you should have realized that Alex was innocent as soon as they showed the video clip of the first missing child and his mother said it was "before Detective Loki's time"
You know from the start I knew there was something fishy about that woman but it's simply the way they connected the dots - masterpiece in storytelling.
either you don't know what good movies are or you're just pretending to be a dick. Also it is pretty predictable that you are going to defend yourself saying "OPINIONS".
But the movie has a pseudo happy ending. Loki failed so many times, it would be completely natural to see him failing one last time as his character trait dictates, a mystery film with a bad detective failing at the end can be considered something creative, a different take. But no, the bad detective completed his job, it almost feels offensive imo. The message is like... you can fail in your job constantly, it doesn't matter, the job will be done at the end.
He might be talking about the part where Loki hears the whistle. As soon as I saw the red whistle down in that whole I knew something like that ending would happen (and yeah I know there's probably no point in responding to this comment anymore lol)
TheAlpacaAlliance I figured the whistle would come into play when Dover finds it and you heard the mom say "Yeah she keeps insisting that they found the whistle" when talking to Loki, so obviously they were going to end up with Dover using the whistle. But it was a still damn good movie
He meant everything was gonna be alright predictable. No real threat as in everything is fine and dandy ending. Would've been cool if they didn't make it, then that would be predictable. Come on people. This movie requires you to think and see. So does Jeremy obviously hinting that good guys win. Though Hugh Jackman's character is going to jail after he was found anyway for torturing Alex Jones.
Yuri Lopes I didnt at all I was in shock when she take the gun and shoot Yo g... and the movie didnt let you gues that she is the one by give you a guy that have the clothe of those girls
This film was nominated for Best Cinematography. Apart from that it didn't get nominated for other things because 2013 was a stacked year. There were A LOT of great performances and films and all of them were mostly interchangeable with others that didn't get nominated. It had nothing to do with "good political movies".
SPOILERS! I understand, I related because I predicted how the end would turn out right about when Hugh Jackman found the whistle. Though I predicted it, I was disappointed. I thought that Alex's father was the corpse in the priest's cellar. Though, earlier in the movie I thought Alex's dad brainwashed Alex to kidnap children before he left.
+jimuel sanoy I've seen so many disgraceful comments such as this, but you degenerates don't seem to get it. Read my fucking lips, no one fucking cares about your Last Of Us shit, we are here to discuss prisoners. If you're just gonna come to these videos to post dumbass comments such as this. Then don't come to it at all.
Predictable? Maybe you're a genius and everyone else is an idiot, but no one I've seen calls this movie predictable. In fact, most critics comment how it ISN'T predictable. I don't know, that just kinda threw me off and I couldn't really follow your review afterwards. I mean, think about it. The consensus for this movie would be average to negative, instead of being positive like it is - were the movie predictable. A crime thriller that's predictable is basically a crime thriller with bad actors. It won't survive fondly in the mainstream eye. Prisoners is not this way, so I have to either doubt the masses or doubt you, and I'm kinda choosing to doubt you given this is the first review I've ever seen from you.
nathan ford I'm not saying to follow the critics. Lol. I'm saying he just states outright "It's predictable" and never explains it. Hence my negative reaction to this. I'm fine with negative criticism, but the way he just states it outright as though it's some truth really bothered me, and so I made the comment.
maybe it was unpredictable in the sense that you wouldn't know who the mastermind was, but it was pretty predictable that the dead body with the maze necklace would come into play and that somewhere someone would be a red herring and things like that . . .
HORRORFAN001bleh To your first part, I don't quite see the point you're trying to make. The scene wouldn't exist if it wasn't to be predicted like that. It would be a pointless scene if it wasn't hinting at the answer. And even then, it's not the 100% right answer that we're lead to if you follow the maze. The maze leads you to the ratty looking guy who Jake Gyllenhall chases through backyards. He isn't the answer, only part of it. So I don't see why you felt you needed to bring that up. Maybe I'm missing what you're going for. As to your second part, that's highly subjective. Most people don't go into a film predicting a red herring, and if they do it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's either the plot requires some sort of complexity - in which not everything can lead to the answer (as is the case of the maze necklace; if it lead to the answer then what's the point of the remaining screen time?) and a red herring (which I might add is not inherently a bad thing, only if it's used in extremes a la David Lynch) is one of the best ways to do this - or the plot is linear and you deem the movie dull as a result. Not every complex movie needs non-linearity, and not every non-linear film is complex, but it's rather difficult to pull off either of those two. Better to enjoy the film for what it has then to assume the upmost top-tier writing.
I dont get why so many people always say something along the lines of "stop dissecting the movie and just enjoy it for what it is!" I can still enjoy something and criticize it as well. (And I did indeed enjoy Prisoners thoroughly) Prisoners is one of the best made films I've ever scene, but to me, the writing isn't on the same level as the rest of the film. You were asking why Jeremy thought the film was predictable and I was merely providing examples of things I found predictable. I admit that the body wasn't a very good example to support my point but I do think it's a good example of the writing problems this movie has. Obviously the dead body has to play some part in the end of the story but the super coincidental way that Loki ends up finding the body is completely ridiculous and convoluted. (Think about it, he randomly visits sex offenders in the area and arrives when one of them is incapacitated which allows him to find a secret room where the dead body of the husband of the person he's looking for is?) It all just seems very unnecessary. They could've incorporated the body in different ways that would fit much better imo. I really don't have a problem with cliches. I understand that all movies contain some type of cliche, but they can still make a movie predictable, which is why I mentioned the red herring, even if it is subjective. If you expect a red herring (which many people will if they've ever seen a crime, mystery thriller) it takes away from the movie. Once again, I did really like Prisoners but that doesn't mean I'm just gonna switch off my brain when I watch it, if I wanted to do that I'd watch something else . . .
HORRORFAN001bleh "stop dissecting the movie and just enjoy it for what it is!" I'm not saying that. I'm saying simply if you look for errors, you'll find what you believe are errors, when they really aren't. The body didn't have to play into the crime itself. It could very easily have been some coincidentally found object that distracted Loki. The priest could have been lying to us about what the body meant... there's a lot that you can reasonably predict from that scene. Basically we don't know for sure, but if you analyze that scene too much, you end up thinking "Well that clearly has to be involved with the case - they could have handled this better, and I think it's a red herring" or you could simply think "I wonder what that body will lead to" which is what the film intends you to do, is it not? I get what you mean, it is a bit much that Loki just happens to stumble upon the husband of the woman who is behind of all this. But only after seeing the film would you know that. And this is what I was talking about. If you look for issues, you find them. If you let things play out, you wouldn't see that issue until after reviewing the film, which it loses a lot of punch it has if you're watching the film for the first time and you're yanked out of the experience by your own attempts to snag on one bit of lesser writing. I mean, sure, the movie isn't a flawless pile of unpredictable perfection that could not be seen as predictable in any way, shape, or form. Everyone sees a movie differently, but it's a bit unfair to the movie with what you want from it. There has to be a clue somewhere, or else you feel no buildup to the climax. What was some event turns into arrows to the answer once you see it, and that aids the film - not hinders it. One of the best examples of this is the first SAW. The body in the middle of the room is so curious and bizarre, and when it gets up and shows us that he's behind it all, it's surprising. Much more so than who shows up last second because the writers didn't dare be predictable to a close analysis.
Seriously it one of the best movies i have ever seen, not bored for a second, the movie keep me captivate all long. The acting was incredible and as soon as i finished the movie i wanted to watch it again. Hugh Jackman surprise me , didn't know he was so good, i watched all of the X-Men movie exept DOFP and he was just ok but man in Prisoners he was just amazing.
SPOILER!!... i want to make a comment about the whistling since it seems some people had an issue with that ending... when it happened and screen went to black it was only about a quarter second that it gave me pause... then i said OF COURSE something i noticed throughout the movie that stood out to me and why it makes the ending PERFECTLY SYMMETRICAL to the rest of the movie is that this is how they ended EVERY SCENE OF DISCOVERY... even the last scene before this one when Jake's character goes to the old house where the guy is being tortured, when he gets to the room we never see him actually getting the guy out of the shower room, it fades to black as soon as it is made obvious to us that he found him... many other scenes were just like that in the movie... go back and look so the implication of the last scene as soon as it went to black was MOMENT OF DISCOVERY... he did in fact find him, which we didn't get to see "happy" ending!
+Mysterious Coconut To be fair, it's so emotionally heavy that chances are that you're gonna miss a few things because you're trying to recover from the scene before it.
That's hilarious to me, as the cinematography was terrible imo! So flaccid and static. There was no real movement, most of it was still shots. If really made the film seem to drag a lot. Worst thing about the film. And it was weird, it didn't look like a movie, more sort of in between tv and film.
