Surveillance

This must be the worst thriller I have seen in a long long time. The directing, the acting and the adaptation of the story leave what could probably have been a good plot into a meaningless waste of time. Within a few minutes of watching the film it was easy to figure out the whole plot and then there are more obvious clues very early on leaving no mystery. I guessed this within the first few minutes and I kept hoping I was wrong and much to my dismay I was not. The film starts off with two FBI agents who drive to a remote town to investigate a murderous spree which has left three witnesses, a young girl, a drug addict and a cop. They are interviewed under surveillance cameras separately and each tells their account of the day. Each has something to hide about themselves and the day unfolds as they tell their accounts. This part is probably the saving grace and if developed could have made this film better. Spoiler: The whole story ends in the FBI agents being the actual killers and the young girl is the only one who has figured this out and so left unhurt by them. Why do they go through the whole charade of interviewing three witnesses and bonding with the young girl if their idea had been to kill them in the first place? How did they get away with pretending to be FBI agents (when you discover that real FBI agents had been killed and their badges were found on them)? How did they know how to set up and use the surveillance cameras? Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond are so unconvincing from the beginning to the end. Maybe the idea is to develop their characters for the revelation at the end. Come on, they both look ridiculous, stupid and not sinister in the least. The character of the young girl is also wasted potential. There is no meaning to her actions and no meaning to whom she prefers to bond with in her ordeal. She does not appear distressed, but rather detached which again is not explained. Awful film on the whole.

I just got home from seeing this film in Paris. All I could think during the film, and as I made a mad dash for the exit when the credits started to roll, was that it made me ashamed to be an American -- or at least ashamed to be associated by my nationality with anything to do with this film. The style in Hollywood nowadays, it seems, is to be as spectacularly violent as possible and to avoid at all costs providing any character a moral compass. While some fine films are made ("The Assassination of Jesse James," "Babel," "Gone, Baby, Gone," "No Country for Old Men," to name just a few), the impression we give to the world by our film-making is that we are a country of ugly, violent barbarians. This film is in no way on par with the above examples of truly great film-making, but only shares with them the projection of Americans as violent, bloodthirsty, dishonest, amoral, and reprehensible - if not by the characters we portray then in our taste for bloodier and bloodier cinematic portrayals of sociopathic Americans. I'm no prude when it comes to film violence, and I don't want to advocate against creative freedom, but this film is the worst of our worst. Even the nine-year old child in this story has no redeeming qualities ferchrissakes, with an inexplicable lack of morality or emotion - or even a shred of humanity - despite enduring perhaps the most brutal and revolting experiences a human being could suffer. And the film, like every one of its characters, has absolutely no redeeming qualities whatsoever. My advice: Stay away. I only wish I had, and I only wish its distributors had spared France the dubious privilege of its advanced release. I was tempted to stand at the exit and apologize to every Parisian as they exited, and ask them to at least TRY not to judge us based on the travesty they'd just witnessed. The only thing that stopped me was the greater urge to distance myself from the theater as fast as my feet would carry me. Feh!

The FBI agents Elizabeth Anderson (Julia Ormond) and Sam Hallaway (Bill Pullman) come to a police station in the middle of the desert to interview the three survivors of a massacre of a serial-killer that they are hunting. The girl Stephanie (Ryan Simpkins); the junkie Bobbi Prescott (Pell James) and the abusive patrol officer Jack Bennett (Kent Harper) are placed in separate rooms and their hearings are recorded through cameras under the surveillance of Agent Sam. Each one tells part of the gore event; when three bodies are found in a motel, the solution of the case seems to be near to be resolved. "Surveillance" is a weird thriller that uses the idea of "Rashomon", with three persons telling different views of a tragic event. I personally disclosed the plot point based on the weird behavior of Sam Hallaway, but anyway the surprising twist gives a totally different sequence to the result of the investigation. After the uncomfortable "Boxing Helena", Jennifer Lynch returns with another sick and violent story and bizarre characters. I liked this movie but it is recommended for very specific audiences. My vote is seven. Title (Brazil): "Sob Controle" ("Under Control")

What really irritated me is that it was not at all the kind of movie that I wanted to watch. I expected a kind of "detective story" and didn't expect the total turnaround the script takes. Not that I don't like being surprised by a well-constructed script. It's just that the movie should be re-branded and viewers should be warned that it is NOT a story of "FBI investigates killings" but of "perverse mentally sick killer couple are presented as romantic heroes in this twisted and unrealistic story". Now I understand that some viewers actually enjoy this type of movie, including depictions of particularly vicious killings. That's fine. There is a genre called "horror movies" for that type of content. I simply want to warn viewers who have more mainstream tastes that they will be disappointed, perhaps even sickened, by this movie.

A good thriller and I was hooked into this film within the first Ten Minutes and stayed involved for the entire ride. It kept me guessing throughout. The contrast between eerie cop shop and stark, beautiful prairies is a stylish treat for the eyes. The performances are believable and compelling. Well cast, without exception. The little girl is surprisingly good. Her even performance made me wonder about what had happened to her and drew me into the story. The ending is a clever, eerie choice. I was taken completely by surprise and I usually predict a ending a mile away Not In this case. It could have gone much further in that vein. Instead the tension relied upon intelligent visual storytelling. Kudos to everyone involved. I thoroughly enjoyed this film it left me Wanting More!

