you see more clearly that under this veneer is a rotting community of missing children and demented adults.

The movie also raises the traditional masculinity theme. "I always thought you would protect us," says Dover's wife, who, at this point is incapacitated by pills and grief. And this is what drives Dover further into the abyss: the belief that the disappearance of his child is an indictment on him as a father and a husband.

This is not a movie in which you can take sides. In fact, it leaves you stranded, desperately trying to cling to any character who might show mercy. It does take some liberties, though, with the storyline.

There are some confusing bits that make one feel a bit lost: What have the snakes got to do with it? What happened to that priest? Tightening up such instances could have made Prisoners tauter and pacier.

But it does keep you guessing. There are so many suspects, each with a motive, but you'll never guess the culprit.

The power of Prisoners is in the strength of its two key characters and the fact that it will not let you relax and assume that things will go your way. That only happens in the movies. Life, as we all know, does not work that way.

[jo]

A review from THE AUSTRALIAN --

www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/imprisoned-by-their-demons-in-denis-villeneuves-prisoners/story-fn9n8gph-1226736903942

Imprisoned by their demons in Denis Villeneuve's Prisoners

David Stratton |
The Australian|
October 12, 201312:00AM


THE first Hollywood film from Quebec director Denis Villeneuve (who made the impressive Incendies), Prisoners opens in virtual monochrome; even the Warner Bros logo is the old one, used in the 1950s, and in black and white.

This prepares the audience for something dark, and - perhaps - something substantial, because weren't movies better back then than they are today? The first sequence takes place in a forest: dark, foreboding, the winter trees and the icy ground covered in snow. The only movement is that of a deer, and the deer will be the film's first victim. Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) is teaching his son Ralph (Dylan Minnette) survival skills. "All that stands between you and being dead is just you," he advises the teenager. "Be ready."

The Dovers live in a small community somewhere in the US. Keller and his wife, Grace (Maria Bello), are devoted to their children, Ralph and six-year-old Anna (Erin Gerasimovich). Keller is a carpenter and builder, and probably a good one; his own house is testament to his efficiency, and the presence of a cellar containing numerous weapons and stocks of food and water confirms that this religious man is one of those individuals who believes in defending and protecting his family from whatever evil the outside world might have in store for him. The evil proves to be closer than he realises, as he and his family will discover as they celebrate Thanksgiving at the nearby home of their friends Franklin and Nancy Birch (Terrence Howard, Viola Davis).

In contrast to convivial celebrations taking place at the Birch home that day, Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal) is eating alone in a Chinese restaurant, half-heartedly flirting with the waitress serving him. It's raining heavily when Loki receives the news that two little girls, Anna and Joy, are missing. They went out to play and have simply disappeared. Ralph suggests perhaps the disappearance has something to do with a battered campervan that was parked in the street near their house earlier in the day.

The owner of the van is Alex Jones (Paul Dano), an inarticulate, mentally challenged young man who lives with his aunt (Melissa Leo). Loki takes Alex in for questioning but there's no direct evidence against him and no sign whatsoever of the missing children, so Loki is forced to release him.

This doesn't satisfy Keller who, with Franklin's reluctant help, decides to take the law into his own hands.

The screenplay by Aaron Guzikowski bears all the hallmarks of being based on a real case, though the film's credits carry no confirmation of this. As the slow-burning drama unfolds, the tension created so skilfully by Villeneuve becomes almost unbearable; the low-key intensity of the drama is compelling and audience sympathies are likely to fluctuate as the 2 1/2-hour thriller unfolds, taking its time to explore the minute details surrounding the case.

We discover, as the film proceeds, that the title has multiple meanings and it's not always clear exactly who are the good guys and who are the bad. What is clear, though, is the excellence of the acting. Jackman has rarely done anything as powerful as this on the screen: his righteous protagonist is scary in his implacability.

Unforgettable, too, is Gyllenhaal's detective; we never learn as much about the background of this character as we do about Keller, but Loki's isolated situation and barely controlled rage suggest a troubled past - this character is far removed from the investigator Gyllenhaal played in David Fincher's similarly intense Zodiac.

The outstanding cinematography, much of it taking place in snow or driving rain, is the work of Roger Deakins, the British cinematographer who often works with Joel and Ethan Coen, and the film also benefits from a very well conceived music score by Johann Johannsson, an Icelandic composer here working on his first Hollywood film.

