Walden

First I gotta say this snuck up on me, this film is a independent cult classic, the dark humor & sinister plot twist was paced well for me, this movie is not too over the top for your senses, the direct too the point main character is just right. The connoisseurs of independent cinema should enjoy, hell I did. I gotta add it's a damn shame this film didn't get the push like most films but you gotta be plugged into the mainstream for that, that being said this film stands on it's own merit. The pacing of this film was not full of cliches too bog a viewer down, the main character was all in, the supporting cast was not out of place for me at all.

I feel like the pacing and writing was massively meant for television. It was good film but but protracted at points and then wrapped up too quickly. It felt it had threads to unwrap but none of them did in a one hour and forty minute film. Acting was great and production very good but it did, at times, feel like a television series.

Main guy camps up the main role but presumably on purpose to make it feel less droll with the subject matter in hand which at times is as dark as it gets.

Enjoyed this but interested to know if it was meant instalments which might mean more films or a spin off series.

This movie had so much potential but it was like a long form version of a bad episode of a crime procedural.

Why the coloring? Why is the movie filtered so strangely lol Did anyone involved in this movie look into court reporting or talk to any real life court reporters? 360wpm is way, way faster than they read in the movie, The steno machine has a stand and there's a proper way to sit at it. It's not propped on a table. And steno notes DO have to be stored, by law, for a certain period of time. But I guess they would've had to write something more clever /talk to the extras who played court reporters if they'd done the research.

This movie could've been interesting AND informed the public about the court reporting profession, but it just played pretend and also fell flat in so many areas of the story.

"No one gives a damn. Why should you?"

Walden is directed by Mick Davis and stars Emile Hirsch, Shane West, Kelli Garner and Tania Raymonde.

When small town court stenographer Walden Dean discovers he has a terminal illness he decides to become a vigilante to punish the people who deserve it. Emile Hirsch gives one of his best performances here as what I could only explain as "Dexter if he was on the spectrum." Seriously he really sold this role. His performance might come across as grating to some but I thought it worked for this movie.

Overall this movie isn't great but for a DTV thriller this was engaging to watch and competently made. The ending also sets up a sequel which I would be down to see.

I watched this movie in an effort to join in on comments at another site just for fun and got hooked instead. Like Roman J. Israel, Esq., starring Denzel Washington playing a legal savant with little else in the brain going for him, this movie reflects on the ranges of savants, from one too dim to be grown up, and one, the stenographer, too tried of injustice to allow it anymore. The story then delves into the ranges of vigilantism. When does it go too far? Is it always too far? But, the movie delivers this story with a lighthearted approach almost to the point of campiness, but managed to avoid it and give us a very satisfying ending. After the ending, have a discussion about how far you might be willing to go or would be willing to turn your head from or even condone. Well done.