"You're not from around here. You got no identification. You got no car. You're covered in dirt like you've been digging somewhere and to top it all off..." Two college professors are working on a study in racial dynamics and bias. They plan to rob a bank in a small town record how they are treated before they give the money back. Things are going as planned until they find a sheriff (Sadler) who will stop at nothing to get a positive identification. When the partner doesn't show up with the money to prove it's all an act things take a serious turn. This is a difficult movie to review. It is very good but it's hard to talk too much about it without giving anything away. I will say though that the movie at the same time breaks down and supports certain stereotypes, when you watch you will see what I mean. The best part of the movie though is that you never are quite sure what is going on and it keeps you guessing all the way until the end. This is the type of movie where there is really no defined good or bad guys. That makes a movie more fun to watch. Overall, a movie that stays one step ahead of you the entire time, I like movies like that. I give this a B+.
Add a Review
-
featheredsun13 November 2013This film has merits and problems, both, but in the end, it keeps your attention and makes you care about the characters and how the story is going to end.
The acting is pretty solid and the pace is lean and appropriate.
So it succeeds at a basic level.
AND the subject matter is thought-provoking. This reviewer found himself looking at situations and behaviour with a keen eye toward subtext and meaning. I can't say more without spoiling it.
As other reviewers have said, this is best viewed with a minimal or no previous understanding of the plot. Just enjoy the ride. -
The first 3/4 of the movie were interesting, and I could have given it a 6 or 7 out of 10, but several things didn't sit well that made the film a far stretch even for a movie..
The premise is basic. Two college professors perform a "sociological experiment" in several midwest towns, seeing just how prevalent an undercurrent of racism is. The context of this is staging a bank robbery in very small towns where there are no other African-Americans and one guy rob the bank, then leave the other guy on the side of the road to be found by the police. Then comes an interrogation where the potential prejudice/racism can come out. It becomes justified as an "experiment" and they get pardoned from jail to go on their merry way because 1) the money gets returned and 2) the "experiment" context (ie potential for the scenario being published) leaves the sheriff embarrassed enough to let the suspect go.
The first big problem I was bugged by, throughout the entire film, was that if you rob a bank, it's a crime. Even if you give the money back. Even ATTEMPTED robbery is a crime. Obviously, there's no specific evidence of who robbed the bank (wearing masks, long clothing, etc), but the moment your partner shows up at the sheriff with a bunch of money that comes up to the amount stolen from the bank, you'll get arrested. Embarrassment aside, you've committed a crime.
Secondly, the theme of racism comes up many times but I fail to see how the behavior is racist. If you happen to show a bit of dark colored skin while robbing a bank and there are no dark skinned people in the town, then a dark skinned fellow is on the side of the road outside of town under ambiguous circumstances, it's a logic conclusion, not racism. Racism would be looking for an African-American suspect and stopping every African-American in town when there is a certain percentage of such. Using overgeneralized identifiable information on a selection of the population. But if a midget robs a bank and there are no midgets who live in town and then you see a midget on the side of the road who can't come up with a clear alibi, then you're going to conclude that the midget did it. That's just logic. It's almost like this movie was trying to overdo the race theme for some cheezy after-school feel-good purpose.
Third, in a town where people are genuinely racist, they don't talk as politely as these sheriffs do. They throw out the N-word like it's nothing. These people's behaviors was not racist, it may have been prejudiced to an outsider, but his skin color was not a factor except that it shared identifiable information to the bank robber which no other citizen in the town could identify with. But that's a minor issue.
The ending had a double twist. First, the partner never made it to the sheriff station, with the money. So enough of the situation is explained to the sheriff so they end up going on a search for the missing guy and his car. Turns out it ends up over a cliff (are there even cliffs in the midwest?), and the partner is dead. The money is in a bag, and the sheriff insists on the money first, pulled up via winch. They're apparently going to keep the money and say they let this fellow go (surprise!)
The problem I have here is that this supposed college professor of psychology never gave question to giving the money (his leverage) to the police. Granted, the money in the bag was counterfeit. But with the winch gone, how would the guy ever get back to safety? It seemed like a long ways down.
This somewhat reveals the second twist. Or perhaps there are three twists. The money they return to the bank is counterfeit. Did nobody care enough to check the serial numbers? OK, maybe that doesn't matter. Apparently they are "fake" robbing banks under the pretext of a university sociological experiment so as to acquire enough money for - surprise - the guy's dying daughter (ie black market organs from Argentina). They switch the real money for some counterfeit, and keep the real money.