If Prisoners has a flaw, it's arguably in the not entirely convincing delineation of one of the key characters and the slightly pat resolution; but overall this is a thriller of substance, a story that grips you from the opening scenes and never lets go.

Prisoners (MA15+)
4 stars
National release from Thursday

[jo]

www.iol.co.za/tonight/movies/movie-review-prisoners-1.1590659

MOVIE REVIEW: Prisoners

October 11 2013 at 12:43pm
By Theresa Smith


PRISONERS

DIRECTOR: Denis Villeneuve

CAST: Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Terrence Howard, Viola Davis and Maria Bello

CLASSIFICATION: 16LV

RUNNING TIME: 153 minutes

RATING: ****



TENSE, disturbing and detailed, this well- constructed mystery thriller functions even better as a character study.

Though the men come off more well-rounded than the women, Prisoners delves into the various ways people respond to stress, particularly how parents respond when their children go missing.

Roger Deakins’ cinematography does much to create the anxious atmosphere with the claustrophobic wintry weather, but it is the atypically lit night scenes – candle-light vigils, swirling snow lit up by car headlights, or a torture scene in which the victim is visible only when a tiny sliver of light hits him – which sets the disturbing tone. Shadows menace and scenes are richly textured as much because of set details as the way Deakins has framed scenes.

Any parent who watches this film will be freaked out. Director Denis Villeneuve does scary things that can happen to normal people really well (he also directed the powerful and moving Incendies) and he meticulously captures the sense of helplessness faced by the Dover and Birch families.

Spending Thanksgiving together, the families are thrown into an escalating panic when young Anna (Erin Gerasimovich) and Joy (Kyla Drew Simmons) disappear. The policeman heading the investigation, Detective Loki (Gyllenhaal), quickly makes an arrest, but is just as quickly frustrated by strange young Alex (Dano), who has the mentality of a 10-year-old.

Keller Dover (Jackman), father of the missing Anna, takes matters into his own hands and kidnaps Alex to extract details of the children’s whereabouts when the police are forced to let him go.

Dover starts torturing Alex, but is forced to tell Franklin Birch (Howard) – the father of the missing Joy – what he is doing, much to the chagrin of the second father, who now has another bit of guilt to add to losing his daughter in the first place.

Meanwhile, Detective Loki is doggedly following clues, but becomes increasingly suspicious of Keller, who disappears for long stretches of time.

Keller’s wife, Grace (Bello), goes the chemical numbness route, while Franklin’s wife, Nancy (Davis), desperately tries to hold together her fragmenting family.

Then there’s Alex’s aunt, Holly Jones (Leo), who knows more than she is letting on… and that’s not even halfway into the film, which ends up going somewhere the beginning does not suggest.

We are so used to seeing Jackman as the nice, affable guy (when he is not ripping bad guys to shreds with adamantium claws) that you don’t at first believe he is about to hurt someone in cold blood, but that is pretty much the point – how far will a normal person go to find their child?

Jackman runs the full gamut of shock, grief, horror, vulnerability and empathy and still keeps you guessing about his morality – is Keller the good guy? Has he just been pressed too hard, or is there something else at play?

Gyllenhaal is also in top form, contained and restrained – where Jackman’s emotion is apparent, even when his actions are not, Gyllenhaal’s cop is detached from his emotions.

While we get very little of Loki’s history, with just a few references, a nervous tic and some tattoos, Gyllenhaal builds up a complicated character who is fascinated by the mystery playing out in front of him.

Once Alex is locked up and being tortured, it is all screams and blood so you start seesawing. Is he guilty? Does he know something? Is Keller going too far?

If you liked Mystic River or The Town you will like this.

[JH4HJ]

Prisoners movie review: trapped in mazes of moral murkiness

In Prisoners, a superb bone-chiller from Quebec director Denis Villeneuve (Incendies), desperate god-fearing Pennsylvanian carpenter Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) decides to take the law into his own hands. . .
Hugh Jackman seems headed towards emotional territory certain to over-extend his limited dramatic reach; having cut his teeth on the stage, the former Boy from Oz is yet to master the subtleties of a nuanced cinematic presence. His character affords him plenty of cause to be gruff and barky, however, and Jackman’s loud acting is offset by quieter performances from Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Melissa Leo, Terrence Howard and others.