Jose Sandoval It was so bland and lifeless, just still shot after still shot. And ever so slightly moving forward, or to one side. The worst thing you can do is make a two and a half hour movie seem long, and flat, flaccid direction does exactly that.
Chris Dynamo You obviously were not even paying attention to the plot or something... because then you wouldn't have been analyzing the camera work. You would have been invested in the story. But that is besides the fact because actually the still filming added to the feel of the movie. The still camera helped me focus... I honestly HATE shaky cam and cameras swinging around. I feel as though that in this particular movie it would have been simply distracting and annoying. With the stillness, it added to the suspense immensely. But anyway... great movie!
David Leckness The topic was the cinematography, what has the plot got to do with that? I was paying attention to the plot, I was invested but the direction was so sluggish that it constantly caught my eye and I'm not someone that often pays attention to this sort of thing. I wasn't asking for shaky camera, just something with a bit more kick.
I was about to say that.. and jake looks like leon in, resident evil 4...well at least if there ever was a resident movie with Leon on it, jake cums close..
+Will M there actually is a Resident Evil movie with Leon in it. It was the latest RE movie, cant remember what its called, but they got a guy who looks just like him except way buffer, but his acting sucks compared to Jake. His acting actually sucks compared to anyone really.
Everyone acted just great, you can see the hate/desperate look in Keller's eyes and the fear in Franklin's eyes. I never imagined the freacking old lady being the abductor, and I didn't know what to think when Alex said "I'm not Alex". I just loved it.
I just want to say that the "predictability" is not really a fault of the movie, it's actually engineered that way. Basically, there's this principle called Chekhov's gun, which is that "if a scene shows a gun, the gun should be used in the plot later." So nothing in this movie that you visualize is supposed to mean nothing. Everything is not predictable through formula but rather the movie directs you with alluding elements. This movie emphasizes on this completely, making everything seem natural. I can name numerous instances of this principle, starting at the very beginning when the son mentions his grandfather's old house. Later in the movie that house is an important location and no dialogue is wasted in exposition saying "oh btw Hugh Jackman has access to this remote area because reasons." Many more are spoiler ridden but to try and be subtle I will mention that the crime the Detective finds out about in the Pastor's house was a huuuuge plot point. At first I thought it wouldn't be tied in well and two very unrelated plot points would be shoehorned, instead everything comes together very well in the 3rd act. So if we understand that the movie INTENDS to help it's audience and give clues early on so we can somehow solve plot points, then you realize the movie is not truly predictable. It is manufactured specifically to immerse you in the story so that nothing seems far fetched, nothing comes out of no where, and each character's motivation is clear and succinct. Just saying, I don't think Jeremy caught that. I think predictability in movies should pertain to the movie being formulaic, and although things do work out as each protagonist intends (generally), it isn't predictable as in you can say "yeah that scene reminded me of X, so predictable." I just don't see that. Although I admit I really did expect at some point the final antagonist would actually be that person. They kept bringing them into the plot, was kind of expectant considering the movie follows Chekhov's Gun.
Err.. Like you don't really need a name for that, it's like storytelling 101. You foreshadow things that are relevant later and don't waste time on things that aren't, unless they're meant to be red herrings. Jeremy knows this, he's just saying that he didn't think this aspect was well executed.
Max White You DO need a name for that because people confuse it for predictability. Something being predictable is more along the lines of a cliche in a movie or storyline, aka why I described predictability as being formulaic. The best example is most Rom-Com's. There is a meet up of two potential lovers, a threshold they cross into their relationship, outside influence to hindrance 1 or even both parties, a reluctant break up, revelation of truth or feeling, and then their rekindling. And you might think that only applies to Rom-Com's but that's even Avatar, Star Wars (iffy), Scott Pilgrim, etc. Romance as a genre or subgenre can be very predictable, as well as Action, thriller, etc. And while I admit there is a general flow to this movie, it's more of a "the good guy wins" predictable movie (or rather "the bad guy gets caught" movie, as I personally didn't anticipate everyone to come out living), not a "It's time for this scene" predictable movie. This movie doesn't really follow any specific paradigm, in fact it really seems to follow events realistically. Could the movie have had a direction that was more abstract and thus left the viewer wondering the whole time? Absolutely, but then you'd have a focus on 1 specific party (likely the father), and that would drain perspective. And that's not the concern of the film. It's a drama first, mystery/thriller second. My only gripe is perhaps some events would be ungodly convenient and contrived if they happened to the same character. Luckily they flesh out two different characters to play the protagonist with The Father and the Detective, so only the audience is truly aware of every clue, and the film is truly engineered to be that way. Not every movie needs to be abstract in order to lack predictability like Enemy or Pulp Fiction or something. TheGamerThing I don't really follow why a potential red herring ( I say potential because he was actually still VERY important to the plot) would qualify as being predictable. And especially when he committed suicide and ended their lead.
Max White Also, after rewatching the actual review, at 2:18 he claims it is predictable and then unknowningly describes Chekhov's Gun. He says " There are moment's when you are like 'that looks trivial, just out of the blue. Something tells me it's not gonna be, so I should remember that.' Then when you see something else that might tie into it, you start piecing things together." That is literally the layman's term description for Chekhov's Gun dude lol. He even says "SOMETHING TELLS ME it's not gonna be (trivial)." That something is the focus and direction from the movie. I promise dude, this movie is not predictable, it is engineered to inform the viewer without giving away the whole truth too quickly.
i think the only thing that was missing from this film was a proper closure both for the film's characters and for us the viewers. After all that shit the characters had been through they should have at least shown Keller being found in the end, even if he had to go to jail, the idea of him dying in that pit without at least knowing that his daughter had been saved is awfully disturbing to me. i hate these kinds of cliffhangers in movies.
That's something director's like to do...they leave the ending to our imagination...remember 'Inception'...even though its a bummer to not exactly know whether Keller was found or not but i kinda like these cliffhangers...they show that life is all about our choices and perceptions.
The screenwriters confirmed an alternate ending that was actually filmed where loki finds keller at the bottom of the pit. they decided to not used because it didn't fit in the director's vision.
***** I haven't seen the other two movies, but the ending of inception had nothing to do with the fact that Nolan didn't have the balls to make a conclusion. He wanted the audience to feel invested in the movie to the point in which they would want to decide the ending for themselves. So no, it's not because he didn't have the balls to make a conclusion, it's because he had enough balls not to make a definite conclusion.
Here's he difference between this movie and inception though. Inception had absolutely no hints as to what the truthful ending was at all. You had to come up with it completely. However in prisoners, they at least gave you some kind of hint that Keller was found because you here him blowing the whistle very faintly. You just had to be smart enough to put 2 and 2 together.
This is my #1 favorite movie. I could watch it over and over and still enjoy it. And the ending makes you think there's going to be a sequel, but once you think piece things together, you realize the ending was just right.
David Riehl That's what I thought as well, but after thinking about it they didn't need another movie. Loki pretty much found Dover from the whistle. Although I'd love to watch more movies about detective Loki.
I don't mind predictability since I NEVER know what's coming which is surprising since I took Media Studies and Film and I should be able to guess endings and what not but nope.
yeah, i heard this review before i decided to watch the movie, and various times while watching this movie i was like "this movie is so not predictable. i had no idea that x was going to happen. i was surprised myself." lol this guy must have read the script if he found this predictable.
Yeah now I feel stupid ._. the only thing I found mildly predictable (spoiler alert obviously) was that earlier on in the film I wondered if Melissa Leo's character was the kidnapper. Although I dismissed it and I was surprised when she pulled out the gun.
This movie is superbly executed. Great timing of the scenes, camera angles, script, awesome acting and superb atmosphere. This shows that movies don't have to have never before seen story to be good. The scenes between Jake and Hugh are so realistic that it's scary. Thumb up!
SPOILERS I GUESS This film made me so angry at the end, angry because something like this could happen in real life and there are actually people like Melissa Leo's character that exist and I hate it! Why do you we have to live in this kind of world?