Except this is where the final - and perhaps sappy - twist comes into play. The cops take the supposed bag of money and then douse the guy stuck down a cliff with gasoline, then set everything on fire. Except the guy never bothers to get up. He just sits there, screaming, in the fire. He doesn't seem to care. He doesn't bother moving, or trying to survive. Seems really stupid. And this is where the final sappy twist comes into play. He dies, and he has this life insurance policy, that pays out $8 million that can then pay for his dying daughter's black market organ/surgery! Sappy ending.
Maybe I'm the only one who caught it, but I don't see how the ending is plausible AT ALL. First off, the guy was telling the sheriff his FRIEND'S name, ie "Freeman Finch". Yes, they both died, but seems that they got burned. How can anyone be identified? Who would bother informing the insurance company? These fellows manipulated and conned the cops, so it's in their interest to pretend they don't exist. I guess maybe to close the case on the robbery they had to explain that these guys died in a car crash. How the tire popped and lose control made no sense either. What's ironic is that part of the movie's appeal is the race card played against the sheriffs, except it really was played against the movie watchers, because they really were keeping the money. -
I was certainly entertained by the movie. Since the synopsis has it, the fact that the two black guys are university professors/researchers is not a spoiler. The other twists are interesting enough. The premise holds your interest through its run time, and the film doesn't run too long.
One minor issue was all of the jump backs in time. It was a little much to keep track of what is present day vs. past.
The BIG issue is that (and this is not spoiler either) even if they returned the money and explained themselves, they still committed a crime. It's a little far-fetched that they would be let off scot-free by multiple cities, EVEN when the nature of their study is explained (the race card stuff). I get that they want you to think that they are let go because of the explanation and the notion that if the race stuff got out, it would make the cops look bad, so they just let them go.
It's somewhat of a clever script, I'll give them that, and the performances are good. I'm giving it 6/10 out because 5 is average and this is ever-so-slightly above that, but this isn't the greatest thing since sliced bread. It's an entertaining watch if you can see it for free or very low cost. -
ikeybabe16 June 2014This was a twisty, curvy, throwing all kinds of unexpected things in your face kind of film and I liked it. The whole plot was a surprise, because what you think is happening isn't and even when you think you know what's going on that's not it either! The script was well-done because the whole thing is a mystery unfolding inside another mystery. The cast was excellent and they did a good, believable job with the roles. *SPOILER ALERT* At the end, the only thing that irked me a bit was that these brothas basically ended up playing into the overall stereotype, even if it was ingenious but then again they had the very best reason in the world. So there ya go. A thoroughly entertaining flight of fun
-
westsideschl20 April 2014The premise of investigating prejudice in police behavior by being arrested for a crime and then saying it was all a hoax was a promising plot, except - 1. The plot hook of robbing banks was too overly far-fetched largely because of the safety and legal issues to participants, bank employees, customers, police, pedestrian traffic, etc. should an unexpected event turn tragic. 2. That supposedly a University signed off on this is ludicrous. A poorly designed research method that could have been done in many other and safer ways with more accurate results. That several other police, banks and officials later dismissed their participation and swept it under-the-rug is not very likely. 3. The extreme stereotyping of a bank employee, police and others greatly reduced the credibility of the story which is a shame because the story's premise had potential to be a truly educative tool. 4. The ending created for a dramatic effect was more laughable than real casting yet another nail of make believe into what could have been an impactful script.
-
donniemurray194921 April 2014Good Movie story line, well acted.
To Bad whomever was in charge of costumes, didn't bother with checking some of the props that were used on the uniforms of the Officers... the Sheriff had both a PFC and a Spc4 insignias on his uniform and all the officers were displaying multiple rank insignias of Private, corporal or Sergeant ranks at the same time. Noticed the insignia for Artillery on one shoulder panel and the Sheriff had infantry insignia on his breast pocket. Jeesh any military person could have advised them better than the person they had handling wardrobe.
Other that that, not a bad movie.. -
peter_van_o30 October 2013It seems that I must have watched a different movie to the first two reviewers. This is easily one of the worst films I've seen all year.
Put simply, I was unable to get past the halfway point of this film (I literally walked out on this movie). The acting was horrible, the script was clunky and lacked subtlety of any kind. The portrayal of the police officers in this movie was laughably bad (extremely one-dimensional). The attempt to build suspense had me grinding my teeth very quickly.
