Walden

A stenographic vigilante is not a common theme and opens up vast number of avenues for the plot to grow. But the movie's first half was too distracted with introducing the manic nature of the central character rather than focusing on the plot's progress. Introducing irrelevant characters such as romantic partners wasn't making much effect or useful. Final twist was great but police showing their findings for the sake of neighborly acquaintance was one out of many illogical things in this story. However the visuals were haunting and performances were sincere. Walden is a story that's very much interesting when summed up.

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.

This will go down in years to come as a cult classic.

Characters in this film are nothing short of wonderful.

The acting is spot on, a lovely storyline of revenge and honesty.

A soft hearted Court reporter gets fed up with seeing bad guys go free and takes it upon himself to deal out a bit of self justice, then his friend gets wrongly accused of an evil crime so he goes after the real perpetrator.....

At first I thought it was a comedic affair, but it turns out to be a unique quirky thriller with a twist or two.

Well worth a watch , I cannot understand the poor reviews. I loved it from start to end.