(Spoilers if you havent seen the movie) Jeremy says that this movie is predictable? He actually says that it was predictable "To the point where I was like the last thing that will happen is this and the last shot of the movie will be this". Im calling bullshit, he predicted not only who the kidnapper was etc. I mean there are a lot of moving parts with Paul Dano and Melissa Leos dead husband and everything else, but he also predicted that the last shot of the movie would be Hugh Jackman trapped in a hole under a car blowing a whistle that his daughter had previously lost while Detective Loki was standing outside and he most likely hears the whistle and will find him? That makes no sense, the movie is not predictable.
yeah...predictable my ass. No way you could predict the final shot, that was way too off the beaten path to ever guess. Thank you Jeremy for at least not giving this movie 'A good time, no alcohol required' or whatever tour de force bullshit you rank these movies without the Marvel titles as
Don't blame yourself for your own stupidity, c'mon now. Why show Jackman's character obsession with survival techniques... just like that, they will show all that for nothing? Of course there will be a scene featuring this behavior in some sort of way. You can't predict the role itself, but you can predict the scenario. Try to read some Agatha Christie novels. When clues are so evident, it's easy to predict the ending scenario.
@@RRRRRRRRR33 I picked up some underlying character traits, but nothing prepared me for the child molester being revealed as a satan-worshipping old lady with a gun.
I really do like this movie however when I walked out of it I said to myself that this was utterly disappointing. Now the reason why I said that was because the way the movie ended I was not at all satisfied. I like it when movies or tv shows leave things to your imagination but after everything Hugh Jackman's character went through I really wanted to see him have a scene with his daughter before the credits rolled. After about a minute I got over it and still thought the movie was great but for a movie that is 2 and a half hours long I would of liked to see at least that two minute scene I mentioned. Apart from that I really enjoyed the movie. I am not sure if I would see it again though because the atmosphere is so depressing, disturbing, realistic, dark, gritty and brutal that I really do not want to go through that again. Its a very strange combinations of feelings I am having after watching this. I can't remember a movie that has done that to me before so I guess that's a positive for the movie. 8/10
I totally agree man, the movie ended on an incomplete note. It was dark, scary and real. Remember that he did illegaly hold Alex, and so when Gyllenhal would have found Jackman, Jackman would be given medical treatment and arrested until he was tried in court and most likely found guilty. Going along with the realistic theme of the movie I think it would unrealistic for the daughter and father to have any happy meet up at the end without it being during a prison visit or in a police jail. So in a way him being found was a bittersweet moment with a bittersweet ending. That is probably the reason they decided to cut it off like they did. Thinking about it that way gives me closure.
chili24137 Lol that gives me a little closure but I still would of liked to see Hugh Jackman out of the hole in the ground. Also one thing about this movie which I thought was a bit odd was the torture. In the torture scenes when Hugh Jackman is punching the guy constantly I thought he would make some more painful moaning sounds or something. Since the guy has a mind of a 10 year old I thought they could have made the torture scenes a bit more disturbing if he cried a bit whilst being taking all those hits or something instead of having a blank expression on his face the whole time. Did you have the same thought?
chili24137 Ya, it was inevitable that he was going to jail especially since the person he tortured was practically an innocent party. But, I can imagine the jury sympathizing with Jackman's character and convicting him of a lighter sentence, after all the guy was just trying to do best by his daughter. But, in the end they could of still had a John Q moment. At the end of that movie Denzel's character is still going to jail but he shares this moment with his son, in the court room, after the verdict, that is still heart warming despite the circumstances. I think they ended Prisoners the way they did because they wanted to maintain that whole mystery tone they had going throughout the movie. I mean, obviously it's not a mystery what was going to happen next but the way Loki looks out into the darkness, searching; it's fuckin' eerie man...
I thought the ending was perfect, because it prevented a forcefully long conclusion from happening. We saw Detective Loki's curiosity of the whistle being blown, and he knew about the absence of Keller Dover. He would've traced the direction of where the whistle was being blown, which would result in the finding of Keller Dover. Here's my hypothetical ending of the movie. Keller Dover receives medical attention, then he goes to jail. His family is in tears over the path he has taken, and Detective Loki fucks his wife. While Mrs. Dover is at her climax before splooshing, it cuts to the black screen, and the credits start rolling. I saw this movie twice in theaters.... the first time with a buddy, and the second time was by myself. I thought Jake Gyllenhaal did a phenomenal job, and in my opinion, this is the best movie of 2013. In fact, it's already rated in IMDb's top 250 movies of all time.
This movie left me with the same feeling that The Grey did. I know that the only similarity between both endings is that they cut to credits, but I felt the exact same on both. In The Grey, when Liam Neeson is tying the broken bottles and stuff to his fists, as he's getting ready to fight the alpha, then recites that poem that his father told him as a child, lunges toward the wolf (credits role). I felt the same thing when Gyllenhal was hearing the whistle at the end of this movie Prisoners. It's a feeling of like being excited and scared at the same time, really hard to describe. The Grey and Prisoners are both fantastic movies that I don't think I'll ever be able to watch again. The endings left me like emotionally scarred, with no way of healing.
Thought the movie was really good but have question that I haven't seen answered in any forums: SPOILERS After the aunt shoots Jackman and puts him in the hole, she moves his car to the back of the property. During the investigation after her death, wouldn't the cops have found this and used this as a clue of his whereabouts. I'm not saying that this would have lead them right to him, but wouldn't have it been an indication that he was quite close to the house seeing as it was the middle of winter?
Yeah I never said he died. It has to be assumed a few days had passed since he was put in hole as the detective and the little girl have recovered quite a bit.
I love how most of the people in the comment section say that the movie is predictable, yet I'm pretty sure you never thought 100% sure it was the (SPOILERS) aunt.
StickMasterKai I honestly thought she was the culprit from the beginning. But, it didn't bring down the movie for me at all. I still thought this film was incredible
fuck this movie. it made me dippresed i just finished watching in and its 5 am in 2014. best start to the year. i just wana be god and never let this shit happen on my watch :(. it is a very well executed, well acted, well shot movie tho. deserves a few awards.
One of the best movies of the year until the last 45 minutes and several plot points that didn't have anything to do with anything. So what exactly was the significance of the maze? Still worth watching.
Ah okay, so... The old lady's husband wore a maze necklace. We saw his corpse in the Fathers basement. The old woman and her husband kidnapped kids, one of them was that dude with the black hair who had a thing for snakes (and killed himself). That guy was scarred for life, and drew the maze that was on the necklace
***** Question... *SPOILERS* I was surprised by the fact that the old lady was the kidnapper.. But what were her motives? That whole twist just felt so forced and out of the blue for me.
While he was being imprisoned, tortured, and interrogated, why didn't Alex just tell Keller that his Aunt has the girls? And what was the significance of the drunk priest to the main plot?
honestly i wanted the twist to be the other father just of how he didnt present much of the dynamic as jackman's character portrayed and how there was subtleness in how he expressed towards losing his daughter cause rarely you saw him showing emotion even if he was a timid person to hide it. Though would be a gut wrenching feeling of him knowing where they were and he was the culprit than what we had in the end. Overall felt a bit disappointed of who it was, would've been awesome to have another twist of alex faking his iq and being quite sadistic by how earlier we saw how he was towards the dog.
I just finished it, enjoyed the whole thing. Only thing that really fucking pissed me off was the whole interrogation etc. I mean Alex lived there almost all the time. I don't maybe he could of popped a "SHE KEEPS THEM IN THE BACK, BITCH IS CRAY CRAY!", instead he popped a "uh urm idk urm uh idk" then got beat to near death. Fucking stupid in my opinion.
I like how he says "a director who's a love child of Clint Eastwood and David Fincher" because there's a movie named Mystic River which was directed by Clint Eastwood that had somewhat of a similar plot. And strong acting by almost everyone in that film as well, Sean Penn was also exactly like the Hugh Jackman kind of father in that film. Either way loved both of these films also directed by good actors, personally like David Fincher the most though when it comes to directors.
Took me a minute to watch Prisoners. Amazing movie. I like how Loki hears the whistling from Keller in the end, which implies that he eventually gets him out of the hole.
yeah, so that he can go to prison for the rest of his life... because now the guy that kidnapped his daughter is a victim to his kidnapping and torture.. sad
Mike Hummonyu He won't go to prison for the rest of his life. If he kidnapped and tortured that guy for no reason, he would probably get 8-10 years. But EVERYONE knows what he went through AND the guy's aunt or whatever was a child killer. Hugh Jackman will probably get sentenced to 2-4 years and be out in a year and a half. P.S. That guy didn't kidnap his daughter.
Jonathan Blaze uh... no.. kidnapping alone carries a life sentence. Add to that torture, maybe attempted murder.. and yeah, locked up for life. And not EVERYone knows what he went thru, in real life they would make sure they found a jury that was unbiased and knew nothing of the prior events. Revenge is no longer a justifiable excuse in our society anyway. He'd be hung out to dry just to be made an example of
Mike Hummonyu Not true. IF the kidnapping results in the death of the victim it MAY result in a life sentence. No way anyone in that community didn't know everything about that case. WAAAYYYYYYY to much sympathy would be given to the father in that situation, PLUS the man he kidnapped's aunt WAS THE ACTUAL CHILD KILLER. Many people would feel he was 100% justified. Judge or jury would give him 2-5 year sentence. He wouldn't serve over 2 years.