Full review

I have thought about this occasionally while watching Hugh in films. It's that theatrical "gotta reach the last row of the balcony" vs. a camera inches from your face with a zoom lens on it. His "takes" (reactions, etc.) are sometimes a bit too "big" for my taste, but I've always attributed this to the director. After all, it's his job to ask for more/less and orchestrate all the performances. I think Hugh "switches gears" better than most. Only a few stage actors transition well to film, and far less visa verse IMHO.

[Aside: I just made myself think about Peter O'Toole in My Favorite Year. "I'm not an actor, I'm a Movie Star!" (Oh, how I love watching him relish that line!) This is definitely NOT our Hugh! I think he is an Actor in every (best) sense of the word.]

Just FYI: This is not a movie I would have seen in a theater (probably wouldn't bother with it on cable either) if Hugh were not in it. It's too "mean" for my enjoyment. I really didn't find anyone genuinely "likeable" and since we never got to know the missing kids, I didn't feel very "invested" in them either - they were just the McGuffin. Yes, Hugh's performance was stellar - as always. I just wish he made different choices. I'd like to see him in roles that would have been played by Spencer Tracy, Gregory Peck, James Stewart or Cary Grant (in their prime). Just my opinion... I'd like to hear yours.

[jo]

Have you read about or seen clips about Hugh narrating what happened during the hammer scene?

It seemed that he thought he had already done what an actor could do re showing brutality and thought Villeneuve would have given him a thumbs-up after acting it out. But it seemed it was not enough -- Villeneueve told him that " he was not there yet!"...and Hugh added the scene where he practically threatened to nail down Alex's hand, while yelling to the top of his voice, but hit the wall instead. That scene is the most horrifying in a way because you didn't know that it was not going to end tragically.

I just wish he made different choices. I'd like to see him in roles that would have been played by Spencer Tracy, Gregory Peck, James Stewart or Cary Grant (in their prime).

Unfortunately, audience tastes ( and therefore Hollywood artistic directions) have changed - the genre of movies made by those actors is no longer popular. Also, people's span of attention has changed as we now live in a world where we see and hear about the constantly evolving events -- mainly because the stories are brought to our attention at breakneck speed, with technology and people willing to share what they have witnessed so freely on media ( e.g., readers reporting to news organizations like CNN) and social media. There is not much time for mulling or digesting events or enjoying an old-fashioned story - we just move on to the next. We also see mainstream media giving away part of its territory day by day - so many newspapers folding up. Maybe people no longer have the patience for the more carefree days of the kind of movies where Tracy, Grant, Peck, Stewart entertained.


Ironically, I have read many comments about how "lifelike" and "realistic" Prisoners was ( art mirrors life) - because the situations can happen anywhere to anyone ( and some claiming they would have acted exactly like Keller, had the same thing happened to their children) - and has thus become a popular movie. Not entetaining, but gripping and thought-provoking ( so many discussions on Keller's ultimate fate, even if he were rescued). A generation ago, the word AMBER ALERT was never heard of. Maybe they did happen then, but probably not as strongly etched in people's minds, as it is now.

I do like thrillers - and I had seen this movie three times, because I wanted to make sure I got all the clues right. I even think there was an important clue that many people missed ( which caused my third viewing, where I confirmed it) - the clue of the RV as first mentioned by the real mother of Alex ( which Loki missed!), in the first third of the movie.

I recognize that the movie could be divisive. But the box office results seemed to have surprised many ( it was three weeks running at the top in the UK), its reviews are very strong ( it was certified FRESH early at Rotten Tomatoes and has held firm at 81%) and the likeability factor has scored high on Rotten Tomatoes ( 89%) and on IMDB ( 8.1) and on many tweets proclaiming it as "movie of the year". There is even Oscar buzz about the film!

Btw, how did you like SWEENEY TODD, the movie musical? It was almost macabre - again, a movie which some may think had not much redeeming social value. There was an interesting comparison survey between this movie and Les Miserables on IMDB. It was pretty even, but Les Miserables had almost unanimous preference for its " emotionally investing " appeal. Maybe PRISONERS echoed to some extent how audiences were affected emotionally by the movie?