While the makers of this film were obviously aiming for an intelligent, racially-charged thriller, they've ended up producing an absolute stinker. This is a "B" movie personified.
You have been warned! -
The Suspect is one of the movies that has intriguing hook right from the start. It shrewdly fiddles with the timeline back and forth, giving just enough information as it goes and revealing timely revelations later on. Whereas other thrillers might offer aggressive approach, The Suspect bids its time with apt performance by its cast along with the premise of social manipulation.
A sheriff in small town arrests a man after bank robbery. This particular suspect only has one identifiable feature that allegedly implicates him, his dark skin. Since it's the farthest thing from CSI, the sheriff must determine if this suspect is indeed the felon. The strange dynamic concept spirals further as there are a lot of questions concerning his behavior, which might not be so accommodating. The movie's biggest strength is its social and psychological aspects, these are easily identifiable to audience as well as meticulously scripted.
Acting is fine, with the cast looking beyond their stereotypical roles as they try to outwit each other. Cinematography isn't grandiose as the movie sets almost entirely in rural town. In fact it's exclusively shot only in a few major sets and the rest is ordinary road or outdoor. This is made cleverly into an advantage since the movie probably wouldn't work with bolder setting. The camera-work itself is good, opting more for precision than flair.
The change in pace flows adequately well with smart script to guide it. Some scenes pique curiosity while a few others are surprisingly humorous. One drawback from this shifting pace is it can be confusing at times, also towards the end the narration is slightly heavy-handed. The development could be smoother as some of the scenes may be foreshadowing. Nevertheless, the movie maintains a balanced focus through its run time.
The Suspect is a different type of thriller, it delivers an alternative and restrained story. If this is a book, which we should never judge by its cover, it would be a pop-up book due to series of trickery it has stored inside. -
I think the description of the movie may have thrown me off a little bit, because I was expecting the events to turn out differently, and the lead characters to be different.
I must say, when the experiment that is the movie's plot goes wrong and the goals of the experiment start to reveal itself, it made for an interesting roller-coaster of events done in a very low key matter, and very well.
It's funny, the movie tries to be cleaver and show you that things are not what they seem, but it messes up somewhere and the movie falls victim of the point it was trying to make, and as a result does not make it at all.
the summary made me feel that it was trying to speak out against prejudice, but I felt everyone in the film just got stereotyped.
I don't know if the filmmaker intended to do this or realized what he was doing, but if that's not the case he may want to strangle the man who promoted this film. It's a good film if you can take race out of the equation, I couldn't. -
paduka12 November 2013This is the first time I am writing a review on IMDb and I am doing this for two reasons: 1). Because this is a truly great movie that deserves a review 2). To boost up the ratings because I am truly shocked that the film has received such poor ratings (so far)
I will not give much away (and nor should you do much reading on the plot) because this is one of those movies where the less you know, the better it is. The settings are very simple yet effective. And with a storyline like this there was no need for all the mumbo jumbo CGI, special effects, blasts and the whole malarkey. There are so many twists in this film and you will be glued right on the get go.
When I first watched the film, there were no reviews/ratings available as it had just been released, so I was very much looking forward to the reviews and see that (not if) other viewers enjoyed it as much as I did. Now that I see the ratings, I felt compelled (like the other reviewers here) to urge people to watch it as it is truly a remarkable, original and SMART film. So please, do yourself a favour and watch it- you will NOT be disappointed! -
nogodnomasters7 June 2019A bank has just been robbed and small town "by the book" Sheriff Dixon (William Sadler) has a man (Mekhi Phifer) in custody. While interrogating the man about the robbery our suspect constantly tries to goat the sheriff into making a racist comment. The film is filled with flashbacks to present a twist and continued to have flashbacks within a flashback.
The first twist comes early as we find out our suspect had a partner and did indeed rob the bank. The second twist at about an hour into the film was expected as the film dropped a clue.
The final twist didn't seem to have much of a clue and goes against character established in the film, although should have been expected.
A mild thriller.
Parental Guide F-bomb. No sex or nudity. -
Buddy-5130 June 2014"The Suspect" has all the polish and professionalism of some grad-school student's final project for a PhD in Cinema.