Jonathan Blaze no. the charge of kidnapping itself can be punishable by up to life in prison. And a jury wouldn't have THAT much sympathy for the guy. He kidnapped the kidnappers NEPHEW... not the kidnapper herself. Not to mention that it was all over the papers that the kid was reunited with his family after he himself was abducted. And they have to go by sentencing guidelines(depending on the state)... No way he'd get to go free in 2 years for kidnapping and torture of an innocent victim, a child himself
Prisoners was also very much how I imagine Heavy Rain will be when it's made into a film, hopefully directed by David Fincher...it's bleak, realistic and fantastically acted especially by Hugh Jackman.
The cons of the movie was that they should have shown Keller reuniting with his daughter that would of been a great ending. I also would of like to seen chris reuniting with his family. I felt so bad when he was being tortured because I knew the whole time that he was innocent. They should of also explained more further why the lady did what she did. Obviously she was messed up in the head but it would of just been a nice thing to add in the movie.
In terms of performances I think Maria Bello gets really overlooked in this movie, she was incredible, seeing her in so much emotional distress, always red in the face from so much crying, the shot of her sleeping with like 6 bottles of medication, she just looked like a total wreck, like a woman who’s entire world is crumbing around her and is unable to relax until it’s all over, which was the idea and so for that reason she totally nailed that part
How did none of you predict who the real villain was? It was too obvious to be the two main dudes so it had to be the only other main character in the story. Simple as shit. BTW Jeremy, I am surprised you didn't say this movie was scary as shit. Freaked me out.
Personally I think Chris Stuckmann is a much more professional and talented movie Reviewer. This guy's mannerisms and even how he talks is really annoying not to mention Loud and Obnoxious.
So i just watched this online and didn't know if i was missing some of the movie or not it ended (spoiler) with Jake Hearing Hue JackMan's Character with the whistle. is that right or was there more to it?
I have a simple question but couldn't figure it out. Why Keller could exactly know the real abducter right after Joy said "you were there" to Keller? Help me out please. Thanks :)
predictable?? This movie had me on the edge of my seat the whole 2.5 hours
you should have realized that Alex was innocent as soon as they showed the video clip of the first missing child and his mother said it was "before Detective Loki's time"
no kidding, i would of NEVER guessed the little old lady
Dana White nobody thought that was Alex
I guessed it was the old lady. But still an awesome movie.
I was expecting for Hugh Jackmans daughter to never be found or be found dead I was surprised it wasn’t
I didn't think it was predictable. I was actually shocked at the end..
Me too...I can still hear the whistle
Samuel James me too
Rafael Teles what the fuck?
The ending was actually really shocking did not expect it to happen one bit
You know from the start I knew there was something fishy about that woman but it's simply the way they connected the dots - masterpiece in storytelling.
This movie wasn't predictable in my opinion
Dude stfu
"THIRD HALF"
ryushev2000 lmao
This movie is the worst and it sucks 👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎👎 and I wish this movie and looper never existed
either you don't know what good movies are or you're just pretending to be a dick. Also it is pretty predictable that you are going to defend yourself saying "OPINIONS".
I liked the ending. A tragic ending would have left people hating the movie and a happy ending would dilute the strength of the movie.
I agree! I really loved the ending!!
But the movie has a pseudo happy ending. Loki failed so many times, it would be completely natural to see him failing one last time as his character trait dictates, a mystery film with a bad detective failing at the end can be considered something creative, a different take. But no, the bad detective completed his job, it almost feels offensive imo. The message is like... you can fail in your job constantly, it doesn't matter, the job will be done at the end.
The ending sucks
@@RRRRRRRRR33 The ending is signifying how everyone is a prisoner to something.
Well said
I didn't predict the ending at all...
Lol same, didn't predict it at all the first time I saw it.
I know right, plot twist of the year
He might be talking about the part where Loki hears the whistle. As soon as I saw the red whistle down in that whole I knew something like that ending would happen (and yeah I know there's probably no point in responding to this comment anymore lol)
TheAlpacaAlliance I figured the whistle would come into play when Dover finds it and you heard the mom say "Yeah she keeps insisting that they found the whistle" when talking to Loki, so obviously they were going to end up with Dover using the whistle. But it was a still damn good movie
Potpourri Yeah, despite the occasional predictability, this is a fantastic movie! It's actually one of my favorites, definitely on the short list.
dudes a fucking mind reader if he could predict the last scene
My father knew it after 45 minutes and spoiled me :/
Mr0strich how like i just dont understand, i saw it as a complete shock
Mr0strich He couldn't have, no one knew the hole existed 45 minutes in
+Banana Well no but he knew that the guy was the kidnapped kid and the granny the kidnapper.
Finаlly I've found full Рrisооnееeers moviе hеrе => twitter.com/fba6ca15518da82b9/status/795843358795055105 Рrisоners moоvie rеvieeeew
i had no idea what was going to happen .. didnt think it was predictable
I know right!
He meant everything was gonna be alright predictable. No real threat as in everything is fine and dandy ending. Would've been cool if they didn't make it, then that would be predictable. Come on people. This movie requires you to think and see. So does Jeremy obviously hinting that good guys win. Though Hugh Jackman's character is going to jail after he was found anyway for torturing Alex Jones.
jackson dobson i predicted most of it when they showed the tape of the missing 5yr old.
Yuri Lopes I didnt at all I was in shock when she take the gun and shoot Yo g... and the movie didnt let you gues that she is the one
by give you a guy that have the clothe of those girls
Yuri Lopes bro in a lot movie there is a nice old woman,what ure saying it isnot solid at all! maybe for it felt solid and him
This movie wasn't predictable, it had clues, sure. But it wasn't predictable
Well to him it was predictable bro
@@ramonlrey99com watching the movie and understanding what it shows you doesnt really make it predictable
This movie didn't get Oscars because the Academy don't care about great movies. They just want good political movies.
This film was nominated for Best Cinematography. Apart from that it didn't get nominated for other things because 2013 was a stacked year. There were A LOT of great performances and films and all of them were mostly interchangeable with others that didn't get nominated. It had nothing to do with "good political movies".
***** Both were also about a rather heavy subject matter and done by a pretty damn good director. Plus Zero Dark Thirty only won Best Sound Editing.
"Nightcrawler" is a perfect example. So good, yet no best actor nomination for Jake Gyllenhaal!? He deserves the Oscar!
callahaine100 You said it, bro
Jeremy should've made a video about Jackamn and Gyllenhaal BOTH getting snubbed for Oscars!
PREDICTABLE???
Tell us another joke
+Max Walker for me it was like he said the last shot and the couple serial killers i saw that coming it was not obvious but it was my first guess
SPOILERS!
I understand, I related because I predicted how the end would turn out right about when Hugh Jackman found the whistle. Though I predicted it, I was disappointed.
I thought that Alex's father was the corpse in the priest's cellar. Though, earlier in the movie I thought Alex's dad brainwashed Alex to kidnap children before he left.
+ANameYouCanRemember Alex's father was the body in the priest's cellar. He killed him after he confessed to killing a bunch of kids.
UmmHeyish
Yeah, I know.
I made that connection after it was mentioned Alex's father "walked out on them".
It isn't a joke
if there was a last of us movie, Hugh Jackman should be Joel
jimuel sanoy agreed
jimuel sanoy agreed
+jimuel sanoy oh damn, agreed
+jimuel sanoy I literaly said the same thing...
+jimuel sanoy I've seen so many disgraceful comments such as this, but you degenerates don't seem to get it. Read my fucking lips, no one fucking cares about your Last Of Us shit, we are here to discuss prisoners. If you're just gonna come to these videos to post dumbass comments such as this. Then don't come to it at all.
Predictable? Maybe you're a genius and everyone else is an idiot, but no one I've seen calls this movie predictable. In fact, most critics comment how it ISN'T predictable.
I don't know, that just kinda threw me off and I couldn't really follow your review afterwards. I mean, think about it. The consensus for this movie would be average to negative, instead of being positive like it is - were the movie predictable. A crime thriller that's predictable is basically a crime thriller with bad actors. It won't survive fondly in the mainstream eye.
Prisoners is not this way, so I have to either doubt the masses or doubt you, and I'm kinda choosing to doubt you given this is the first review I've ever seen from you.
nathan ford I'm not saying to follow the critics. Lol.
I'm saying he just states outright "It's predictable" and never explains it. Hence my negative reaction to this.
