list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Murder By Numbers on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Murder_By_Numbers/205626/default.aspx Title: Murder By Numbers
Year: 2002
Director: Barbet Schroeder
Plot: When a pair of bright-but sociopathic teens conspires to commit the perfect murder, a troubled cop teams with her eager new partner to solve the case that left the community in fear and the police without a clue. High school ladies' man Richard Haywood (Ryan Gosling) and outcast Justin Pendleton (Michael Pitt) have no motive to commit murder, but they soon conspire to choose a random victim and pin the crime on local pot dealer Ray (Chris Penn), under the guise that the police will never suspect them of such a brutal act. Determined Det. Cassie Merriweather (Sandra Bullock) is assigned to the case, and quickly becomes suspicious of the elusive teens despite the doubts expressed by her superiors and her lack of solid evidence. Soon entering into a dangerous test of wills with the increasingly desperate and dangerous teens, her investigation leads her down a disturbing path that will test her skills as a detective and her will to survive. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 21
Number of Lists: 21
Number of blog posts: 5
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:21:00 GMTMurder By Numbers2002Barbet SchroederWhen a pair of bright-but sociopathic teens conspires to commit the perfect murder, a troubled cop teams with her eager new partner to solve the case that left the community in fear and the police without a clue. High school ladies' man Richard Haywood (<a href="/players/P___279096/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Ryan Gosling</a>) and outcast Justin Pendleton (<a href="/players/P___291783/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Michael Pitt</a>) have no motive to commit murder, but they soon conspire to choose a random victim and pin the crime on local pot dealer Ray (<a href="/players/P____55920/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Chris Penn</a>), under the guise that the police will never suspect them of such a brutal act. Determined Det. Cassie Merriweather (<a href="/players/P_____9472/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Sandra Bullock</a>) is assigned to the case, and quickly becomes suspicious of the elusive teens despite the doubts expressed by her superiors and her lack of solid evidence. Soon entering into a dangerous test of wills with the increasingly desperate and dangerous teens, her investigation leads her down a disturbing path that will test her skills as a detective and her will to survive. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide21Tag Target (>10)2152http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t22763v5yk0.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Murder_By_Numbers/205626/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/mbsgirl/archive/2009/11/7/44319.aspx Post By: mbsgirl
Post To: mbsgirl Blog
Post Date: 11/7/2009 5:45:07 PM
Body: The movie is set in San Benito county Ca. The final scene where Bullock almost takes a dive into the pacific ocean well, there's only one problem with that. San Benito county is landlocked!
]]>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:45:07 GMTmbsgirlmbsgirl Blog11/7/2009 5:45:07 PMThe movie is set in San Benito county Ca. The final scene where Bullock almost takes a dive into the pacific ocean well, there's only one problem with that. San Benito county is landlocked! http://www.spout.com/blogs/pippin06/archive/2009/1/2/39041.aspx Post By: pippin06
Post To: Reel Thoughts
Post Date: 1/2/2009 12:21:00 PM
Body: The next couplet of thrillers to round out the current streak of four on my rolling Netflix queue feature Sandra Bullock in the top-billed roles. Ms. Bullock has made a handful of thrillers in her career, and, for the record, I tend to like her and her films. Her movies may not be masterpieces of filmmaking, but a good percentage of them are entertaining. She doesn't take many risks as an actress, since her films largely fall into the categories of romantic comedies (While You Were Sleeping, Six Weeks' Notice) to romantic dramas (Hope Floats, Practical Magic) to thrillers (The Net, Speed) with the occasional foray into movies that toy with variations on those themes (The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood, A Time to Kill). Some of her films just aren't good, but I still think she's appealing and plays characters to which I tend to relate at least in some small measure, so I typically give her films, for better or for worse, chances. I remember Murder By Numbers being advertised and thought, at the time, that it looked decent. I hadn't heard of Bullock's co-stars, Ryan Gosling or Michael Pitt, when the film was released, because I hadn't watched the Mickey Mouse Club or Dawson's Creek, and I really did not know much about the plot, at least beyond the fact that Sandra's character was engaged in a battle of wits with some teenaged murderers. So, I had no real predilections going into this film, which also means I had no expectations about how the movie should play out. I mention this for a reason, but I'll discuss it more at length momentarily. Bullock plays Cassie Merriweather, a cop who, alongside her new partner (Ben Chaplin), must investigate a murder of an unknown woman in a small California town. What they don't know is that two rich, highly intelligent, and bored teenagers, Richard Haywood (Gosling), a ladies man and all around king of the school, and Justin Pendleton (Pitt), a socially awkward outcast, have conspired to committ the perfect crime - an unsolvable murder. They have no real motive, other than boredom and a disturbing fascination with forensics, and part of their conspiracy involves pinning the crime on the school's janitor Ray (Chris Penn), who also happens to be a pot dealer. Cassie, in her investigation, grows quickly suspicious of particularly Richard, but his father is powerful and influential, she has no concrete evidence, and she has a troubled past that her superiors, including the