Stolen

Little flaws in production design can distract viewers from the story. Here, we have Josh Lucas and his wife losing their home to foreclosure in 1958, yet they own a brand new Rambler. The set-up would have been more persuasive if the family car had been something from the late 40s or early 50s. The boys' hair styles, particular John's, are likewise out of place. Further, most of the male actors are chronically showing about a 4-day growth of beard. Some of those characters might be expected to shave only occasionally, but not so for Thomas Atkins, a police detective. I found the pacing far too slow and the movie was the longest 91-minute flick I've ever seen. The story never grabbed me by the collar as it needed to. Quickie, casual sex while standing up and fully clothed is another silly cliché that detracts from the plausibility of the story. I'm quick to defend movies that have been unfairly maligned by critics, such as "Bonfire of the Vanities," but this DVD box is headed for the donation bin of the local thrift shop.

I have to admit that I have never watched Mad Men, so Jon Hamm is, in a sense, new to me. I am sure I have seen him in other shows, but I do not recall any at the moment. He plays Detective Tom Adkins, who is looking for his son, who disappeared eight years earlier. Simultaneously, we see the story of Matthew Wakefield (Josh Lucas), who is trying to find work to help his three children after his wife dies. His son disappears while he is having a hot time with another man's wife (Morena Baccarin). There are similarities between the two disappearances. Akins is determined to find out what happened to Wakefield's son, and that leads him to a creepy James Van Der Beek. But, he must decide if he will let his life be ruined searching, or if he will embrace his wife and move on. I enjoyed seeing Rhona Mitra (Passion of the Priest, Hollow Man, and The Life of David Gale) as Tom's wife. She always brings an energy to her roles that make them enjoyable.

Do yourself a favor...watch this movie! Josh Lucas, John Hamm, and James Van Byke all give wonderfully superb performances in this dual plot story. The story of 2 fathers in different eras with the same issue, searching for his missing son is woven to perfection. An extremely pressing and reoccurring theme set the base for a beautifully sad story that occurs so often in so many places. The scripting was wonderful and the settings are so natural and not overpowering as many Hollywood films are. I'd kept this on my netflix queue for so long, I started to watch it three times before I fully committed. I was sorry I'd postponed it so long. Such a beautiful film with stellar performances. Watch watch!

I normally loath movies about the kidnapping of children but this one was fabulous! As always, Lucas performs perfectly - as does the rest of the cast. The greatest thing about this movie is the subtlety. You know what's been done to these children but it never crosses that line and shows you or goes into any great detail about it, which I very much appreciated. The characters were developed very well without long blocks of the movie taken up with boring development. The plot was easy to follow yet still intricate enough to hold your interest. I was taken aback somewhat by the revelation of the killer although I had a suspicion all along. Only had one problem with the movie and that was the fact that a cop was allowed full access to a prisoner who was a suspect in the disappearance of the cops son. That would not have happened in "real life" and I found that to be a bit distracting. Excellent movie, finely acted and written. I would highly recommend to anyone.

At the end of the credits, I always read all the credits after every movie I watch because you learn things, was The Boy in The Box. I researched that and found out that there had been a murder of a small boy, 4 or 5, in rural PA back in 1957 who was found in a card board box by the side of a road. It has never been discovered who he was, and many detectives and others have tried solving the case over the years. He is known as America's unknown child. You can google the boy in the box to read more of this unsolved homicide. Tragic and sad. But after seeing the movie and reading about this case, it was closely related and interesting to see how the movie was loosely based on some of the facts of the real case. I thought the movie was well done.

Perhaps the most daunting prospect for anyone wanting to watch this film is not piecing together the identification of a serial killer, it is watching the unraveling of the police detective and his marriage as the loss of his son, grabbed whilst momentarily out of sight, taunts him even eight years after it happened. This film does not let go of the torture this father endures as he tries to piece together all the similarities between his loss and that of a previous child whose body has been discovered. We observe how his wife comes slowly to terms with the fact her son may be dead, but he cannot let go. The story is never easily told perhaps because the director wished us to explore the notion that reality is seldom something we confront without absolute proof. At times the acting is so real we may feel like giving up on this father because if he cannot let go then we can, but we persevere as he does. Although I felt the story could have been better told I did end up admiring this work simply because it is very human exposing all the faults and frailties of our lives. It is also ultimately cathartic with a natural release with allows us to breathe again. It is certainly a fine film and well worth watching.