I'm fine with negative criticism, but the way he just states it outright as though it's some truth really bothered me, and so I made the comment.
maybe it was unpredictable in the sense that you wouldn't know who the mastermind was, but it was pretty predictable that the dead body with the maze necklace would come into play and that somewhere someone would be a red herring and things like that . . .
HORRORFAN001bleh To your first part, I don't quite see the point you're trying to make. The scene wouldn't exist if it wasn't to be predicted like that. It would be a pointless scene if it wasn't hinting at the answer. And even then, it's not the 100% right answer that we're lead to if you follow the maze. The maze leads you to the ratty looking guy who Jake Gyllenhall chases through backyards. He isn't the answer, only part of it. So I don't see why you felt you needed to bring that up. Maybe I'm missing what you're going for.
As to your second part, that's highly subjective. Most people don't go into a film predicting a red herring, and if they do it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. It's either the plot requires some sort of complexity - in which not everything can lead to the answer (as is the case of the maze necklace; if it lead to the answer then what's the point of the remaining screen time?) and a red herring (which I might add is not inherently a bad thing, only if it's used in extremes a la David Lynch) is one of the best ways to do this - or the plot is linear and you deem the movie dull as a result. Not every complex movie needs non-linearity, and not every non-linear film is complex, but it's rather difficult to pull off either of those two. Better to enjoy the film for what it has then to assume the upmost top-tier writing.
I dont get why so many people always say something along the lines of "stop dissecting the movie and just enjoy it for what it is!" I can still enjoy something and criticize it as well. (And I did indeed enjoy Prisoners thoroughly)
Prisoners is one of the best made films I've ever scene, but to me, the writing isn't on the same level as the rest of the film.
You were asking why Jeremy thought the film was predictable and I was merely providing examples of things I found predictable.
I admit that the body wasn't a very good example to support my point but I do think it's a good example of the writing problems this movie has. Obviously the dead body has to play some part in the end of the story but the super coincidental way that Loki ends up finding the body is completely ridiculous and convoluted. (Think about it, he randomly visits sex offenders in the area and arrives when one of them is incapacitated which allows him to find a secret room where the dead body of the husband of the person he's looking for is?) It all just seems very unnecessary. They could've incorporated the body in different ways that would fit much better imo.
I really don't have a problem with cliches. I understand that all movies contain some type of cliche, but they can still make a movie predictable, which is why I mentioned the red herring, even if it is subjective. If you expect a red herring (which many people will if they've ever seen a crime, mystery thriller) it takes away from the movie.
Once again, I did really like Prisoners but that doesn't mean I'm just gonna switch off my brain when I watch it, if I wanted to do that I'd watch something else . . .
HORRORFAN001bleh "stop dissecting the movie and just enjoy it for what it is!"
I'm not saying that. I'm saying simply if you look for errors, you'll find what you believe are errors, when they really aren't.
The body didn't have to play into the crime itself. It could very easily have been some coincidentally found object that distracted Loki. The priest could have been lying to us about what the body meant... there's a lot that you can reasonably predict from that scene.
Basically we don't know for sure, but if you analyze that scene too much, you end up thinking "Well that clearly has to be involved with the case - they could have handled this better, and I think it's a red herring" or you could simply think "I wonder what that body will lead to" which is what the film intends you to do, is it not?
I get what you mean, it is a bit much that Loki just happens to stumble upon the husband of the woman who is behind of all this. But only after seeing the film would you know that. And this is what I was talking about. If you look for issues, you find them. If you let things play out, you wouldn't see that issue until after reviewing the film, which it loses a lot of punch it has if you're watching the film for the first time and you're yanked out of the experience by your own attempts to snag on one bit of lesser writing.
I mean, sure, the movie isn't a flawless pile of unpredictable perfection that could not be seen as predictable in any way, shape, or form. Everyone sees a movie differently, but it's a bit unfair to the movie with what you want from it. There has to be a clue somewhere, or else you feel no buildup to the climax. What was some event turns into arrows to the answer once you see it, and that aids the film - not hinders it. One of the best examples of this is the first SAW. The body in the middle of the room is so curious and bizarre, and when it gets up and shows us that he's behind it all, it's surprising. Much more so than who shows up last second because the writers didn't dare be predictable to a close analysis.
Seriously it one of the best movies i have ever seen, not bored for a second, the movie keep me captivate all long. The acting was incredible and as soon as i finished the movie i wanted to watch it again. Hugh Jackman surprise me , didn't know he was so good, i watched all of the X-Men movie exept DOFP and he was just ok but man in Prisoners he was just amazing.
7 month late. He's great in The Prestige aswell and that movie is great.
Watch other movies from Denis Villeneuve. He is AMAZING. I love Prisoners too.
5 years late but if you haven't seen it days of Future past is the best X-Men movie
SPOILER!!...
i want to make a comment about the whistling since it seems some people had an issue with that ending... when it happened and screen went to black it was only about a quarter second that it gave me pause... then i said OF COURSE
something i noticed throughout the movie that stood out to me and why it makes the ending PERFECTLY SYMMETRICAL to the rest of the movie is that this is how they ended EVERY SCENE OF DISCOVERY... even the last scene before this one when Jake's character goes to the old house where the guy is being tortured, when he gets to the room we never see him actually getting the guy out of the shower room, it fades to black as soon as it is made obvious to us that he found him... many other scenes were just like that in the movie... go back and look
so the implication of the last scene as soon as it went to black was MOMENT OF DISCOVERY... he did in fact find him, which we didn't get to see
"happy" ending!
Based in his acting in this movie I'd like to see Hugh Jakman play as Joel in the last of us movie
Same here, perfect actor for the role
Holy shit. You should get an award for that comment. Best comment on TH-cam. BRILLIANT! Now a director to realize how good the story IS!
tristin arnold after watching Logan, yes.
logan is basically the last of us minus the zombies
YES OMG I was thinking his character reminded me of Joel so much!!! Thought I'd be the only one, glad I'm not!!
I feel like a dumbass because I really couldn't predict the movie...
+Mysterious Coconut To be fair, it's so emotionally heavy that chances are that you're gonna miss a few things because you're trying to recover from the scene before it.
+Mysterious Coconut It's one of those movies where I just let it happen and I didn't predict anything.
Don't feel like a dumbass, Jeremy's just a genius
its hard to predict
ME TOO! On rewatch I was like “how did I not catch this shit”
Hugh Jackman didn't get nominated for an Oscar in this movie... I'm Crying.....😢😢😢
over 2 and a half years later and it STILL pisses me off...
@Mubarak Alsharrad 40 years later and it still pisses me off.
@@raulramirez1711 41 years and it still pisses me off.
When the girls were getting kidnapped, did anyone else get scared when they zoomed in on the tree? 😂
Hey me too! For a second I was like "wait, is this a horror movie?" 😂
+Ruturaj Kulkarni EXACTLY 😂
I was just thinking its great directing because a lot of the beginning is shot from the point of view of someone watching them from afar.
Matt K Oh yeah, I love those shots. Gives you that creeper feeling. really loved the cinematography of this movie!
Adrianne Apparently this movie used to be rated R before they reedited it. I never want to see the original version lol
Liam Neeson would find those kids in a hour!
Lol right
AG21films nah 6 minutes is enough for him
lol
Seems like u dont like thriller...😁
Well it definitely got the best cinematography nomination it deserved at the Oscars, shame Jackman and Gyllenhaal were snubbed. ;(
That's hilarious to me, as the cinematography was terrible imo! So flaccid and static. There was no real movement, most of it was still shots. If really made the film seem to drag a lot. Worst thing about the film. And it was weird, it didn't look like a movie, more sort of in between tv and film.
Jose Sandoval It was so bland and lifeless, just still shot after still shot. And ever so slightly moving forward, or to one side. The worst thing you can do is make a two and a half hour movie seem long, and flat, flaccid direction does exactly that.
Chris Dynamo
You obviously were not even paying attention to the plot or something... because then you wouldn't have been analyzing the camera work. You would have been invested in the story. But that is besides the fact because actually the still filming added to the feel of the movie. The still camera helped me focus... I honestly HATE shaky cam and cameras swinging around. I feel as though that in this particular movie it would have been simply distracting and annoying. With the stillness, it added to the suspense immensely. But anyway... great movie!
David Leckness The topic was the cinematography, what has the plot got to do with that?
I was paying attention to the plot, I was invested but the direction was so sluggish that it constantly caught my eye and I'm not someone that often pays attention to this sort of thing. I wasn't asking for shaky camera, just something with a bit more kick.
Gyllenhaal got snubbed for best actor in "Nightcrawler"!
