Deadline

A film with some of the worst acting ever seen, Deadline (an AWFUL title) came across as a bad student film destined for a very short theatrical release. Saw this in Tennessee, and figured it's only in theaters here hoping to capitalize on the that it was filmed here.

Clichéd dialogue, stereotypical characters & unbelievable story development plague this film "inspired by a true story". Felt like a film from the 60s, not one from 2012.

There are many great films dealing with racial issues, but this is not one.

But it was great to Eric Roberts, who was the lone bright spot.

March 5, Addendum Note the two new "positive" user reviews are from the same person. Click on Cole and you'll see that the reviewer's name is Leslie Hutchens! My hunch is she worked on the film or is related to someone that did.

Dreadful, horrible, deplorable and extremely unpleasant. Those are just a few words that I would use to describe this movie. The fact that the incredible Eric Roberts is in this movie doesn't help one bit. For the first 20 minutes, the scenes that Roberts was in, all seemed like a cameo. Now for the acting. The acting wasn't bad...It was BEYOND bad. It made me think most of them just came out of a horrible high school play and then into this movie. And just what is with that boss of the newspaper? For those who haven't seen this movie yet, imagine the kid from Bad Santa. Now imagine him trying to be a very loud, mean and angry boss. That's what we got here. It just doesn't work! The soundtrack is very familiar. I know I heard it somewhere before.....Oh yeah, now I know. I heard it sometime during the 80's.

At first I thought the story will be depressing, as movies about suffering usually are, but this one is definitely not one of those.

They say it's a real story, which makes it even better. The movie is very interesting, it keeps you on your sit the whole time. Maybe the spins we get during the plot, the thrill, or the excitement, whichever be the case, it's a good movie, great acting for a movie like this perhaps of medium budget. I'll give it a 6 and I'll definitely could see it a second time. I read another review which totally talks down about the movie. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, we don't know who wrote that or why, but I can only say, give it a chance and watch it. And the best thing, the end was totally unexpected.

Yup it is pretty bad and its hard to figure how who is mostly at fault .. but I'm going to say the direction caused a lot of that stilted acting. We go from one scene to the next of conversation .. two people or three, standing or sitting, and giving either expositional dialogue ad infinitum, or right on the nose dialogue, which is just as boring. So, the accomplice to the murder of this film would go to the writer.

And if wouldn't it be great if actors, having been given such an awful script and such plodding direction, could at least try to find some way to work against the predictable and the stereotypical. If you can't, then try to find some charm in your character, something we'd like, or identify with.

As fellow reviewer "clashjam" pointed out, the previous (very positive) reviews surely must have been posted by people involved with this film. To compare this movie to "A Time To Kill" is only accurate in that they both cover a similar topic. That's where the similarities end.

The acting is appalling with the exception of a few minor characters who are given so little screen time that they didn't have a chance to be as horrible as everyone else.

The soundtrack/score is so painfully bad I have to believe that the musicians are related to someone involved in its development or funding. Or, the musicians helped fund the movie on the condition that their music was used.

If you haven't seen the movie "A Time To Kill" - watch it instead. If you have seen "A Time To Kill" - watch it again, instead.

I gave the movie two stars instead of 1 because Eric Roberts did have a few funny lines. I would have given it one star if zero was an option.