The premise of the movie is so improbable and loopy that it requires a complete suspension of disbelief even to get through it. However, I won't reveal what that premise is, for to do so would be to engage in the biggest plot spoiler since "The Crying Game." All I can tell you is that it involves two African-American men who may have robbed a bank in a rural Midwest community. "May" is indeed the operative word here, for it turns out there is far more to the story than what appears on the surface.
If all that sounds somehow intriguing, then I'm doing more justice to the movie than it actually deserves. I don't question the good intentions of those who made the film, but it so ineptly directed and so badly acted, so filled with screeds and bromides about racism and justice, and so bogged down by over-earnest plotting and a confusing time-shifting narrative, that even the best of intentions can't make a silk purse out of this particular sow's ear.
I've deliberately avoided identifying the individuals responsible for "The Suspect," both those in front of the camera and those behind it, and I wish them nothing but the best in their future careers in movie-making. But I doubt anyone will be rushing to claim credit for this underwhelming, if well-intentioned, cinematic misfire. -
deloudelouvain14 July 2022I wasn't impressed by this one to be honest. The entire movie felt like a cheap tv-movie. The only positive thing was the acting, which wasn't bad, but the rest just fell short. Annoying soundtrack, exactly the kind you could expect from a tv-movie. The story is not very believable, let just say that if this happened in real life those african American men would have been or shot, or ended up in jail for the rest of their lives, certainly in trigger happy America. I hoped for something better, but what I saw was borderline boring.
-
OJT21 February 2014A perfect start to a film is watching landscapes and the introduction to a venue, while listening to a radio updating you. In seconds you are put into the situation. A small town has just experienced a bank robbery. And a sheriff of a completely white small town leaves the police car to start an interrogation of a black man which is suspected of the robbery. Simply great, and a great start of the film.
I like a film that is different, and this is very original both in the storytelling and in the plot. I was engaged in the story all the way through, though it's a little bit confusing. There's even some flash backs to help you understand. By no way perfect, but still interesting and engaging. On a large budget this would have potential to be a large hit.
William Sadler is great as the sheriff, as is Mekhi Phifer as the suspect. It's a low budget production but they have made the best out of it. Talented film making by first time offender Stuart Connelly! Go see it! -
SPOILER ALERT!!
What made the film good is that you don't realize what the film is about until the end. Yes, it started off as a social experiment on racism, only to find out it wasn't really an experiment at all. They actually were robbing the banks and replacing the money with counterfeit and returning the money to the sheriff to be released from custody.
Here's the twist: it was never about them robbing the bank in the first place. That was the back up plan. The plan was for the main character to be killed so that his family can receive the insurance money. He would go to small towns in the Deep South where racism is very much still alive and try to provoke the sheriff into killing him. If the sheriff followed protocol and let him go, then the back up plan was to accumulate enough money for his daughter's medical expenses through the bank robberies.
There were several "twists" in the film. 1)One being that they weren't actually conducting an experiment, but really robbing the bank. 2)The obviously racist sheriff in the first experiment let them go, but the seemingly good sheriff in the second experiment that is just following protocol is actually the guy that kills him. 3) The actual plan was for him to be killed all along, robbing banks was just the back up plan.
The film was good. It takes a little intelligence to understand it, which made it even better.
P.S: in response to one review that posed several questions as to the logic in the film: Yes there are cliffs in the Midwest but that is not the setting of the film. The film is set in the South and yes there are cliffs there too. As to how the tire blew out and the guy lost control of his vehicle: the racist rednecks outside the gas station damaged his tire while he was inside paying for his glasses. Yes, the sheriff would report that they died in the car crash so as to end the case and yes a person can be identified when burned by their dental records. -
alshwenbear126 October 2013Some of us while watching a film, look for unpredictability, and on my opinion 95 per cent of the movies are about the same, crime with a cliché, zombie with a cliché, etc... with a cliché, and when you find an argument that is telling you nothing, I mean teasing you with the same question: "What is really happening here?" and then immerse and interest you without giving a real clue, that's what I CALL A GOOD ONE!
I came into "The suspect" waiting for something that would turn off my attention within fifteen minutes, instead, after an hour or so, I was with eyes glued to the screen, no blood, no shootings, no CGI, but a story, not build in great suspense, but properly elaborated, and I wondered how come movies like this fall into the great pit of indifference... because most moviegoers are lazy and dumb? The acting is good, at moments like watching live theater, more interestingly the plot takes a turn as if Vince Gilligan (Breaking Bad) had something to do with it.
