Piégé

A film about being trapped in a car? Ironically fitting, because watching Locked feels exactly like that-stuck, suffocating, and desperate for an escape.

Bill Skarsgård does his best with a script that insists on making him both a victim and an idiot, while Anthony Hopkins delivers lines with the air of a man who signed on for a better movie. What is he doing in this mediocrity of a film is honestly beyond me. The tension fizzles out early, leaving a predictable, boring, and frankly annoying ride to nowhere.

If you're after a claustrophobic thriller, watch Buried instead. At least that film knows how to keep you gasping for air.

Totally boring, implausible and pointless. Another disappointing flop featuring Skarsgård. It's not tense so much as just tedious. The back and forth moralizing of the protagonist and his captor seems like a stale attempt at courting the public discontent. The protagonist's complaint that laws serve to only protect the rich elicited a real groan from me. Fortunately this evaporates quickly, and never returns. However there's else here to captivate. All of the characters are ugly, and unlikeable. Save yourself the time and watch the 2000s classic 'Phone Booth' instead, which is much more thrilling.

LIKES: The Concept The Acting The Dialogue Food For Thought Deep A Different Character Development Movie Summary: Locked looks like a movie about escaping, and in a way, it is, but the trailers mislead how much deeper this film is than a simple survival film. The concept is unique in that it takes a philosophy class and crams it into an interesting scenario that the movies serve to portray. Throughout Eddie's journey, he is forced to answer questions and undergo trials to test his morals, question choices, and study how rules apply. Within the movie is a lot of dialogue that blends reality with theatrical precedence, shaping a casual conversation into an artful debate that will push both players to wild behaviors. To think a car could prove to be such an extreme classroom impressed me, as Yarovesky and his team created a scenario that is intelligent and yet approachable on many levels. Such content manages to bring great thought wrapped up in an engaging package of horrific fights for survival in such a simplistic measure, yet is truly deep in causing the audience to perhaps self-reflect on this journey. Locked is a movie with a very unique character development method, but the story emphasizes character evolution in the most unlikely ways. And the acting is simply wonderful despite the limited cast involved in bringing this film to life. Cartwright's quick interludes are impressive for someone so young; she just needed more time to sparkle. Instead, the two leads grab the most attention, with Skarsgard, the headliner who continues to be so engaging in roles and comfortable with the dark material. He's raw and abrasive in this film, but it works to so many levels and is still contained without spilling into too much, a task not easy to achieve by any means. Hopkins's voice is well-suited for this role, a perfect antagonistic drawl that he has mastered and utilizes like a weapon to challenge the youthful urgings. The chemistry is fantastic, the bouts so sincere and maniacal that I felt a true kindred of animosity between these two parties.

DISLIKES: Not Really Thrilling A Bit Drawn Out At Times Uneven Pace Anthony Hopkins's Backstory Is Dull Torture is a tad extensive The Language Gets Stale Quickly Summary: For this film, I did not find it as thrilling as I had imagined it would be. Sure, there are close moments and an ordeal that pushes Eddie to limits, but for most of the movie, I did not feel he was in danger (thanks to the trailers). Yet, the movie is missing a few elements to make the whole ordeal exciting, with only the end finally moving past that plot shield for me. Locked also felt very drawn out at times, the initial trapped in the parking lot concept a little too long when not supported by external stories that could have upped the intensity as it could have. The uneven pace leads to a rather slow middle part, which only becomes relieved when the car starts moving. Until that point, the torture components are the only "sport" for enjoyment and some of them are very disturbing given how real they are and the evil dialogue that taunts the victim. Such wickedness is hard to handle in such a setting, no matter how well it is acted. In regards to backstory, all the waiting proves to be somewhat worth it for Hopkins' character, but I felt there was a lot more to tell that was left on the cutting board. I didn't hate it, but I also didn't think it was quite up to snuff for how calculating William was. Yet, the worst thing for me was the cursing. No matter how accurate it might be, nearly ninety minutes of the F-bomb does little but bore me when that becomes much of the dialogue. The writers help this by giving Hopkins free rein over responding, but it still is not enough to get past what I call limited writing and thus was not my cup of tea. So, for those who do not like such excess in language, you've been warned in this movie.

The VERDICT: Locked in an engaging philosophy class in a horror-like package. A fantastic cast of two is the backbone to make much of the wit, material, and dialog excel, providing deep moral concepts to drive a character-centric plot. The engaging will to survive alone is an admirable concept, but to have such content reflect the audience is a level of film that is hard to balance. It's a much deeper movie than I anticipated, and for that, I give it higher props. Sure, the pacing is uneven, the thrills are minimalistic if you like something with more popcorn bite, and the story is lacking in some departments. In addition, the cursing is excessive, and the darker moments can be difficult to handle for those who have a low tolerance for such things. Still, Locked proves to be one of the more intelligently-written films I've seen in a while, and worth a watch or two. Is it theater-worthy? Tough call, but the movie's lack of conventional thrills might be better suited for a home viewing. By factoring everything together, my scores are: Horror/Thriller: 7.0 Movie Overall: 7.0.

A man, sick and tired of people breaking into his car, traps the next thief and extend his torture for longer than necessary by making his own justice. A man willing and capable to do anything, and a youngster at the wrong place.

I wasn't expecting the sound design to be so crunchy, or for it to be as gore-y as it was. The setup isn't particularly memorable, and most of the dialogue isn't that good. I enjoyed Collateral (2004) much more than this for that simple reason. But it takes its premise and goes places with it.. but not enough to fill in 90 minutes. Sadly, there's a LOT of "empty space" and the pacing suffers a lot because of its content. The acting is good, but not great.

Overall, it's okay.

You understand what it is doing/saying, and you know where it is going to go (more or less). The sad part is that there is no particular reason to watch this.

I got back from the theaters a few mins ago

I thought this movie looked more like something I would watch on streaming, but since I have Regal Unlimited, I decided to go on a slow day at the office.

Long story short - the movie isn't good. You're better off waiting for streaming

The plot itself is bare-bones. Bill Skarsgard (who looks a little like Pete Davidson here) gets trapped inside a car, basically. And as a result, very little actually happens for most of the movie. What we get, instead, is about an hour and change of watching Skarsgard sit inside the car by himself, which gets dull very quickly. The movie simply doesn't have enough to maintain interest while Skarsgard is trapped. The dialogue between him and Hopkins isn't interesting: Hopkins' characters meanders on and on, and they seem to repeat themselves ("What do you want from me?" "I want you to understand" .. seriously, I feel that I heard that exchange at least 5 times). The little acts that Hopkins does to terrorize Skargard similarly become repetitive

The movie is basically a two-man show in Skarsgard and Hopkins, and neither one of them is likable. Hopkins' character is obviously too pyscho for the audience to like. And though the film tries to make Skarsgard appear likable by using his daughter as well as a scene where he randomly gives water to a dog, the basic truth remains that he's scum who steals people's money and belongings . There is no one here for the audience get behind

The movie takes a bit of a silly turn when Hopkins somehow controls the car remotely; the events that happen here become almost unintentionally funny. Some of the dialogue near the end (e.g. Dirty Harry references) become cringe

4/10.