district attorney, are all too familiar with. As she zeroes in on Richard and Justin, the plot becomes a cat-and-mouse game that forces Cassie into a fight for survival and to convince her colleagues that she is not, in fact, obsessive or crazy. Murder by Numbers could be reviewed in a variety of ways. I've noticed that the reviews by other Spouters are mixed at best and lukewarm to mostly unfavorable on average. I actually liked this movie enough to be entertained by it. I think that's because I didn't think too hard about it and expected so little that I was pleasantly surprised by how involved I became. That's not to say that the movie was all that great; on the contrary, in all the ways one could look at it, it's got some major flaws. As a movie for the sake of it, however, it was decent and engaging. The reason why this movie was even remotely as fascinating as it was owes in every way possible to the performances of Gosling and Pitt, who gave their characters so much dimension that the movie, in a significant way, transformed into something of a character study of troubled teens who are propelled to committ murder. The cold calculations of their characters were really portrayed with mesmerizing nuance. Some of that nuance almost suggested a possible romantic involvement between the two of them, and while that was never explicitly explained or mentioned, particularly Gosling's slant on this element infused his character with so much texture, it was hard not to be taken by him. The film could have been reduced to two young, rich, white males who played too many video games and decided to act out on their "encouraged" violent tendencies, but these actors created three-dimensional characters that seem to be more troubled at their core than bored, and these characters were compelling. As to the other production elements, there were some obvious conventions used and possibly too many story flaws. There was nothing special about any of the visual elements, and the direction was underwhelming. The pacing was erratic, though it leaned more heavily on the side of slower than molasses. The story was incomplete. While the two teenagers were well-rounded characters that held my interest, the Cassie character became a conundrum all on her own. Her motivations were unfocused at times, and no closure was given to her character's dalliance with her partner. The film itself became something of a hodge podge between Cassie's need to fight against her past and the two teenagers' struggle to protect their heinous actions. The intention was to show that Cassie was so troubled, she would identify with the victims of the crimes she investigated, including the current Jane Doe, to the the point of inappropriate emotional involvement which either enhanced her instincts or compromised her investigations or both. Her past (which I can't spoil, or it will downplay some of the impact) also leads her to suspect Richard rather quickly, and though she turns out to be right, it becomes a confused interplay of quasi murder mystery/thriller, a psychological profile of several troubled characters, and a formulaic exercise in vindicating the woman who's taking it all too personally and is rightfully called out on the carpet for it, even it produces results. So, here's where we can get into how the film can be reviewed in several ways. If looked at as strictly a thriller, the film fails, because the pacing is so slow and erratic, and the penultimate confrontations between Cassie and Richard and Justin are so protractedly delayed, the film really provides no thrills at all. Since the film is billed as a thriller just about everywhere, including on Netflix, it's no wonder that the film would be disappointing at least and "meh" at best to a majority of viewers. The film could be regarded as a whodunit murdery mystery, but that concept would fail because we already know whodunit, and the Justin character tells the viewer how every step of the way. The film could be seen as something of a noir, but it's not told in flashback or from the first person, and too many ingredients are missing. I think the best way to regard Murder By Numbers is as a dramatic character study of three troubled characters and how they each approach confronting their various troubles. As it relates to the teenaged boys, I think the film succeeds because their two perfomances transcend the cookie cutter outlines that could have rendered them and therefore the movie a lot less interesting. Besides, given the prevalence of teen shootings at high schools nationwide, this inside look into two psyches provides an interesting perspective bordering on semi-intelligent social commentary. As it relates to Cassie, however, the film as a character study becomes formulaic and incomplete. Cassie is the cookie cutter; she's traumatized, this trauma affects her life adversely, it affects her work adversely. she encounters a nice man and finds herself, and decides to fight for whatever she thought she lost. The ending of this is too predictable, and while Bullock did a fine job with what she was given, she was not really given much to work with. The character takes few risks because the movie takes few risks, and while this part of it almost wants to be social commentary about certain things, it falls short and flat through the execution of it all. Thus, clearly Murder By Numbers has some flaws, but I was still entertained by the Richard and Justin characters, which made me like the film a bit when I would otherwise have been neutral or lost interest in it. In ratings land, I think the film warrants a 6.5, for being between cute/mediocre and shaky/entertaining, because it's clearly shaky and would almost be mediocre but for Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt. As for the test, however, it's not a passer. This is a film that would clearly not hold up well on repeat viewings, since it barely holds up the first time. Still, for a slice of modest entertainment that doesn't require too much thought, Murder By Numbers is a worthwhile rental, just as long as the viewer realizes that it doesn't get more by the book than this.
