2:13

Nothing adds up, no logic, bad acting. Somebody had a very bad day when they decided to release this crap.

Actually quite an original well done movie - Not! The acting was poor, on a level way beneath poor actually, in occasions. It was advertised as being stomach churning but I'm afraid that it was far from it, at times it was more like a comedy than a thriller.... The plot was so bad and had no logic at all, the personal relations between leading parts began but was left with an uncertainty as if the writer got bored with them and then decided just to get rid of one of them by another murder, which left the other one completely indifferent - "funny" love-story. The killers reason (or motive) was quite far-fetched - exaggerated is an understatement. And for Gods sake; how could the killer who was much younger than Spivey have been a grown-up at the time he met the young Spivey at an age of 10? So many of these little oversights made the total impression of a great muck-up.

To begin this film has exceeded my expectations by a landslide.I thought going in i would be watching a movie that i have seen a 100 times before with a different name.I am a sucker for the Horror,Thriller genre.I feel this to be more of a mystery thriller.That said the acting was great,well paced,edge of your seat(my kind of movie)in your face.The director did a fine job.I was especially impressed with the twist,mainly because i didn't see it coming.I usually can put my finger on the who dun it but i was really thrown for a loop here.I gotta say i thought it was going a different direction,and i love the fact that i was way wrong(that is so cool).So to sum it up if you want to see a great who dun it in your face mystery thriller (with a bit of horror thrown in)then i highly recommend giving 2:13 a look,you will not be disappointed.I am anxious to read your reviews.Enjoy.

I'm not exactly sure why I picked this from all the Netflix horror movies, I had never heard of it and the cast looked unknown (with the exception of Kevin Pollak). Sometimes these turn out quite good, but this one didn't really. It was somewhat enjoyable thriller, but there are goofs and stylistic choices that drop the score (a lot).

I'm gonna go straight to the bad stuff. The script and what you'll see on screen don't really match. There are flashbacks of events that seem to happen somewhere between 50s and 70s. The style of this movie looks as if it's from the 90s. Yet the movie is made just a few years ago, so you're not really sure when it takes place. People appearing in the flashbacks and current time age differently. Two people, who are younger and older in flashbacks, appear the other way around in current time. So it's really confusing, I don't know what they were thinking, it's mind boggling. Some people don't seem to have aged at all in a good 20-40 years.

The movie has a big 90's vibe to it, saturated colors, filters, TV series style lighting. Even the cast looks 90's. Kind of like a bigger budget porn movie. Quite weird comparison, but that's what I was thinking a few times. The cast looks like they'd be on a reality show rather than being believable cops - or something, there was something lackluster and even campy in the styling. There's also a strong L.A. feel to it - in a bad way. Kind of like the "Melrose Place" cast had a get together and they made a serial killer movie.

All of the above aside, the story is somewhat gripping and the acting is quite good. Camera work is OK, editing is OK.

People have been mentioning movies like Seven, Silence of the Lambs in their reviews. There is a serial killer, but these movies have absolutely nothing in common apart from that. This could be an extended episode of any cop/crime series from L.A. It's not really horror, there's a few gory scenes, but other than that it's your common crime series stuff.

I'm giving three, because something kept me watching and even enjoying a bit. I'm still not quite sure why I kept watching.

2:13 is your usual run-of-the-mill style serial killer thriller that looks like it was made and shot in the mid-'90s. Even the way the cast includes supporting roles for various seasoned players like Kevin Pollak and Dwight Yoakam reminded me of the old days of film-making.

Although the DVD cover makes this look like a horror movie, it really isn't. It's just a thriller with a handful of gory moments. I find films like this fail or succeed due to the nature of the killer and how memorable he or she is. Unfortunately, 2:13's killer is entirely forgettable. The rest of the film is a muddle of flashbacks and convoluted scenes, with token blonde Teri Polo shining her flashlight around and getting herself into danger. It's not very interesting.

RELEASED IN 2009 and directed by Charles Adelman, "2:13" was written by and stars Mark Thompson as a troubled L.A. detective chasing down an obviously sick serial killer who has a fetish for theater masks and mutilating his victims. Teri Polo and Jere Burns play his cop associates while Mark Pellegrino appears as a distraught victim of the murderer. Deborah Carson is also on hand.

This is a grim psychological crime thriller with grisly elements, bordering on horror, similar to "The Silence of the Lambs" (1991) and, in some ways, "The Glimmer Man" (1996). The movie is low-budget, but competent enough with a palpably grey, austere tone. Teri is thoroughly stunning throughout, nice & curvy. I enjoyed her character's relationship with the disturbed (alcoholic) protagonist; you could sense the warmth between them and it's kinda moving.

There's a focus on psychotherapy, which is reminiscent of "Equus" (1977). If that's your thang, you might be interested. Also consider checking out the micro-budgeted "Sheltered" (2010), which shares some similarities, but with an altogether different plot (see my review).

THE MOVIE RUNS 96 minutes and was shot in Los Angeles.

GRADE: C+ (5.5/10)