I had never heard of this movie but saw it on Netflix and it looked interesting so I gave it a try. Wow, I was hooked, such powerful acting by Josh Lucas, Jon Hamm and James Van Der Beek. I haven't read all the reviews here so I don't know if anyone else has mentioned it but the makeup department definitely deserves praise for the job they did with the age makeup. The story really caught my attention, I loved how it was intertwined between the past and the present and I really enjoyed the final confrontation. I really would recommend this movie, you won't be disappointed.

I had never heard of this film before chancing upon it recently. The premise sounded OK so I decided to watch it expecting something very much run of the mill. The film centres on a policeman's (Jon Hamm) search to uncover the truth behind the discovery of a 50 year old corpse of a child. It also interweaves the story of a young man (Josh Lucas) and his 3 sons as he struggles to support his family in 1950's America. The 1950's storyline in particular is dealt with extremely well but both story lines link well together throughout the movie. I have never seen anything of Hamm's previous work and only Posieden of Lucas but was impressed by both actors who conveyed the sense of loss of a child impressively throughout. Lucas in particular was I thought outstanding. The children in the film were also impressive especially Jimmy Bennett. The rest of the cast had less to work with and the characters weren't fully fleshed out but this was probably due to the relatively short running period of the film. Once it hits its stride (fairly early on) this film never lets go. I found it quite moving and disturbing at the same time and for viewers with children this film will hit home in particular. Whilst it does have a few flaws, for a relatively low budget film this is extremely impressive.

This guy Anders Anderson is supposedly a hot shot new director, but he's unable to handle the present vs. flashback aspect of this movie without making a jumbled mess. To be fair, jumbled mess or not, the film held my interest enough to score it 6/10. I found no fault with either the acting or the cinematography, but the continuity is a scramble. (Big SPOILER coming). The sex scene proves director Anderson knows little about sex: The hero and his girl have sex fully clothed except for the girl's shoulders. The man bangs the girl hard against an unvarnished wooden door with total disregard for bruises (or splinters). Both people have expressions of pain on their faces, as if they were being stuck with a draw-blood needle by an amateur nurse. Their sexual encounter lasts for substantially less than 20 seconds. If the director had read SEX FOR DUMMIES he'd know it's smart to undress first, avoid doing it standing up, and for Heaven's sake a man ought to take at least as long with sex as he'd take eating a Happy Meal. Maybe longer. Maybe better. WOW! Is that not romance made in Heaven.

The plot is pretty simple: a man who is searching for his lost son gets wrapped up in a parallel mystery from 50 years earlier. It isn't intended to be a Hitchcockian thriller with lots of action, twists & turns, but instead it's a great character study into the mind of a man who borders on obsession. It asks the questions: when are we supposed to let go, and if we do pursue closure, at what cost? Over the course of his many-year investigation, the man's life becomes a total mess, and in that respect we see some interesting parallels with the excellent Clint Eastwood film "In the Line of Fire" (about a secret service agent who fails to save JFK and who is tasked with foiling a similar assassination decades later). Both films ask us what is the difference between perseverance and obsession? The answer, even after the credits roll, is up to you. Something I really liked about this film is the way the director used surrealism to blend the two timelines, 1958 and 2008. Scenes would blend seamlessly from one to the other. For example, there's one shot in a bar where the camera flows through the room beginning in 2008 and ending in 1958 without any cuts. This subtle style, in addition to the underlying mystery of the whole story, forces the audience to keep on their toes. The basic plot is pretty straightforward, but there are a lot of background questions & themes that are not as obvious. These questions give the film substance. Religion is a minor theme that crops up visually in the form of crucifixes and subtle lighting effects. Guilt is another subtle yet powerful theme. I also sense a bit of existentialism in that the heroes are subjected to some rotten luck without any apparent rhyme or reason, and it is only through the individuals' strength of character that they manage to make it through the day. In all, there's a ton of stuff going on, and if you like your films to be full of philosophy and questions of morality, this will be a real treat for you. Other great films worth checking out are "Changeling" (2008) about a woman searching for her lost son, "A Very Long Engagement" (2004) about a woman searching for a soldier reportedly killed in action, the aforementioned "In the Line of Fire" (1993) about a secret service agent trying to redeem himself for losing JFK, and a wonderful unknown gem called "Into Temptation" (2009) about a priest trying to find a suicidal confessor before it's too late.