Anyone else see Hugh Jackman as Joel for The Last of Us movie? I sure as hell do.
oh shit. You're right
100 % and that girl from Juno & inception should be Elli
I was about to say that.. and jake looks like leon in, resident evil 4...well at least if there ever was a resident movie with Leon on it, jake cums close..
+Will M there actually is a Resident Evil movie with Leon in it. It was the latest RE movie, cant remember what its called, but they got a guy who looks just like him except way buffer, but his acting sucks compared to Jake. His acting actually sucks compared to anyone really.
+elsacapuntaz im just saying, if they ever need a leon, jake would be it lol but resident evil never really went as a serious movie..
I hate the fact that this movie was fucking SNUBBED in the Oscars.
Damn right!!
Fantastic movie. Didn't pick up all the things like I did the second time. This shit deserves award after award.
Everyone acted just great, you can see the hate/desperate look in Keller's eyes and the fear in Franklin's eyes. I never imagined the freacking old lady being the abductor, and I didn't know what to think when Alex said "I'm not Alex". I just loved it.
spoilers!!!!!!!!!!! wtf man
@@Donydarco dude it was 10 years ago lol I’m sorry
One word for this movie: Masterpiece
The fact that you like to predict things Jeremy doesn't mean the movie was predictable.
Pablo x late but I'm terrible with predictions and even I figured out it was the old lady like 40 mins in.
@@someonesomewhere6289 Very very late, but what gave it away?
Spoiler alert
I'm surprised Jeremy said he found it was predictable. I would have never suspected the aunt!
fuck u spoiler
+Yezra Lumapas dude you are 3+ years late stop crying
+Yezra Lumapas Uh, he clearly put a spoiler warning.
I suspected her halfway the movie...
Steven Galley
I just want to say that the "predictability" is not really a fault of the movie, it's actually engineered that way. Basically, there's this principle called Chekhov's gun, which is that "if a scene shows a gun, the gun should be used in the plot later." So nothing in this movie that you visualize is supposed to mean nothing. Everything is not predictable through formula but rather the movie directs you with alluding elements.
This movie emphasizes on this completely, making everything seem natural. I can name numerous instances of this principle, starting at the very beginning when the son mentions his grandfather's old house. Later in the movie that house is an important location and no dialogue is wasted in exposition saying "oh btw Hugh Jackman has access to this remote area because reasons." Many more are spoiler ridden but to try and be subtle I will mention that the crime the Detective finds out about in the Pastor's house was a huuuuge plot point. At first I thought it wouldn't be tied in well and two very unrelated plot points would be shoehorned, instead everything comes together very well in the 3rd act.
So if we understand that the movie INTENDS to help it's audience and give clues early on so we can somehow solve plot points, then you realize the movie is not truly predictable. It is manufactured specifically to immerse you in the story so that nothing seems far fetched, nothing comes out of no where, and each character's motivation is clear and succinct.
Just saying, I don't think Jeremy caught that. I think predictability in movies should pertain to the movie being formulaic, and although things do work out as each protagonist intends (generally), it isn't predictable as in you can say "yeah that scene reminded me of X, so predictable." I just don't see that. Although I admit I really did expect at some point the final antagonist would actually be that person. They kept bringing them into the plot, was kind of expectant considering the movie follows Chekhov's Gun.
Err.. Like you don't really need a name for that, it's like storytelling 101. You foreshadow things that are relevant later and don't waste time on things that aren't, unless they're meant to be red herrings. Jeremy knows this, he's just saying that he didn't think this aspect was well executed.
But it was predictable. What about the fake killer? All he was there for was to draw out the running time
Max White You DO need a name for that because people confuse it for predictability. Something being predictable is more along the lines of a cliche in a movie or storyline, aka why I described predictability as being formulaic.
The best example is most Rom-Com's. There is a meet up of two potential lovers, a threshold they cross into their relationship, outside influence to hindrance 1 or even both parties, a reluctant break up, revelation of truth or feeling, and then their rekindling. And you might think that only applies to Rom-Com's but that's even Avatar, Star Wars (iffy), Scott Pilgrim, etc. Romance as a genre or subgenre can be very predictable, as well as Action, thriller, etc. And while I admit there is a general flow to this movie, it's more of a "the good guy wins" predictable movie (or rather "the bad guy gets caught" movie, as I personally didn't anticipate everyone to come out living), not a "It's time for this scene" predictable movie.
This movie doesn't really follow any specific paradigm, in fact it really seems to follow events realistically. Could the movie have had a direction that was more abstract and thus left the viewer wondering the whole time? Absolutely, but then you'd have a focus on 1 specific party (likely the father), and that would drain perspective. And that's not the concern of the film. It's a drama first, mystery/thriller second. My only gripe is perhaps some events would be ungodly convenient and contrived if they happened to the same character. Luckily they flesh out two different characters to play the protagonist with The Father and the Detective, so only the audience is truly aware of every clue, and the film is truly engineered to be that way. Not every movie needs to be abstract in order to lack predictability like Enemy or Pulp Fiction or something.
TheGamerThing I don't really follow why a potential red herring ( I say potential because he was actually still VERY important to the plot) would qualify as being predictable. And especially when he committed suicide and ended their lead.
Max White Also, after rewatching the actual review, at 2:18 he claims it is predictable and then unknowningly describes Chekhov's Gun. He says " There are moment's when you are like 'that looks trivial, just out of the blue. Something tells me it's not gonna be, so I should remember that.' Then when you see something else that might tie into it, you start piecing things together." That is literally the layman's term description for Chekhov's Gun dude lol. He even says "SOMETHING TELLS ME it's not gonna be (trivial)." That something is the focus and direction from the movie.
I promise dude, this movie is not predictable, it is engineered to inform the viewer without giving away the whole truth too quickly.
MortalFluff I predicted when would happen.. Hence
Man that scene with Hugh Jackman bashing the basin, then bashing it into the wall next to the Paul Dano's head. Man that was good acting.
There's no way you were able to predict the final shot
whaaaaaa, i never saw the ending coming.
Sam Salem I knew it was the old lady when Paul Dano said 'they weren't crying when he left them'.
"they only cried when i left"
There was nooo freaking way Jeremy could have figured it out half way through
I figured it out in the first half hour I don't know how, but I felt it in my gut lol. It's a great movie still.
i think the only thing that was missing from this film was a proper closure both for the film's characters and for us the viewers. After all that shit the characters had been through they should have at least shown Keller being found in the end, even if he had to go to jail, the idea of him dying in that pit without at least knowing that his daughter had been saved is awfully disturbing to me. i hate these kinds of cliffhangers in movies.
That's something director's like to do...they leave the ending to our imagination...remember 'Inception'...even though its a bummer to not exactly know whether Keller was found or not but i kinda like these cliffhangers...they show that life is all about our choices and perceptions.
The screenwriters confirmed an alternate ending that was actually filmed where loki finds keller at the bottom of the pit. they decided to not used because it didn't fit in the director's vision.
if u listen closely, u can hear at the end Keller blowing the wistle, so I think that that's enough for us to know that he will make it
***** I haven't seen the other two movies, but the ending of inception had nothing to do with the fact that Nolan didn't have the balls to make a conclusion. He wanted the audience to feel invested in the movie to the point in which they would want to decide the ending for themselves. So no, it's not because he didn't have the balls to make a conclusion, it's because he had enough balls not to make a definite conclusion.
Here's he difference between this movie and inception though. Inception had absolutely no hints as to what the truthful ending was at all. You had to come up with it completely. However in prisoners, they at least gave you some kind of hint that Keller was found because you here him blowing the whistle very faintly. You just had to be smart enough to put 2 and 2 together.
This is my #1 favorite movie. I could watch it over and over and still enjoy it. And the ending makes you think there's going to be a sequel, but once you think piece things together, you realize the ending was just right.
David Riehl That's what I thought as well, but after thinking about it they didn't need another movie. Loki pretty much found Dover from the whistle. Although I'd love to watch more movies about detective Loki.
One of the few bad reviews from Jeremy.
predictable.... your funny dude
You can't tell me you predicted snakes coming out of that box.
I don't mind predictability since I NEVER know what's coming which is surprising since I took Media Studies and Film and I should be able to guess endings and what not but nope.
what do you mean the movie was predictable... i didn't feel like it was at all
yeah, i heard this review before i decided to watch the movie, and various times while watching this movie i was like "this movie is so not predictable. i had no idea that x was going to happen. i was surprised myself." lol this guy must have read the script if he found this predictable.
Yeah now I feel stupid ._. the only thing I found mildly predictable (spoiler alert obviously) was that earlier on in the film I wondered if Melissa Leo's character was the kidnapper. Although I dismissed it and I was surprised when she pulled out the gun.