Jo

[birchie]

Oct 19, 2013 13:00:37 GMT -5 JH4HJ said:

Prisoners movie review: trapped in mazes of moral murkiness

In Prisoners, a superb bone-chiller from Quebec director Denis Villeneuve (Incendies), desperate god-fearing Pennsylvanian carpenter Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman) decides to take the law into his own hands. . .
Hugh Jackman seems headed towards emotional territory certain to over-extend his limited dramatic reach; having cut his teeth on the stage, the former Boy from Oz is yet to master the subtleties of a nuanced cinematic presence. His character affords him plenty of cause to be gruff and barky, however, and Jackman’s loud acting is offset by quieter performances from Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Melissa Leo, Terrence Howard and others.

Full review

I have thought about this occasionally while watching Hugh in films. It's that theatrical "gotta reach the last row of the balcony" vs. a camera inches from your face with a zoom lens on it. His "takes" (reactions, etc.) are sometimes a bit too "big" for my taste, but I've always attributed this to the director. After all, it's his job to ask for more/less and orchestrate all the performances. I think Hugh "switches gears" better than most. Only a few stage actors transition well to film, and far less visa verse IMHO.

[Aside: I just made myself think about Peter O'Toole in My Favorite Year. "I'm not an actor, I'm a Movie Star!" (Oh, how I love watching him relish that line!) This is definitely NOT our Hugh! I think he is an Actor in every (best) sense of the word.]

Just FYI: This is not a movie I would have seen in a theater (probably wouldn't bother with it on cable either) if Hugh were not in it. It's too "mean" for my enjoyment. I really didn't find anyone genuinely "likeable" and since we never got to know the missing kids, I didn't feel very "invested" in them either - they were just the McGuffin. Yes, Hugh's performance was stellar - as always. I just wish he made different choices. I'd like to see him in roles that would have been played by Spencer Tracy, Gregory Peck, James Stewart or Cary Grant (in their prime). Just my opinion... I'd like to hear yours.

I completely disagree with that reviewer-whoever he/she may be! That line "Hugh Jackman seems headed towards emotional territory certain to over-extend his limited dramatic reach" That person has obviously not seen much of Hugh's work in movies. As for the other actors being quieter & him being barky & loud!!!!!! Hello stupid reviewer person!!!! they are called characters and they are written that way!!!! <bash> <tantrum> <rant> I guess this person failed to see the moments of Keller's restrained anguish, which I thought were some the the best performed moments in the film...by anyone!!! End of rant!

I do agree that Hugh hasn't always made the best role choices but I don't think Prisoners fits with that issue. I think it's a very good role. I like thrillers though, so maybe I've seen more to compare it to. I'd also love it if he could get Gregory Peck, James Stewart or Cary Grant caliber parts to play and I'd add Gene Kelly, even though he wasn't as good an actor as Hugh (or the others). I'd like him to be offered some role similar to the type that Gene did. Maybe if the Barnum film ever sees the light of day that will fill the bill. But, as for the GP, JS, CG parts, it seem that Clooney is getting all of those! <boo>
Sue

[jo]

Lol - I agree with your rant, Sue

Maybe if the Barnum film ever sees the light of day that will fill the bill.

Pete Hammond of Deadline-Hollywood said ( in his account of the MPTF event)that he hears BARNUM is almost a go! And that it would have the backing of FOX! Pete has his ears fairly close to the ground at Hollywoodland, so I would give the buzz a high level of credibility. He also said that it would be a modern musical in its treatment ( he says that it would be like Moulin Rouge - LOL, not sure if that is to everyone's taste or maybe I am misunderstanding it completely - but maybe he is saying that unless a movie musical is not a dramatic musical, it has to be contemporized to suit modern audiences's tastes). I do remember Hugh saying recently that BARNUM may just suprise us in that it may come sooner than expected after spending a number of years in development "purgatory" ( I think this is a more apt term than "h*ll"). He said " Watch this space!" -- so, I am even thinking it might supersede "Houdini", if Schwartz takes his merry time composing.