I do not know what today's movie goers expect, but after 68 years of movie watching.. (Well maybe I didn't watch many movies in the first 9 - 10 years, so make that 58 years of movie watching) I expect to be entertained, not bored to tears, assaulted by continuous profanity (every other word) and idiotic scenes of violence that are presented in with no other purpose in mind but to show blood splattering and body parts being mangled. Surveillance is one of those movies that was made by people who have NO imagination, little if any talent, a total inability to tie scenes together and an unreasonable trait of letting a scene go on and on, long after the purpose for it has elapsed. That anyone would ever think that this was a worthwhile movie, when it is nothing more that Hollywood garbage is beyond me. As a combat veteran I have seen violence, blood and gore, in many forms, and movies like We were soldiers is about as violent as a movie can get, but it has redeeming value. Surveillance must have been dreamed up by persons in a drug induced stupor, with no writing ability, no directorial training, no experience in film editing, and a total lack of contact with reality. Just a stupid movie of two serial killers posing as FBI agents, setting up a scenario to kill some stupid foul mouth cops, etc.. A high priced piece of garbage that only an idiot could like...

This is a snuff movie. I'm shocked it is even considered to be in the IMDb library. And, Bill, Julia, and all other "professional" actors involved should be ashamed to be part of this sick flick. I thought I was going to view a somewhat classic horror film with a creative end that writers like to invent....that usually make no sense when writing a horror film, but as a viewer, we try to rationalize and understand. This ending was not creative. It was sick and has all the earmarks of a snuff movie. I am shocked it was edited to this ending, and more shocked that it will be out for distribution by the end of June 2009. It should not be shown in a theater. It is harmful to innocent minds on many levels....watch the movie, the ending, and you will understand this statement. Plus, included in the plot is a sweet little girl "not yet 9" her character says. She is not in the snuff ending, but she is an integral part of the movie. Why do directors feel they need to shock with a sick flick in order to get recognition? The director is in the wrong line of work if she thinks this is an art film.

1st, let me say that I'm an ordinary person (i.e., not an industry person) who pays to see 50-100 films a year -- and I do not go to horror flicks 2nd, I rely on IMDb ratings and reviews to shape my movie choices, and wish there had been more accurate, reliable info on this before I saw it (when it opened in Vienna) 3rd, this is the first review I've written after ~10 years of being a part of IMDb the best thing I can say about this is that it's a low-grade B movie -- a psychotic-thriller about wanton torture & murder I find no redeeming value in this movie ... I do not walk out of movies, but this one deserved it! the "FBI agents" are not very convincing the small-town cops are stereotyped to an unbelievable extreme (shooting tires out of vehicles to stop and abuse/ terrify them) Ryan Simpkins as Stephanie gives a gem of a performance in this otherwise ridiculous movie, a breath of reality in this sordid mess ... but I feel sad for her personally, since 10 year old kids shouldn't be exposed to this wickedness (hence it's rating) many alternatives would be preferable to spending time watching this -- taking a nap, visiting a trauma room in an ER on Halloween, going to a park, watching open heart surgery, dancing, having a colonoscopy without anesthetic, etc.

Jennifer Lynch's first feature since "Boxing Helena" is the worst film I've seen this year. The script is an inept mess and the direction is clueless. The characters are cardboard cutouts with indecipherable motivations. Editing-wise, this looks like a salvage job. FBI agents are investigating a series of murders. Which means they are also investigating themselves. Jennifer is not David, but she tries to be. The problem is, she doesn't have his talent or his ability to create a real, identifiable world into which darkness can be threaded. This is all darkness and all misery. Lynch opts for a cynical, boring, pandering "thriller" with no thrills. The violence is graphic at times, but it has no context. Worse, there is not one character we care about. That this sorry nonsense just won top prize at Sitges (over the way superior "Martyrs" and the fresh "Let The Right One In") is a disgrace, and undermines that fine festival's credibility. Don't believe any hype about this. It's abysmal.

This film was ruined, as far as I can see, by the twist at the end, and by the directing in most parts. Until the twist was revealed, I'd assumed that Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond were simply giving the worst performances of their careers. As it happens, they were doing a reasonable job, but to no avail. The dialogue was utterly abysmal. I think Lynch is trying to create an atmosphere of complete discomfort for the audience by employing this 'trick', but instead it only serves to hamper any character development. Rather than create a creepy-but-socially-adaptable character in Sam Hallaway, Pullman and Lynch have turned him into someone who appears to be suffering from the after-effects of a lobotomy. He also spends the entire film looking like he has a cricked neck, which looked utterly stupid. Essentially it's a good premise for a film, and it was occasionally tense and gripping. However, there's something missing, and I felt that whatever it was turned what could have been a great thriller into something slightly farcical.