Come on guys... Its was not predictable.. But an amazing movie with full of suspense
This movie is superbly executed. Great timing of the scenes, camera angles, script, awesome acting and superb atmosphere. This shows that movies don't have to have never before seen story to be good. The scenes between Jake and Hugh are so realistic that it's scary. Thumb up!
The way the bass played in dramatic moments was eccentric and superb.
I loved the movie! Couldn't predict shit though lol
I honestly didn't see the ending coming at all!
This movie was friggin BRILLIANT!!!
Predictable? You must be joking.
SPOILERS I GUESS
This film made me so angry at the end, angry because something like this could happen in real life and there are actually people like Melissa Leo's character that exist and I hate it! Why do you we have to live in this kind of world?
best film i have seen in a very long time
This movie is a masterpiece. It’s not a predictable movie at all! This is an incredible film!! Great freaking film!!
Hugh Jackman Looks sooo much like Joel from The Last of Us in this movie!
Yes, I'm not the only one that thought that! :D
Mystic River. When Sean Penn finds out his daughter has been murdered and lets out the primal cry...moves me to tears every time.
Everybody is raving about Hugh Jackman and I'm sitting here thinking, dat Jake Gyllenhaal tho!
I'm still kinda miffed that Hugh Jackman didn't get a nomination for best actor
crewkid52 and Jake
That movie was not predictable at all!! I was guessing who it was left and right
so. . .is this a good thanksgiving day movie for the family?
yes of course
Catch this man who is saying that this movie is predictable 😂
somthing tells me if this guy isnt occupied with action and explosions, than he isnt personally interested
Thats a really fucking stupid thing to say. He stated valid points on HIS channel. Accept his opinion or leave
i know i watch all his videos im just talking shit
Daniel shepherd lol and yeah he hates transformers
+TheGamerThing seriously? If your opinion is to say that we can't post disagreements then you're completely out of your mind.
(Spoilers if you havent seen the movie) Jeremy says that this movie is predictable? He actually says that it was predictable "To the point where I was like the last thing that will happen is this and the last shot of the movie will be this". Im calling bullshit, he predicted not only who the kidnapper was etc. I mean there are a lot of moving parts with Paul Dano and Melissa Leos dead husband and everything else, but he also predicted that the last shot of the movie would be Hugh Jackman trapped in a hole under a car blowing a whistle that his daughter had previously lost while Detective Loki was standing outside and he most likely hears the whistle and will find him? That makes no sense, the movie is not predictable.
yeah...predictable my ass. No way you could predict the final shot, that was way too off the beaten path to ever guess. Thank you Jeremy for at least not giving this movie 'A good time, no alcohol required' or whatever tour de force bullshit you rank these movies without the Marvel titles as
Enoch Ching Lmao!!!!!
Don't blame yourself for your own stupidity, c'mon now. Why show Jackman's character obsession with survival techniques... just like that, they will show all that for nothing? Of course there will be a scene featuring this behavior in some sort of way. You can't predict the role itself, but you can predict the scenario. Try to read some Agatha Christie novels. When clues are so evident, it's easy to predict the ending scenario.
Rafael Teles it's just a film, you don't need a master's degree to watch a film.
@@RRRRRRRRR33 lol, the movie isn't predictable, we aren't psychos like you
@@RRRRRRRRR33 I picked up some underlying character traits, but nothing prepared me for the child molester being revealed as a satan-worshipping old lady with a gun.
I really do like this movie however when I walked out of it I said to myself that this was utterly disappointing. Now the reason why I said that was because the way the movie ended I was not at all satisfied. I like it when movies or tv shows leave things to your imagination but after everything Hugh Jackman's character went through I really wanted to see him have a scene with his daughter before the credits rolled. After about a minute I got over it and still thought the movie was great but for a movie that is 2 and a half hours long I would of liked to see at least that two minute scene I mentioned. Apart from that I really enjoyed the movie.
I am not sure if I would see it again though because the atmosphere is so depressing, disturbing, realistic, dark, gritty and brutal that I really do not want to go through that again. Its a very strange combinations of feelings I am having after watching this. I can't remember a movie that has done that to me before so I guess that's a positive for the movie. 8/10
I totally agree man, the movie ended on an incomplete note. It was dark, scary and real. Remember that he did illegaly hold Alex, and so when Gyllenhal would have found Jackman, Jackman would be given medical treatment and arrested until he was tried in court and most likely found guilty. Going along with the realistic theme of the movie I think it would unrealistic for the daughter and father to have any happy meet up at the end without it being during a prison visit or in a police jail. So in a way him being found was a bittersweet moment with a bittersweet ending. That is probably the reason they decided to cut it off like they did. Thinking about it that way gives me closure.
chili24137 Lol that gives me a little closure but I still would of liked to see Hugh Jackman out of the hole in the ground.
Also one thing about this movie which I thought was a bit odd was the torture. In the torture scenes when Hugh Jackman is punching the guy constantly I thought he would make some more painful moaning sounds or something. Since the guy has a mind of a 10 year old I thought they could have made the torture scenes a bit more disturbing if he cried a bit whilst being taking all those hits or something instead of having a blank expression on his face the whole time. Did you have the same thought?
chili24137 Ya, it was inevitable that he was going to jail especially since the person he tortured was practically an innocent party. But, I can imagine the jury sympathizing with Jackman's character and convicting him of a lighter sentence, after all the guy was just trying to do best by his daughter. But, in the end they could of still had a John Q moment. At the end of that movie Denzel's character is still going to jail but he shares this moment with his son, in the court room, after the verdict, that is still heart warming despite the circumstances. I think they ended Prisoners the way they did because they wanted to maintain that whole mystery tone they had going throughout the movie. I mean, obviously it's not a mystery what was going to happen next but the way Loki looks out into the darkness, searching; it's fuckin' eerie man...
Yeah I completely agree bro! I wanted to see something good actually happen to him...but no...that is asking too much
I thought the ending was perfect, because it prevented a forcefully long conclusion from happening. We saw Detective Loki's curiosity of the whistle being blown, and he knew about the absence of Keller Dover. He would've traced the direction of where the whistle was being blown, which would result in the finding of Keller Dover.
Here's my hypothetical ending of the movie. Keller Dover receives medical attention, then he goes to jail. His family is in tears over the path he has taken, and Detective Loki fucks his wife. While Mrs. Dover is at her climax before splooshing, it cuts to the black screen, and the credits start rolling.
I saw this movie twice in theaters.... the first time with a buddy, and the second time was by myself. I thought Jake Gyllenhaal did a phenomenal job, and in my opinion, this is the best movie of 2013. In fact, it's already rated in IMDb's top 250 movies of all time.
Predictable? Dude what! I literally never thought the guy being beaten was kidnapped and the old lady was the villain.
This movie left me with the same feeling that The Grey did. I know that the only similarity between both endings is that they cut to credits, but I felt the exact same on both. In The Grey, when Liam Neeson is tying the broken bottles and stuff to his fists, as he's getting ready to fight the alpha, then recites that poem that his father told him as a child, lunges toward the wolf (credits role). I felt the same thing when Gyllenhal was hearing the whistle at the end of this movie Prisoners. It's a feeling of like being excited and scared at the same time, really hard to describe. The Grey and Prisoners are both fantastic movies that I don't think I'll ever be able to watch again. The endings left me like emotionally scarred, with no way of healing.
Have you watched after the credit scene? Sounds like you missed it
Lee uhbbjb No I saw it. Still had that feeling though.
This movie is so underrated because Gravity over shadowed it.
Thought the movie was really good but have question that I haven't seen answered in any forums:
SPOILERS
After the aunt shoots Jackman and puts him in the hole, she moves his car to the back of the property. During the investigation after her death, wouldn't the cops have found this and used this as a clue of his whereabouts. I'm not saying that this would have lead them right to him, but wouldn't have it been an indication that he was quite close to the house seeing as it was the middle of winter?
SPIOLERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He didnt die. You could hear him using the whistle at the end.
pitan johansson He never said he did. He just wondered why they didn't find evidence of their whereabouts.
"During the investigation after his death, wouldn't the cops have found this and used this as a clue of his whereabouts."
that's what he/she wrote!
Yeah I never said he died. It has to be assumed a few days had passed since he was put in hole as the detective and the little girl have recovered quite a bit.
Where did his car go and how did the cops not find it on her property is my main query
Yes, from a parent's perspective, Hugh Jackman's character is totally understandable. Heroic.
It´s not that predictable...
favourite kidnapping movie "baby's day out"
arkham sky Lmao! It's actually taken from a cartoon sketch.