But will Hugh really do musicals projects back to back? Personally, I enjoy the variety in his career choices - so I would like to see him pick up ( between musicals) the "SECTION 6" film project with its touted excellent and expensive script! An action movie with dramatic possibilities and with wide box office appeal -- it is a biopic of the true "M" in the James Bond movie. It is about how the British Intelligence Office took shape! Maybe I am biased - but I did read the early James Bond novels when I was young - I was curious enough when I read somewhere that JFK was a fan

Jo

[birchie]

Jo, I do love the recent buzz re: Barnum including the interview with Hugh. Not sure what being like Moulin Rouge means...I hope it's not since I hated ML! After several attempts I have never even made it completely through the whole movie.
I wonder if they will still call it "The Greatest Showman on Earth" certainly an apropos title for its star!! smiley-love067 I really hope it gets made fairly soon & I would also like to see that Section 6 film done, possible just before! I think I'd prefer Section 6 to that Chappie thing. Guess we'll just have to wait and see...not my strong suit though smiley-rolleyes010
Sue

[jo]

Chappie is just a filler thing - he said he will down in South Africa for only a couple of weeks. His role is likely to be a small one- maybe like Butter? Hugh is industrious and likes to keep busy all the time, although I suspect he is also looking forward to spending the time in his beloved Nelson Mandela's land? He and Deb once paid a visit to that city. Another suspicion - maybe at the time he accepted it, the prospect of when Houdini might be ready was still ( maybe still is) rather murky. Otherwise, early next year will already be committed to serious rehearsals for that show? PLus occasionally he likes to dabble in fun projects, which I would classify CHAPPIE to be one of them.

Jo

[birchie]

Oct 20, 2013 16:53:01 GMT -5 jo said:

Chappie is just a filler thing - he said he will down in South Africa for only a couple of weeks. His role is likely to be a small one- maybe like Butter? Hugh is industrious and likes to keep busy all the time, although I suspect he is also looking forward to spending the time in his beloved Nelson Mandela's land? He and Deb once paid a visit to that city. Another suspicion - maybe at the time he accepted it, the prospect of when Houdini might be ready was still ( maybe still is) rather murky. Otherwise, early next year will already be committed to serious rehearsals for that show? PLus occasionally he likes to dabble in fun projects, which I would classify CHAPPIE to be one of them.

Jo

I understand all that & that it's only a couple of weeks. The point wasn't the time it will take but goes along with the view that he sometimes makes poor choices. Some of his "filler" movies have been less than stellar! My fingers are crossed that Chappie will at least be watchable.
Sue

[jo]

I have always thought that Hugh is a practical man - he says that he initially thought that acting ( a profession that he thoought he would enjoy doing) would just be a job for him to earn a living, but happily it has turned out to have also fulfilled some artistic wishes. Plus he has always said that there are other things in life that mean more to him ( his family)...and there are advocacies to add more meaning to it. During the phase when he took on the role of producer ( for SEED), he must have thought that it would be an interesting career to be both in front and behind the camera ( plus I think he also has a business nose that he wanted to test, and he actually said that he used the Buena Vista business model of Disney for his plans for SEED). Some of those choices ( Deception, Viva Laughlin, a few announced projects which did not come about... and even Origins:Wolverine, a FOX studio project but where SEED was a key producer) did not turn out too happily and he gave up being producer ( except for the deal which included The Wolverine), but there must be some lessons there that he must have appreciated and from where he might be able to find some meaning in his future career moves.

Maybe I am also pragmatic - it will not always be a glittering script or a touted role -- so long as there comes along something where he will shine and be fully recognized for his acting ability, I will go along with his choices. It is like working in a big corporation and even occupying an important position -- you will have to do both the professional and highly satisfying projects/jobs along with the other humdrum responsibilities that come with the job.

Hugh has never been someone who has said that he will not work unless everything meets his artistic fulfilment needs - Butter, Happy Feet, Viva Laughlin ( but look at how Glee and Smash have later on been received!), Flushed Away, Snow Flower - some he will do for fun or to accomodate someone --even the ads he does -- they will come along once in a while...and they are part of his career. Some may not like his Wolverine connection, but that was what brought along all the other opportunities, including Broadway! But then there come along The Fountain, The Prestige, Australia, Les Miserables, The Wolverine and Prisoners..and his more glittering choices onstage.

I don't think he has any illusions to be the next Lawrence Olivier or the next Meryl Streep or even Daniel Day Lewis ( who, it is said may take as long as 5 years to accept a new role)...he is just Hugh! And that is perfectly alright with me...

Jo

[carouselkathy]

Jo,

I agree. I do have to say, though, that FLUSHED AWAY is one of his finest achievements. I sometimes show it to my students when we're stuck inside at recess on a rainy day. It's always one of their favorites. Mine too.

