The Box

For the most part THE BOX is not a bad film but its not a very good film either, plainly put I had mixed reactions about this film, it had a good concept, the acting was above par, it maintains a slow pace throughout but when it ended I felt really disappointed because I waited for something big to happen and it never did, there was no major car chase scenes but there were a few quick shootouts nothing more, there is just nothing to get overly excited about in this film.

However, what kept me watching was the fact that I liked the cast, James Russo, Brad Dourif, Theresa Russell and Micheal Rooker are always great to see on screen no matter how the movie is, also I can safely say director Richard Pepin has done better films in the past, so I can easily let this one slide Overall, it might be worth seeing but you won't miss anything.

There is one thing that works better than a good twist: the absence of a twist when you are expecting one. Why? Because if this happens, it means the movie could surprise you, in the way it didn't choose the path you were thinking about. The Box falls in this category of films.

In its dark, somber and rough style, The Box has elements of the film-noir genre: an ex-convict just released from prison, a small urban town, a femme-fatale and a load of money. And as soon we realize everything is going from bad to worst - following a pessimistic storyline - we know Frank is doomed from the first moment he was released from prison, just because he left unfinished businesses when he was arrested. And for that reason there is no possible redemption, even if we can see, for some moments, glimpses of a new life for the doomed hero.

I like tragedies and doomed characters, and that's one of the reasons I liked The Box. Also, it's nice to see a thriller without a major twist in a time where every thriller marks its points by a closing twist. For this reason, The Box is surely an original piece or, at least, something different from the big-twist-ahead thrillers I've seen in the recent times. For its own good, The Box does not pretend to be smarter than its audience.

Lives up to the genre standard. An ex-con tries to go straight but also wants to get back money he's owed for the job that put him in prison. He meets a waitress who's also seen her share of trouble and they start up a tenuous relationship. Then there's a murder and things get complicated. It's noir so the plot isn't the main focus but the mood of the film is consistent and properly downbeat. The characters can't seem to shake the fate that hangs over them. The only thing that which was stood out as a mistake in judgment is the ending which comes too abruptly and seems tacked on from another film.

James Russo is excellent in this film, his face has aged rapidly acquiring a toughness/grittiness to match that cold stare he's always displayed. To my surprise he also wrote the screenplay, and maybe if he acted in more films he scripted he'd be a better known actor.

Theresa Russell, also getting more and more interesting with age gives a good performance as the waitress. There's also some excellent character work from Brad Dourif, Steve Railsback and Michael Rooker as the friend and the heavies, respectively.

I really love this genre and I wholeheartedly recommend it for other fans.

This is an excellent movie that takes chances. The whole cast is great, but the standout is James Russo as Frank. Russo never goes over the top. Frank just wants to live his life quietly. He is forced into violence. Theresa Russell, Michael Rooker, and Steve Railsback also put in very good performances. It is very unpredictable.

The Plot Is: When Frank and Dora (Theresa Russell) find a box full of money, other characters get involved including dirty cops.

Usually James Russo is in Z-grade junk like ("Deep Core", "The House Next Door", "Sonic Impact") It is nice to see him in a good movie for once.

In the end: If you want to see a solid crime drama, see "The Box"

For more insanity, please visit: comeuppancereviews.com

"The Box" was not a good movie. I thought the main character, Frank, was a brutal thug just released from prison and destined to go back. He solves problems with violence and, as I saw it, stalked a waitress he met. I think the movie tried to portray Frank as a victim of circumstance where he tries to go straight but is pulled back into crime by the bad influences around him. It was not successful. Frank made deliberate choices to use violence while trying to recover money from the crime he was imprisoned for. Was I to believe that this action was justified and correct? I didn't buy it. It's the skewed logic of a criminal mind that since they stole something then it is now theirs and they are justified in using any means to recover their property. Hey, it's stolen property. It doesn't belong to you. Then there is the whole other story about the waitress and her dysfunctional relationship that Frank sticks his nose into. The whole movie had this poorly contrived aura about it. It seemed that there was an ending, a poor ending, the writer had in mind and he just filled in some facts in the beginning to get the ending to happen. The performances by the principles were poor. Theresa Russell is capable of far better work and she did an OK job given the poor story but overall it wasn't that great. Brad Dourif seemed like he wanted to portray a tough guy by cursing and acting like a fool. He wasn't believable. The movie was a waste of time. Don't bother with it.