Тhis mоviе is nоооw аvаilаblе tо wаtсh hеrе => twitter.com/fb417e65a7098253a/status/822787068313026561 Рrisоnеrs moviе rеview
I love how most of the people in the comment section say that the movie is predictable, yet I'm pretty sure you never thought 100% sure it was the (SPOILERS) aunt.
StickMasterKai everybody is saying it's not predictable...
Andrés Stadelmann Not everybody, I see a lot of comments saying " it was to predictable".
StickMasterKai I honestly thought she was the culprit from the beginning. But, it didn't bring down the movie for me at all. I still thought this film was incredible
lmao why did you put spoilers so far into the comment..
oldGnRrocks1 Because the only thing he spoils is what he says after that. Not very practical though, I agree
fuck this movie. it made me dippresed i just finished watching in and its 5 am in 2014. best start to the year. i just wana be god and never let this shit happen on my watch :(. it is a very well executed, well acted, well shot movie tho. deserves a few awards.
I stayed up till 6:50 am
fuck the sun is up
pasoh95 lol, embrace the sun, it is your friend
Barney Stinson Why the hell would you pick this movie to start the new year?? That's your fault, not the film's, you should've known better.
JEREMY, i don't understand how you didn't give this movie an awesometacular
I had my ideas of what may happen but i wouldn't call it predictable at all
One of the best movies of the year until the last 45 minutes and several plot points that didn't have anything to do with anything. So what exactly was the significance of the maze? Still worth watching.
Ah okay, so...
The old lady's husband wore a maze necklace. We saw his corpse in the Fathers basement. The old woman and her husband kidnapped kids, one of them was that dude with the black hair who had a thing for snakes (and killed himself). That guy was scarred for life, and drew the maze that was on the necklace
Interesting. I didn't know what was up with the kid and the snakes. Thanks.
I didnt understand it either until i read this comment. Thanks.
***** Well then
***** Question... *SPOILERS* I was surprised by the fact that the old lady was the kidnapper.. But what were her motives? That whole twist just felt so forced and out of the blue for me.
Predictable? Lmao
I was totally shocked when I found out this movie only get one Oscar nomination...
566 12 Yeah and no acting nods too
566 12 no acting nods too ^^
HOW THE FUCK IS IT PREDICTABLE?!
While he was being imprisoned, tortured, and interrogated, why didn't Alex just tell Keller that his Aunt has the girls? And what was the significance of the drunk priest to the main plot?
honestly i wanted the twist to be the other father just of how he didnt present much of the dynamic as jackman's character portrayed and how there was subtleness in how he expressed towards losing his daughter cause rarely you saw him showing emotion even if he was a timid person to hide it. Though would be a gut wrenching feeling of him knowing where they were and he was the culprit than what we had in the end. Overall felt a bit disappointed of who it was, would've been awesome to have another twist of alex faking his iq and being quite sadistic by how earlier we saw how he was towards the dog.
The only reason I'm here: just finished seeing Prisoners and it was awesome.
Edit: it was *not* predictable.
You didn't mention all the blood in it.
*character gets pushed slightly*
Villeneuve: so basically just make this person look like the Black Dahlia.
I just finished it, enjoyed the whole thing. Only thing that really fucking pissed me off was the whole interrogation etc. I mean Alex lived there almost all the time. I don't maybe he could of popped a "SHE KEEPS THEM IN THE BACK, BITCH IS CRAY CRAY!", instead he popped a "uh urm idk urm uh idk" then got beat to near death. Fucking stupid in my opinion.
he does have the mental ability of a little kid, though, after being messed up from all the LSD he was given when he was a kid...
I like how he says "a director who's a love child of Clint Eastwood and David Fincher" because there's a movie named Mystic River which was directed by Clint Eastwood that had somewhat of a similar plot. And strong acting by almost everyone in that film as well, Sean Penn was also exactly like the Hugh Jackman kind of father in that film. Either way loved both of these films also directed by good actors, personally like David Fincher the most though when it comes to directors.
Took me a minute to watch Prisoners. Amazing movie. I like how Loki hears the whistling from Keller in the end, which implies that he eventually gets him out of the hole.
yeah, so that he can go to prison for the rest of his life... because now the guy that kidnapped his daughter is a victim to his kidnapping and torture.. sad
Mike Hummonyu He won't go to prison for the rest of his life. If he kidnapped and tortured that guy for no reason, he would probably get 8-10 years. But EVERYONE knows what he went through AND the guy's aunt or whatever was a child killer. Hugh Jackman will probably get sentenced to 2-4 years and be out in a year and a half. P.S. That guy didn't kidnap his daughter.
Jonathan Blaze
uh... no.. kidnapping alone carries a life sentence. Add to that torture, maybe attempted murder.. and yeah, locked up for life. And not EVERYone knows what he went thru, in real life they would make sure they found a jury that was unbiased and knew nothing of the prior events. Revenge is no longer a justifiable excuse in our society anyway. He'd be hung out to dry just to be made an example of
Mike Hummonyu Not true. IF the kidnapping results in the death of the victim it MAY result in a life sentence. No way anyone in that community didn't know everything about that case. WAAAYYYYYYY to much sympathy would be given to the father in that situation, PLUS the man he kidnapped's aunt WAS THE ACTUAL CHILD KILLER. Many people would feel he was 100% justified. Judge or jury would give him 2-5 year sentence. He wouldn't serve over 2 years.
Jonathan Blaze
no. the charge of kidnapping itself can be punishable by up to life in prison. And a jury wouldn't have THAT much sympathy for the guy. He kidnapped the kidnappers NEPHEW... not the kidnapper herself. Not to mention that it was all over the papers that the kid was reunited with his family after he himself was abducted. And they have to go by sentencing guidelines(depending on the state)... No way he'd get to go free in 2 years for kidnapping and torture of an innocent victim, a child himself
I felt BAD for Paul Dano
3rd Gunman He is a fantastic actor, feel bad for the character and good for the actor that portrayed him so well
Andrés Stadelmann He is dude. I really like the guy. His performance was powerful and without really much dialog
Elysium - Awesometacular
Prisoners -... really?
The Oscars F'd up with this movie. 1 nomination for cinematography. Nothing else. Terrific film.
Prisoners was also very much how I imagine Heavy Rain will be when it's made into a film, hopefully directed by David Fincher...it's bleak, realistic and fantastically acted especially by Hugh Jackman.
I really really don't like the ending.... fuckin movie....
I couldn't predict the ending omg what
The cons of the movie was that they should have shown Keller reuniting with his daughter that would of been a great ending. I also would of like to seen chris reuniting with his family. I felt so bad when he was being tortured because I knew the whole time that he was innocent. They should of also explained more further why the lady did what she did. Obviously she was messed up in the head but it would of just been a nice thing to add in the movie.
Thoughts are the same
I am so upset Prisoners didn't get any other Oscar nominations besides a best cinematography for Roger Deakins
In terms of performances I think Maria Bello gets really overlooked in this movie, she was incredible, seeing her in so much emotional distress, always red in the face from so much crying, the shot of her sleeping with like 6 bottles of medication, she just looked like a total wreck, like a woman who’s entire world is crumbing around her and is unable to relax until it’s all over, which was the idea and so for that reason she totally nailed that part
Jeremy, you got really bad taste for movies, Prisoners was so awesometacluar
Great movie
How did none of you predict who the real villain was? It was too obvious to be the two main dudes so it had to be the only other main character in the story. Simple as shit. BTW Jeremy, I am surprised you didn't say this movie was scary as shit. Freaked me out.
"Jake Gyllenhaal is Loki. Loki is the master of illusion, he could look like anybody" - Oh so close
When the old lady fired the gun at Hugh's leg in the open, I was like "DA HECK, wouldn't someone have heard that????" Loved the movie anyways. :)
Personally I think Chris Stuckmann is a much more professional and talented movie Reviewer. This guy's mannerisms and even how he talks is really annoying not to mention Loud and Obnoxious.
so watch Stuckmann.
Oh trust me. I do lol
Reading the comments you can tell those who pay attention to the details and those who are more emotionally involved while watching.
That scene at the end where gyllenhaal was driving absolutely had me on the edge of my seat
That awkward moment when Hugh jackman isn't nominated...
So i just watched this online and didn't know if i was missing some of the movie or not it ended
(spoiler) with Jake Hearing Hue JackMan's Character with the whistle. is that right or was there more to it?
I have a simple question but couldn't figure it out. Why Keller could exactly know the real abducter right after Joy said "you were there" to Keller? Help me out please.
Thanks :)
Was wondering the same thing. I think it's about when Keller visited the old lady