The writer and director's name is STUART CONELLY and hopefully his work catches the attention of a TV network, or a big movie studio, because frankly, we need more intelligent movies like "THE SUSPECT"
My recommendation is: watch this movie of you are looking for a smart and twisted ending! And as always no spoilers in here. -
Sy19759 February 2014Refreshingly different thriller that although shot on a budget is well edited, shot and contains some great acting.
I must admit that initially I was not that impressed but as you watch more the plot evolves and the characters start to make an impact. There is some great editing that really pieces together the story, yes maybe the redneck police are a little one sided but situations like this are believable. Without saying too much it's a great scam!
The two key actors (cop and bank robber) deliver great performances and the twist at the end is unexpected till the last minute. Well worth your time and deserves at least a 7. -
Would highly recommend this film and agree with the other reviewer who said to watch it cold without knowing the plot. I am a die-hard movie goer and a tough critic and I loved this film. It is incredibly well- written, directed and produced. This movie feels like a delivery from a seasoned director and production team.
Mekhi Phifer is outstanding. His character is smart and edgy. I thoroughly enjoyed every scene with him. Bill Sadler is eerily believable as a not-so-country-bumpkin cop trying to protect his town while trying to solve a crime. The ending is a stunner.
The film quality feels like a Hollywood blockbuster in terms of shooting, editing and story line, not an Indie film shot in rural Pennsylvania.
Intelligent and gripping - one you will want to enjoy many times over. -
devilshouse200029 October 2013I'm giving this a 10 to fix the rating, cause this movie at the very LEAST deserves a 7.5 to 8. The intensity of the two black "suspects" actors at times is truly impressive. They really pulled a stunt on acting here. It's hard to get into details without spoiling the fun, so it'll have to suffice to say that the characters are very believable. Even those sad stereotypes that don't get a lot of time on screen are eerily realistic, sadly. However what makes The Suspect truly great is the plot line.
It would really be best you go into this movie without knowing anything about it. That way you can relish in all the plot twists, which are all very clever and original.
If you did already read a synopsis however, you'll still have your fair share of twists which come rather unexpected.
So what's there more to want for a good crime thriller than good, believable acting paired with an original story filled with twists and turns? Go watch it and hate/thank me later. -
fhjablonski6 June 2014First, let me say that I can't believe some users are posting such low reviews after having admitted to not even seeing the entire movie. They must be impressively psychic to know exactly how the movie ends without watching it all the way through! Their scores make the movie seem bad to others that may only just look at the composite score out of 10, when in actuality it is a very gripping and intriguing movie.
Advice: Don't initially look too much into the plot (watch it cold like I did). Just sit back and enjoy everything as it unfolds. Don't judge anything while watching or wonder what makes sense or not. Don't try and scan for possible continuity errors. Don't mindlessly check Facebook or casually invest your attention to this movie. Don't think you know it all or are better than everyone (or possibly just better than everyone you are watching). Just watch and take it all in... This movie does all of the thinking for you and will even remind you as it goes with brief flashbacks to something a character has said. Save all of the aforementioned "don'ts" for when the credits roll and only then should you reflect back on the movie to gauge whether or not it was a valid use of your time and attention.
I stumbled across it on Netflix and put it on very late into the night (actually, early morning) expecting it to be just the sleeping pill I needed. To my surprise, I remained riveted as the sun rose on the next day. Oops! Anyway, I'm glad I didn't miss out on this very smart film. Enjoy! -
The real plot of the movie, which most viewers didn't get because they were too busy trying to defend how the racist caucasian cops weren't racist & that they were only seen as racists because it was a couple of black men specifically "experimenting" on them (which isn't at all what they were really doing), is how one man is trying to get his hands on a large sum of money for his daughters' very much needed surgery for what I'm assuming is for an organ that she is too high on the waiting list to receive so he's relying on the black market in Argentina. To do so, the father and his partner, who may be a relative, cut a deal with a money launderer, assuring him they can take $300,000 fake bills and replace them with $300,000 securely from a real bank all under the false deception that they are performing a social experiment for a university, which we find out later in the film, but as we also find out the two also tell the cops that along with returning the stolen money (which is actually the counterfeit money) to the bank they also donate a good amount of money to the sheriff's department to cover any resources, such as the video tape the cops are required to use to record any interrogation on the suspect. The video tape is crucial to the plan which is why the con's are seen consistently making sure it is recording everything. The tape is played back in front of the sheriff and the con's after the "university experiment" lie is explained, so that the cop believes that he has treated the suspect with racist comments and methods such as saying the word "boy".
