Billionaire Ransom

Despite the contrived situation and "Survivors" production style, the story, the acting and the scenery keep things moving along ... until the last section when it all falls in a big heap, as if they ran out of time, money or inspiration. Little and not-so-little inconsistencies in the plot accumulate steadily, gradually becoming more noticeable. I'm happy to suspend reality for a creative tale, well told, so long as whatever takes place is reasonably credible within the context of the story. Take things too far, though, and those inconsistencies become distracting. Reality reasserts itself and the moment is lost. FWIW I suggest you stop watching when the FBI becomes involved and imagine your own conclusion.

I'm not quite sure why reviewers are not warming to this piece. It's interesting all the way to the reform island, I really wanted to see what became of the brat. The island itself is a magical place, very pleasing to the eye, and the movie comes with competent cinematography, but it's authentic, and from the crucible more noble traits arise, a joy to witness. The baddies are well chosen and well played. It's a joy to see them challenged. The soundscape is moving, classical, but not ordinary. The story has been well thought out, there's no fat to trim here. The high altitude of some of the island gels well with pursuit and pursued. Much of it was shot in the rain, a nice touch. You can feel the chill of the climate, juxtaposed against dire desperation. Survival is more a matter of bravery than technique. It's a clever story, professionally done, truly enjoyable, and deserves better mention.

Every trouper in Billionaire Ransom (my latest review), is virtually unknown to me. I mean I have never seen any of these people in any other movies. Oh well, at least the producers got some of them to look like actual celebrities. Lead actor Jeremy Sumptor, is pretty much a cross between Hugh Jackman and Ryan Phillippe. Curly locked Phoebe Tonkin, is a dead ringer for Rebecca Gayheart. Lastly, villain Billy Speck (played by Ed Westwick) sure does give off the whole Justin Timberlake vibe. Anyway, "Billionaire" plays like two separate films altogether. The first hour is all about spoiled, rich kids being taken to a remote, reform school as opposed to going to jail. The last 40-50 minutes are about these same Richie Rich, twentysomethings trying to escape hardened criminals who want to hold them hostage at the same darn school. Echoing 1993's Cliffhanger, Ransom, and The Maze Runner, Billionaire Ransom is by turns violent, bloody, and unabating. It has moments of suspense and relegated strain. However, this British thriller is only mildly compelling compared to Mel Gibson's 1996 hit and Sly Stallone's backyard brawl of an actioner. Released in August, filmed in Wales which is made to look like Scotland, and originally titled Take Down, "Billionaire" hasn't found much of an audience. Based on its current box office state, it might not find much of one on DVD either. Sadly, the budget constraints, the nameless cast, and the action movie clichés might be to blame (I hate it when law enforcement conveniently arrives after everyone has been shooting at each other and bodies are already lying on the ground). In regards to "Billionaire's" character development, well the actor/actress portrayals are unlikable, snide, and defensed. We're talking about young protagonists here and their wealthy parents. These are the people you're inclined to root for. The hostage takers don't count. They're supposed to be vexatious for Pete's sake. As for "Billionaire's" look, undoubtedly it's ultramodern and lush, with the scenery of counterfeit Northern Isles really taking over. The film's musical score by trip hop band Hybrid, makes it all feel Bourne-like as things stir along at a breakneck pace. All in all, Billionaire Ransom senses to be a bit uneven until the gun- filled, second act takes over. And it has a slight twist at the end that almost feels like filler (a rich kid's brother makes a few secret phone calls to the bad guys, hint hint). Bottom line: Based on everything I have just written, the whiff of a rental is exactly what you'll get with Billionaire Ransom. I give it a two and a half star "payoff". Ha!

Very interesting story although not all that original. Phoebe Tonkin is very good. This is somewhat of a suspense movie but on a low scale. Some might say that it's a bit predictable but it's a fun watch even so.

I thought it's going to be a weak "B" movie, but I guess I was wrong. The Cons: A few minor issues in the and the "badguys" make some really rookie mistakes. The CGI is problematic when they shoot their guns. With blanks and fake blood, the movie would get even better. Too much shaky cam. The Pros: The acting is pretty solid, I think there is 1 famous actor in the movie, but the others are also played their roles excellent. I liked the plot too. Even though the movie is about spoiled rich kids, their characters become likable pretty fast. There were a few surprisingly shocking scenes, like the broken arm scene, the practical effect looked really convincing. If you are bored and you have 90 mins to pass, give the movie a chance, it's worth watching.

Excellent thriller. A bit of a slow burn to start with but then the action gets going and it's fun to guess who is and isn't working with Ed Westwick as the evil mastermind. Fun and fast ride with a decent twist ending.

Although, I enjoyed Take Down for what it presents itself, without having too much expectation, I do believe that when you invest a budget of over 11 million USD in a movie, it needs to have a smooth script and storyline first, then you have the means to put the acting on top of that. The matter and fact are not new to me and failure to do so, I saw in countless movies and series, leading to minor to big disasters in respect to the budget invested and the efforts put in. As some reviewers correctly hinted, the movie feels like 2 to 3 movie parts put together. First, you have the young actors and their issues - acceptable development for some, but no background and their overall stories feel disjointed. Aside from some, the others didn't feel spoiled (a mistake). Also, the drama factor between all of them was low. Should have shown that in more problematic ways. No depth shown. Second, you have the parents or basically some of them. Again, aside from basically two (not enough), viewers don't get to know about the others. They are shown together, that's it, they say that a specific place has no electricity but then miraculously stuff happen to be there, working and set up. No depth shown in that section too. Third, You have the hostage takers. Seriously!, their number IMO wasn't enough in the first place, let alone with some (unbelievable) casualties. Basically what happened down there, most of that was because of their low numbers. Their subsequent plans and going after the kids as they did in the movie, wasn't well thought out too leading to how it all ended. Let alone their carelessness. So, why I rated it the way I did? That's because of its cinematography, scenery, some good acting and entertainment value. What the writers and producers failed to understand is what you want to do with your movie in the first place, if there is the slightest feel that the story, expenditures and budget do not match, there are potentially big plot holes and the whole picture will probably be seen as weak, disjointed or lacking solid logic throughout, then it's a mistake to even begin with. Not film it and then hope for the best. Look what happened, the movie was not bad and above average, but because of the mentioned and some other things that more experienced persons will see, it failed miserably at the theaters and almost no one felt like promoting it. Cutting my tales short, I just would like to recommend this movie to pass a nice time, watch some beautiful scenery and have the story unfold before your eyes, without having too much expectation, while at the same enjoying some good and fierce acting, among others, Phoebe Tonkin's one.

I'm not quite sure why reviewers are not warming to this piece. It's interesting all the way to the reform island, I really wanted to see what became of the brat. The island itself is a magical place, very pleasing to the eye, and the movie comes with competent cinematography, but it's authentic, and from the crucible more noble traits arise, a joy to witness. The baddies are well chosen and well played. It's a joy to see them challenged. The soundscape is moving, classical, but not ordinary. The story has been well thought out, there's no fat to trim here. The high altitude of some of the island gels well with pursuit and pursued. Much of it was shot in the rain, a nice touch. You can feel the chill of the climate, juxtaposed against dire desperation. Survival is more a matter of bravery than technique. It's a clever story, professionally done, truly enjoyable, and deserves better mention.

I enjoyed this one which was a pleasant surprise, actors were not known to me but they did a great job. Great setting.

It's good. Remebered watching this alone in the cinema sad it was not received well