Damaged

This movie has so many possibilities but poor direction and some editing flaws the overall experience. It is a perfect example where a "big name" is used just to boost a story or production. I feel for Samuel Jackson here, as he should be awarded for his tenacity and perseverance during this stumbling-along story

Don't get me wrong - there are other notable performances too, but they don't get the credit they deserve - it is all about using SJ's persona. It is a real pity, but this is not the only movie that has used this trait

As for the story itself - well written and executed although the surprise element was a little obvious towards the middle of the movie. The storyline could have done with some punch here and there to counter the slow burning and sometimes awkward watching experience (I fell asleep twice)

For the editing - well, this trait of leaving some scenes hanging for three or four seconds longer than necessary is not doing the experience any good. When a scene tells its story, MOVE ON!

The directing is OK although some scenes make you wonder why? Perhaps creating goofs on purpose? The murder scenes are rather irritating from a factual point of view. They are TOO obviously fake and the prop guys could have done so much more to make the scenes more accurate and believable. Using SJ they could have learnt from "7even" a bit

Overall just a popcorn-Saturday-rainy-night movie.

So with me being the movie person that I am I thought I was going to enjoy this way more then I actually did. The problem is any movie person has seen this story before so many times prior. I dried out alcoholic cop that is great at their job, but not reaching their full potential because of the alcohol and some life issue that is causing them to be miserable. This story is no different. A cop from Chicago is now in Europe working. He's very good at his job but the story doesn't really seem to care. The film is just ok. It's like watching a made for TV movie. It's just ok. I don't think I would recommend or view again.

I had to see this movie, because it featured two of my favorite actors, Samuel L Jackson and Vincent Cassel, but what disappointment it all turned out to be...

The bad: this movie was cheaply made and it shows! Everything from photography to sound and supporting actors looks and is mediocre. The only good thing going for it are these 2 stellar actors, but even they cant elevate a cheaply made product into something worht watching.

More bad: there is NO real supsense or thrill. And that is the whole point of this sort of movie. It should have been exciting, but it turned into quite a sleeping pill. And what's with Vincent Cassel trying to talk English? Kinda cringeworthy...

I couldn't say why the writers wanted Samuel L Jackson in Scotland. Possibly Gianni Capaldi, one of the three writers and co-star, simply wanted to meet him.

A local Scottish detective (Capaldi) has a US cop (Jackson) help with a case due to the similarity of some murders in the States. He then enlists the help of a Frenchman (Cassel) and former colleague who happens to be in London and the unlikely trio attempt to solve the mystery as more murders occur.

The premise is implausible. Jackson phones in his performance. Foreboding moments are neon signs. The twists and ending are unsatisfying.

There are a couple of good performances from Laura Haddock and Kate Dickie as the wife of the Scottish detective and detective Kessler respectively but they by no means lift the film above average.

It really was an unsatisfying conclusion. In itself the reason for the review.

A bit of a flop for me.

None of the characters seemed likeable, there was too much "accidental and forced" relationship drama that interrupted the storyline (which wasn't all that great to begin with), and there was no reason behind some of the character attributes. You'll see Samuel L. Jackson's character drinking constantly from scene one, so it's not a spoiler, but what does it add to the plot?

And speaking of Jackson, here's a good double standard for you: The retirement age for ANY Chicago cop is 63 and yet Samuel L. Jackson is 75. But somehow Leonardo DiCaprio caught hell for being too old for his role in "Killers of the Flower Moon." Now, I love both these guys--but Jackson gets a free pass because???