Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA detective deals with the loss of his own son while trying to uncover the identity of a boy whose mummified remains are found in a box buried for fifty years.A detective deals with the loss of his own son while trying to uncover the identity of a boy whose mummified remains are found in a box buried for fifty years.A detective deals with the loss of his own son while trying to uncover the identity of a boy whose mummified remains are found in a box buried for fifty years.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
The film centres on a policeman's (Jon Hamm) search to uncover the truth behind the discovery of a 50 year old corpse of a child. It also interweaves the story of a young man (Josh Lucas) and his 3 sons as he struggles to support his family in 1950's America. The 1950's storyline in particular is dealt with extremely well but both story lines link well together throughout the movie.
I have never seen anything of Hamm's previous work and only Posieden of Lucas but was impressed by both actors who conveyed the sense of loss of a child impressively throughout. Lucas in particular was I thought outstanding. The children in the film were also impressive especially Jimmy Bennett. The rest of the cast had less to work with and the characters weren't fully fleshed out but this was probably due to the relatively short running period of the film.
Once it hits its stride (fairly early on) this film never lets go. I found it quite moving and disturbing at the same time and for viewers with children this film will hit home in particular.
Whilst it does have a few flaws, for a relatively low budget film this is extremely impressive.
If you are looking for something to pass 90 minutes, you could do a lot worse.
The story basically is a cop, Tom Adkins, is haunted by the disappearance of his son 8 years ago. Then he discovers the remains of another boy about the same age as his own son, who was murdered 50 years previously. He becomes obsessed with the case, which has been long-forgotten. Is the 1958 case, involving down-on-his-luck dad of three family man, Matthew Wakefield and his own sons disappearance linked in any way to that of Tom Adkins?
Acting is fine by all.
Personally I thought the film started really well, and I thought the 1958 story was more interesting than the present story. But the ending seemed a tad rushed.
But, not a bad film at all.
My advice...well worth renting....but don not buy! (It's a watch once film)
Consider Hamm's anguished cop, who, at a Fourth of July pageant, in the mere minutes it took him to go to and from the toilet in a diner establishment, finds the son who accompanied him has apparently disappeared as if into thin air, never to return. It later transpires that he encounters the perpetrator just outside the diner, so how has he managed to spirit away his son and got back to the pageant in those mere minutes?
Years pass, with Hamm unable to get over his loss and attendant guilt, the emotional distance between him and his wife widening close to separation point, when a child's body is unearthed, bearing similarities to his own child and immediately throwing suspicion on a long-interred suspect. The movie then moves back and forth in time from the present-day to 1958 where we see enacted the story of the disappearance (thankfully, there are no scenes depicting the actual murder of the children) of the first child and the truth is gradually brought to light as the stories converge.
That's quite a lot to bring together in a mere 90 minutes and after all the exposition, the ending is wound up in double quick time, with a too blatant slip by the murderer and too easily obtained subsequent confession. I also thought the 1958 story was more involving, if more implausible than the present-day one, contriving a "Postman Always Rings Twice" dalliance between the father and a local femme-fatale, complete with jealous husband, unbalancing the narrative, although the transitions between the two time-frames were cleverly done, with dissolves on the shared crime-scene exhibits.
The acting was okay, Hamm jutting his jaw and running his hand through his hair in familiar angst-ridden fashion, although I thought the better acting was done by Josh Lucas as his 1950's counterpart, conveying just the right composite of Henry Fonda crossed with James Stewart as the drifter at the mercy of fate, while Morena Baccarin and James Van der Beek playing respectively the slack wife and the murderer made strong, if brief impressions too.
In the end, this was a fairly routine thriller, lacking somewhat in tension, characterisation and credibility, with more of the aspects of a TV movie than Hollywood feature. I don't think I'd pay to watch it, seeing it on the small-screen seemed about right.
The story is never easily told perhaps because the director wished us to explore the notion that reality is seldom something we confront without absolute proof. At times the acting is so real we may feel like giving up on this father because if he cannot let go then we can, but we persevere as he does.
Although I felt the story could have been better told I did end up admiring this work simply because it is very human exposing all the faults and frailties of our lives. It is also ultimately cathartic with a natural release with allows us to breathe again.
It is certainly a fine film and well worth watching.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesScreenwriter Glenn Taranto wrote his first draft of the screenplay, originally titled "The Boy in the Box", in six days over a two week period. He was inspired by the famous unsolved case of "America's Unknown Child" aka The Boy In The Box. Working backwards Glenn created an original scenario detailing how such an unsolved crime might have occurred. Should anyone have any information regarding the real "Boy In The Box" case they are encouraged to contact the Philadelphia, PA Police Department.
- GaffesWe see the box being buried in concrete, yet when the box is being dug up it is just buried under earth.
- Citations
[last lines]
Tom Adkins Sr.: My biggest fear is that when I do find him, what's left of us may not be enough. I haven't been able to forgive myself, and so I push my wife away. I can't even look her in the eyes, because every time I do, I see my mistakes. So I take the risk of losing everything. Not because I want to, but because I have to. Only then will I have the strength to go to my wife and ask her for forgiveness. And I have to believe that one day she will give it to me.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Rotten Tomatoes Show: Cop Out/The Crazies/A Prophet (2010)
Meilleurs choix
- How long is Stolen?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Stolen
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 2 000 000 $US (estimé)
- Montant brut aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 7 943 $US
- Week-end de sortie aux États-Unis et au Canada
- 1 035 $US
- 14 mars 2010
- Montant brut mondial
- 7 943 $US
- Durée
- 1h 31min(91 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 2.35 : 1