[suefb]

Oct 20, 2013 21:42:10 GMT -5 birchie said:

Oct 20, 2013 16:53:01 GMT -5 jo said:

Chappie is just a filler thing - he said he will down in South Africa for only a couple of weeks. His role is likely to be a small one- maybe like Butter? Hugh is industrious and likes to keep busy all the time, although I suspect he is also looking forward to spending the time in his beloved Nelson Mandela's land? He and Deb once paid a visit to that city. Another suspicion - maybe at the time he accepted it, the prospect of when Houdini might be ready was still ( maybe still is) rather murky. Otherwise, early next year will already be committed to serious rehearsals for that show? PLus occasionally he likes to dabble in fun projects, which I would classify CHAPPIE to be one of them.

Jo

I understand all that & that it's only a couple of weeks. The point wasn't the time it will take but goes along with the view that he sometimes makes poor choices. Some of his "filler" movies have been less than stellar! My fingers are crossed that Chappie will at least be watchable.
Sue

It's always easy to look back and wish he hadn't chosen certain projects. But at the time, I believe everything he's done had some promise and probably "spoke" to him in some way, so I can't harp on him too much for his choices.

Besides, I find all of his projects watchable in at least some way (well, namely, they all have him in the cast! ). Even Snow Flower ... it could have been a very interesting film. I liked the premise and the story, but it wasn't executed in a very interesting way. Hugh's part was minimal (done more or less as a favor, I understand...?) and really needed his character to be more of a "cad" to enhance the conflict between the two women. But hey, at least we got his Mandarin singing out of it.

[jo]

I agree. I do have to say, though, that FLUSHED AWAY is one of his finest achievements. I sometimes show it to my students when we're stuck inside at recess on a rainy day. It's always one of their favorites. Mine too

LOL - I also enjoy watching it very much together with my sister's very young grandchildren when they are in town! More than just watching it through their eyes, I have fond memories of London and have some great friends who are Brit.

Didn't Hugh say that part of the reasons he took on this role was because it would be something that his own children would enjoy watching.

Some movie buffs do not like to see their favorite "actors" do non-serious and non-dramatic roles smiley-rolleyes010

Jo

[jo]

A review focused on how important the character of Keller Dover is in setting the tone for the movie --

indymoviereviews.blogspot.com/2013/10/prisoners-movie-review.html?m=0

Indy Movie Reviews
Tuesday, October 22, 2013Prisoners movie review.

A recurring motif in Prisoners, the first English language film from director Denis Villeneuve, is the inner angels and demons struggle within people. Using religion as a prime theme, the film seeks to show what can drive a person over the edge, warping their morality in the process. People can bear crosses, quote scripture, and all that jazz, but under times of intense crises, it’s still entirely possible for them to become obsessive, violent, and reckless under extreme stress. This is the ultimate struggle represented in Prisoners, and that’s only part of what makes this movie so compelling. Haunting, and even blood curdling at times, Prisoners takes influence from the grisly mood of David Fincher’s filmography, and crafts a classic thriller in the process.

In a small town at Thanksgiving, while two families are having dinner, the youngest daughters of each disappear mysteriously. The father of one girl, Keller Dover (Hugh Jackman), searches relentlessly for the two, but not without sometimes butting heads with Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal), the man overseeing the investigation. A prime suspect of the kidnapping is Alex Jones (Paul Dano), a mentally handicapped man who owned an RV that the two girls were seen playing around with, but Loki, with a lack of hard evidence against Jones, has to release him, much to the dismay of Dover. In an act of desperation, Dover kidnaps Jones, holds him hostage in an old house, often receiving reluctant help from his friend Franklin Birch (the father of the other missing girl, played by Terrence Howard), and doing unspeakable things until Jones gives them satisfactory information.

It’s been quite a long time since any movie has made me squirm while watching it. First shout out for this goes to the direction and writing. The combined forces of Villeneuve and writer Aaron Guzikowski work to establish a tangible, intense tone that works its way into the great subtext and character development presented in the film. The film moves at a methodical pace, and receives most of its strength from the spectacular build up of events that create a sense of mistrust and dread, particularly aided by the blue tinted camera work and dark lighting that enhances the disturbing mood (Kudos on this deed to the legendary Roger Deakins). Even at what might have been a punishing two and a half hours, the film is never anything less than compelling, particularly during the film’s unsettling torture scenes (Kudos here go out to editors Joel Cox and Gary Roach).

