Criminal activists hijack a gala, taking 300 hostages. One extremist plans mass murder as a message to the world. An Ex-soldier turned window cleaner now works to rescue the hostages.Criminal activists hijack a gala, taking 300 hostages. One extremist plans mass murder as a message to the world. An Ex-soldier turned window cleaner now works to rescue the hostages.Criminal activists hijack a gala, taking 300 hostages. One extremist plans mass murder as a message to the world. An Ex-soldier turned window cleaner now works to rescue the hostages.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 2 nominations total
Taz Skylar
- Noah
- (as Taz Skyler)
- …
Sol E. Romero
- Halina
- (as Sol E Romero)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
The answer is this film. Make the two stars do the bare minimum so you don't have to pay them too much? I don't really get it tho. Like all the money went to the production and Campbell? Clive Owen essentially pulls a Bruce Willis here. Total screen time probably didn't exceed 5 minutes and you got Daisy Ridley outside of the building for 3/4 of the film, doing nothing when she should've just did something to begin with and save us all the stupid ass runtime. This movie would be over in 40 minutes. I'm rambling along here cuz there's a minimum characters required to post a review apparently. I don't write reviews that often...
This movie at its kindest review is mediocre. It's not the worst movie I've ever watched but it no where the best I've ever watched. I totally understand why it started the way it did, it gave a tiny back story. But the character of her brother having autism seemed to have no place in this movie at all. It actually made his character confusing and inconsequential until the end and even then him being autistic had no bearing on the character. The action was decent, the story is the same ole story, and the acting ehhh it just felt off. Will I recommend this movie to others, I seriously doubt it. Will I watch it again, absolutely not. On to the next.
I like Daisy Ridley a lot, and I think she does her best to carry the film, but I just found myself rolling my eyes far too often to enjoy this mess.
I can only suspend disbelief to a certain point, and above every other problem is this... How does everything in the first half of the film happen EXACTLY where the one window cleaner happens to be. This is a four-sided skyscraper!!! Also, people have regular conversations through the glass, one canister of gas in a hallway is enough to knock out everyone on every floor, people travel multiple floors in no time at all, SOOOO many clichès, etc. And as much as I rooted for Daisy to win, it's hard to feel sorry for the hostages.
There was some fun action, though nothing outstanding, and it was capably directed in a way that was very easy to follow. Also, I really enjoyed Matthew Tuck as her brother. Could've been a very annoying character, but he grounded it enough for me.
I can only suspend disbelief to a certain point, and above every other problem is this... How does everything in the first half of the film happen EXACTLY where the one window cleaner happens to be. This is a four-sided skyscraper!!! Also, people have regular conversations through the glass, one canister of gas in a hallway is enough to knock out everyone on every floor, people travel multiple floors in no time at all, SOOOO many clichès, etc. And as much as I rooted for Daisy to win, it's hard to feel sorry for the hostages.
There was some fun action, though nothing outstanding, and it was capably directed in a way that was very easy to follow. Also, I really enjoyed Matthew Tuck as her brother. Could've been a very annoying character, but he grounded it enough for me.
Corporate greed, eco-activism, terrorism, and a window-cleaner ex-military girl taking down the bad guys who seized her building.
I'll be brief.
This movie is neither particularly fun nor satisfying. The premise shows promise but reveals its hand too early and quickly loses steam. The action is serviceable, the villains are a yawn, and the characters, their motivations, dialogue, and their resolution are all too generic to leave a lasting impression. On top of that, the pacing drags in places, the ending fails to deliver, and the emotional beats between the siblings never quite land. Does it attempt to make a statement about environmental destruction and corporate accountability? If so, it does so in the dullest way possible.
Die Hard, this is not, so the comparisons are moot. Here, the villains hold all the cards (they control the police, the building, and the hostages) and yet the heroine somehow becomes an inexplicable problem for them. There's a script issue, but also an execution problem, as Miss Ridley is competent in the role, but her casual attitude while committing "action" feels jarring and undermines any sense of real danger.
At least it is short (90 minutes, and it feels even shorter). Watch if you want a generic action movie.
I'll be brief.
This movie is neither particularly fun nor satisfying. The premise shows promise but reveals its hand too early and quickly loses steam. The action is serviceable, the villains are a yawn, and the characters, their motivations, dialogue, and their resolution are all too generic to leave a lasting impression. On top of that, the pacing drags in places, the ending fails to deliver, and the emotional beats between the siblings never quite land. Does it attempt to make a statement about environmental destruction and corporate accountability? If so, it does so in the dullest way possible.
Die Hard, this is not, so the comparisons are moot. Here, the villains hold all the cards (they control the police, the building, and the hostages) and yet the heroine somehow becomes an inexplicable problem for them. There's a script issue, but also an execution problem, as Miss Ridley is competent in the role, but her casual attitude while committing "action" feels jarring and undermines any sense of real danger.
At least it is short (90 minutes, and it feels even shorter). Watch if you want a generic action movie.
Okay, is this movie winning Oscars? No. Was it a fun watch? Well, yes. Yes it was. Daisy Ridley was solid in her role. I wish we had more Clive Owen. I think the movie would have been better if he played the role of Noah Santos. But overall, it was a fun action movie if you go in to it without high expectations which is what I did. They did give this movie a budget of $25 million which is quite impressive for a movie that wasn't a theater release. My only complaint, cheesy writing and situations that defied logic. But overall I had fun watching it. It kept my attention for almost two hours. If you're bored and can't find anything to watch, give this a go. Heck, it's better than most offerings on Netflix lol.
Did you know
- TriviaThis is the second time Daisy Ridley and Clive Owen have played a protagonist and antagonist in the same movie. Their first movie was Ophélie (2018).
- GoofsWhen the Joey is outside she has a conversation with someone of the inside of the building - they can hear each other easily as no one has to raise their voice. Glass like this in towers is very thick and tough and would deaden noises. A proof of how tough the glass is that later on she tries to break the glass with a heavy wrench without success..
- ConnectionsReferenced in Film Threat: CLEANER | Film Threat Reviews (2025)
- How long is Cleaner?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Клінер
- Filming locations
- Winnersh Film Studios, UK(1020 Eskdale Road Wokingham RG41 5TS)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- £25,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $794,091
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $403,560
- Feb 23, 2025
- Gross worldwide
- $1,314,073
- Runtime
- 1h 37m(97 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content