::some reviewers are mad at this because they don't realize that, YES, the con IS pushing racism out of the cop who may not have actually been racist until meeting the somehow intimidating con.. some reviewers say "if this were in front of a black sheriff and a white con then the sheriff would still react racist by accident, which may be true, but THAT IS THE POINT ::
if the sheriff act's on emotion, even a little and says something racist, such as "boy" when the con spit in his face (which is noticed after the con accused the sheriff of calling him "boy" even though the sheriff swears he doesn't recall saying that, it's because he might not have but the con needs him to), then the sheriff would be too cautious about his actions to let the tape be shown to anyone, so as needed by the cons -the sheriff will destroy the tape and the check made out to the department by the university for any trouble during the experiment (claiming in anger or embarrassment "we don't need your money"), which is good for the cons who don't actually want to be seen, via tape, in the town or actually have permission from any university to write a check out in their name. As we find out at the last scene of the movie, the bank robbery was actually Plan B. Plan A, as we can piece together after the key words earlier in the movie "if I can't accomplish this then what is my point in living", is to have the father die so that the family and daughter receive a very large life insurance.
::if you're one of the people saying this movie wasn't realistic, because you may be an actual officer of the law, then "congratulations" you just pointed out that it's a freaking movie, not everyone who watches it is going to be a cop -- including the writer.::
This movie is NOT (completely or maybe at all) about showing how racist cops can be towards African-Americans (therefore there's no point in complaining that If the roles were performed vice versa on different races, then the opposite race would be racist too). It's about pulling off a con. Though if you hadn't realized it was the latter, and only assumed the movie was pulling the race card too much and unjustifiably, then the writer may have actually pointed out a little racism hidden in you, because that was another point, that it MIGHT not have been justified, seeing as how these suspects were pulling a con. << Big TWIST again, yes the movie is full of them, on and off screen apparently. -
There truly are some dizzy viewers out there!
As a film producer myself, I gave this film a 9, and that's because my only issue was that some of the emotional scenes didn't feel genuine. Other than that, this was a BRILLIANTLY written and performed film...PERIOD!
How can you be confused with the time jumps? IT TELLS YOU WHEN IT'S THE PAST...and the lighting of the scenes change SIGNIFICANTLY when it's back to the present. WOW! The story was absolutely one of a kind. People are criticizing the woods in the South not really being the way they are in the movie...REALLY??? That's what you're basing your rating on??? smdh.
I think the low raters might be mad at something else...like accuracy in the film. *shrug*
GREAT MOVIE!!! -
ginocox-206-33696824 January 2015This review definitely contains spoilers.
"The Suspect" has some very positive qualities. The performances are good throughout, the cinematography is more than adequate with a refreshing lack of jiggly-cam shots which I hate with a passion. For a low-budget independent film, the production values were well above average. The plot is gratifyingly byzantine with a lot of twists, turns and misdirection; however, it has more holes than a wheel of Emmental cheese.
The police procedures seem anachronistic, like procedures from the 1950s. Modern cash counting machines detect counterfeit bills. The chances that the switch would not be discovered are practically nil. Dye packs are used by 75% of American banks. Even if the money is returned and a generous payment is made to the town to compensate them for the nuisance, a number of laws are broken. Even if the police departments are embarrassed and want to avoid further embarrassment, the odds of the local police, state police and FBI all giving them a pass for several such efforts seem a bit remote. It seems unlikely that none of the police departments would have discovered that the study hadn't been sanctioned by the university. They claim to have done it several times, but they may have only attempted it twice. Life insurance policies generally have exclusions for illegal activities. If the counterfeit bills are good enough to pass inspection by the banks and the police departments, why not use them in Argentina?
I enjoyed many aspects of the film, but the implausibilities and incongruities in the screenplay were a major distraction. I wonder if the story might have worked better if set in the 1950s.
Although the plot is like Emmental cheese, you don't really notice the holes while you're eating it. If you can shift the rational, cynical, skeptical part of your mind into neutral, it's an enjoyable film.
Unfortunately, this film has the same title as a Korean film released the same year, so some of the aggregate review scores are misleading.