What ultimately end up making this movie work so well are the characters and the actors. These characters all convey a completely believable portrait of grief, and violence, and the performers cast in these roles are all so well directed, so smartly used, and work together to form a whole that never takes attention away from another. This is where much of the complexity of Prisoners lies. Of course, while the ensemble as a whole is nothing short of phenomenal, much of the film’s focus and psychological insight is directed at Hugh Jackman’s Keller Dover, a simple, but inspired approach that perfectly represents the struggles of all the characters. In many ways, I see Jackman’s performance in Prisoners as an anti-Jean Valjean. He’s a deeply religious man, but he becomes more reckless and aggressive as the film goes on. He’s understandable in how he wants to rescue his daughter, but he’s constantly committing hostile actions against a man that he has no solid evidence against. Dover beats Jones, threatens to break his hand with a hammer, and rigs a shower system that sprays him with scalding hot water. It’s surprisingly pretty frightening. We can sympathize with his obsession to save his daughter, but can we justify the heinous acts he commits, or should we condemn them? The film is smart to never directly answer this itself, and instead leave it to audience interpretation. It’s an excellent analysis that provides great commentary, and Jackman is simply stunning in the role.

When you add all of this together, Prisoners becomes nothing short of a spectacular film. It isn’t for the squeamish, but for those who can stomach the disturbing tone, they’ll most likely find a lot to admire. Prisoners is far and away one of the best films I’ve seen all year.


***** / *****

[jo]

Review written by a member of the Roman Catholic Clergy --

www.catholicleader.com.au/news.php/reviews/exploration-of-making-evil-choices_86882

Exploration of making evil choices
Published: 27 October 2013


PRISONERS: Starring Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Maria Bello, Viola Davis, Terrence Howard, Melissa Leo and Len Cariou. Directed by Denis Villeneuve. 156 minues. Rated MA 15+ (Strong themes and violence).

PRISONERS is one of the strongest dramas of 2013.

It has been directed by Canadian Denis Villeneuve, who made a great impact with his Oscar-nominated film, Incendies.

He has not failed in his follow-up film.

There are many prisoners in this film, some held in abduction and detention, some trapped in their own personalities.

On paper, the plot about the abduction of two little girls might seem fairly straightforward.

The police investigate. The fathers become involved. The mothers share in the grief.

The search goes on over many days and the audience is always unsure of the outcome.

The film opens with two hunters stalking a deer in a wintry November setting.

The soundtrack has a recitation of the Lord's Prayer.

There will be themes of hunting during the film.

There will be some Christian themes.

Two families celebrate Thanksgiving together, the Dovers and the Birches.

Keller Dover is played by Hugh Jackman in one of his best roles and Maria Bello is his wife. The Birches are played by Terrence Howard and Viola Davis.

Before the meal the two little girls go for a walk and want to play on a camper van parked in the street. After the dinner, they disappear as does the camper van.

The film is powerful, showing the desperation of Dover.

An intense man, a carpenter and builder, he is a reformed alcoholic and a devout Christian, listening to tapes in his car.

Angered by the seeming lack of effort by the police, he takes the search into his own hands with brutal and devastating results.

He persuades his friend Franklin Birch to join him to find the girls.

In the meantime, it is Jake Gyllenhaal as the local detective, who has never lost a case, using police methods to try to track down the lost girls.

It is one of Gyllenhaal's best performances also, a loner, serious, with several tattoos, and no back-story.

It is inevitable that the detective and Dover will clash.

There has been controversy about the torture sequences in the film, whether they are too brutal, or if they bring home to the audience what is truly happening in the interrogation.

Many have seen this plot line as echoing Americans taking people captive, interning them, torturing them, the superior Americans, righteous, against those they perceive as enemies, right or wrong.

And the possibility is always there that they are wrong.

Central to the film is the man accused of abducting the girls.

An accident in his early life has meant that he has an IQ of a boy about 10 years old.

He is played by Paul Dano, a versatile actor who does not always take on sympathetic roles.


The audience is puzzled about his role in the taking of the girls because there seems no real evidence against him, which makes the interrogation more brutal.

Another suspect enters the picture and is pursued by the detective, interrogated, his house searched, but the connection is not what the audience expects.

One of the difficulties in investigations is the credibility of the witnesses, and a presumption that they will be telling the truth. Here, vicious lies are told.

There is a strong supporting cast with Len Cariou as an alcoholic priest and, especially the versatile actress Melissa Leo, who appears in many films, several in 2013, playing different roles and characters.

But it is the focus on Hugh Jackman's strong character and the counter-balance of Gyllenhaal's detective which makes this a strong drama, even to the final moments.

This is a dark exploration of human nature, evil choices begetting evil consequences.

Sombre but strong.

Reviewed by Fr Peter Malone MSC

Fr Peter Malone MSC is an associate of the Australian Catholic Office for Film and Broadcasting.

[JH4HJ]

Oct 19, 2013 18:10:06 GMT -5 birchie said:

I completely disagree with that reviewer-whoever he/she may be! That line "Hugh Jackman seems headed towards emotional territory certain to over-extend his limited dramatic reach" That person has obviously not seen much of Hugh's work in movies. As for the other actors being quieter & him being barky & loud!!!!!! Hello stupid reviewer person!!!! they are called characters and they are written that way!!!! <bash> <tantrum> <rant> I guess this person failed to see the moments of Keller's restrained anguish, which I thought were some the the best performed moments in the film...by anyone!!! End of rant!

I agree, Sue. And, yes, Jo, I've seen the interview about the hammer scene. Hugh always gives his best. Even "mediocre" from Hugh would still be far better than most "popular" film stars these days. I guess I disagree with some of the director's choices, which is usually the problem for me where Hugh is involved. He has proved himself capable of an incredible range, but I feel he is sometimes lead off in the wrong direction. (I've only seen this once. I need to watch it again. I will keep all the comments here in mind.)

It's a matter of individual "taste" of course. I'm fond of "subtle" acting techniques. Even Brando, whom I admire, can sometimes be "too much" for me. Peck and Tracy had this amazing ability to just "be" there. When I can see the "work" of acting taking place it intrudes on my "willing suspension of disbelief" and lessens my enjoyment.

...although some characters, like Wolverine, are meant to be "over the top" at times, so that works OK for me.

[jo]

A belated review, but very resonant with many of the film's audience --

themoviepencil.com/movie-review-forget-thor-2-prisoners-movie-moment/

Movie Review: Forget Thor 2, Prisoners is the movie of the moment….

Posted by MoviePencil | on November 16, 2013 | No Comments

Prisoners is a 2013 American thriller film directed by Denis Villeneuve that has an ensemble cast including Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Viola Davis, Maria Bello, Terrence Howard, Melissa Leo, and Paul Dano.

Movies with ensemble casts tend to arrest my attention; there must be something about the film to make all these A-list actors decide to feature in it (I can assure you it’s probably not the pay-check).

To cut the whole 2hrs 33mins of film short, the movie is about two girls who were kidnapped on their street and the search carried out to find them.


‘Prisoners’ is not a film for the immature, it delves into areas of emotional complexity and ethical decisions that one cannot fathom to understand without experience….. A great man once said, you cannot be a faithful high priest until you have experienced what the other person is experiencing first hand….this is an example of such times.

Great performances from all the actors but I would like to commend Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal! Hugh sheds his wolverine persona and pours out a character so emotionally torn yet strategically thinking and looking for a way to find his daughter. He is the only one barking up the right tree but he is not deterred as the fate of his daughter is the most important thing at the moment.

Jake Gyllenhaal is torn between the laxity of the law he represents and his desire to ensure he finds two missing little girls.

Prisoners presents you with a story that would make you ask, ‘what would I do’ or at least make you argue with your friends the ethical correctness of decisions carried out by the characters. It would also leave a couple of us with the, ‘God forbid’ syndrome and others with the, ‘thank God we don’t have crazy people like that here’ syndrome. Whichever the case, you cannot but have emotions boiling up to the surface while watching Prisoners.

The most amazing thing about the film however to me is the end. I tend to really detest climaxes like this one (I hated the end of ‘The Place Beyond The Pines’) but I cannot help but feel like it was an exceptional way to end this particular story.

Take out time to watch this film if you haven’t already, it is amazing story telling with solid acting all wrapped into a potential awards magnet. You don’t want to wonder, when it starts snatching em statuettes.

Rating: 8.5/10