]]>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:21:00 GMTpippin06Reel Thoughts1/2/2009 12:21:00 PMThe next couplet of thrillers to round out the current streak of four on my rolling Netflix queue feature Sandra Bullock in the top-billed roles. Ms. Bullock has made a handful of thrillers in her career, and, for the record, I tend to like her and her films. Her movies may not be masterpieces of filmmaking, but a good percentage of them are entertaining. She doesn't take many risks as an actress, since her films largely fall into the categories of romantic comedies (While You Were Sleeping, Six Weeks' Notice) to romantic dramas (Hope Floats, Practical Magic) to thrillers (The Net, Speed) with the occasional foray into movies that toy with variations on those themes (The Divine Secrets of the Ya-Ya Sisterhood, A Time to Kill). Some of her films just aren't good, but I still think she's appealing and plays characters to which I tend to relate at least in some small measure, so I typically give her films, for better or for worse, chances. I remember Murder By Numbers being advertised and thought, at the time, that it looked decent. I hadn't heard of Bullock's co-stars, Ryan Gosling or Michael Pitt, when the film was released, because I hadn't watched the Mickey Mouse Club or Dawson's Creek, and I really did not know much about the plot, at least beyond the fact that Sandra's character was engaged in a battle of wits with some teenaged murderers. So, I had no real predilections going into this film, which also means I had no expectations about how the movie should play out. I mention this for a reason, but I'll discuss it more at length momentarily. Bullock plays Cassie Merriweather, a cop who, alongside her new partner (Ben Chaplin), must investigate a murder of an unknown woman in a small California town. What they don't know is that two rich, highly intelligent, and bored teenagers, Richard Haywood (Gosling), a ladies man and all around king of the school, and Justin Pendleton (Pitt), a socially awkward outcast, have conspired to committ the perfect crime - an unsolvable murder. They have no real motive, other than boredom and a disturbing fascination with forensics, and part of their conspiracy involves pinning the crime on the school's janitor Ray (Chris Penn), who also happens to be a pot dealer. Cassie, in her investigation, grows quickly suspicious of particularly Richard, but his father is powerful and influential, she has no concrete evidence, and she has a troubled past that her superiors, including the district attorney, are all too familiar with. As she zeroes in on Richard and Justin, the plot becomes a cat-and-mouse game that forces Cassie into a fight for survival and to convince her colleagues that she is not, in fact, obsessive or crazy. Murder by Numbers could be reviewed in a variety of ways. I've noticed that the reviews by other Spouters are mixed at best and lukewarm to mostly unfavorable on average. I actually liked this movie enough to be entertained by it. I think that's because I didn't think too hard about it and expected so little that I was pleasantly surprised by how involved I became. That's not to say that the movie was all that great; on the contrary, in all the ways one could look at it, it's got some major flaws. As a movie for the sake of it, however, it was decent and engaging. The reason why this movie was even remotely as fascinating as it was owes in every way possible to the performances of Gosling and Pitt, who gave their characters so much dimension that the movie, in a significant way, transformed into something of a character study of troubled teens who are propelled to committ murder. The cold calculations of their characters were really portrayed with mesmerizing nuance. Some of that nuance almost suggested a possible romantic involvement between the two of them, and while that was never explicitly explained or mentioned, particularly Gosling's slant on this element infused his character with so much texture, it was hard not to be taken by him. The film could have been reduced to two young, rich, white males who played too many video games and decided to act out on their "encouraged" violent tendencies, but these actors created three-dimensional characters that seem to be more troubled at their core than bored, and these characters were compelling. As to the other production elements, there were some obvious conventions used and possibly too many story flaws. There was nothing special about any of the visual elements, and the direction was underwhelming. The pacing was erratic, though it leaned more heavily on the side of slower than molasses. The story was incomplete. While the two teenagers were well-rounded characters that held my interest, the Cassie character became a conundrum all on her own. Her motivations were unfocused at times, and no closure was given to her character's dalliance with her partner. The film itself became something of a hodge podge between Cassie's need to fight against her past and the two teenagers' struggle to protect their heinous actions. The intention was to show that Cassie was so troubled, she would identify with the victims of the crimes she investigated, including the current Jane Doe, to the the point of inappropriate emotional involvement which either enhanced her instincts or compromised her investigations or both. Her past (which I can't spoil, or it will downplay some of the impact) also leads her to suspect Richard rather quickly, and though she turns out to be right, it becomes a confused interplay of quasi murder mystery/thriller, a psychological profile of several troubled characters, and a formulaic exercise in vindicating the woman who's taking it all too personally and is rightfully called out on the carpet for it, even it produces results. So, here's where we can get into how the film can be reviewed in several ways. If looked at as strictly a thriller, the film fails, because the pacing is so slow and erratic, and the penultimate confrontations between Cassie and Richard and Justin are so protractedly delayed, the film really provides no thrills at all. Since the film is billed as a thriller just about everywhere, including on Netflix, it's no wonder that the film would be disappointing at least and "meh" at best to a majority of viewers. The film could be regarded as a whodunit murdery mystery, but that concept would fail because we already know whodunit, and the Justin character tells the viewer how every step of the way. The film could be seen as something of a noir, but it's not told in flashback or from the first person, and too many ingredients are missing. I think the best way to regard Murder By Numbers is as a dramatic character study of three troubled characters and how they each approach confronting their various troubles. As it relates to the teenaged boys, I think the film succeeds because their two perfomances transcend the cookie cutter outlines that could have rendered them and therefore the movie a lot less interesting. Besides, given the prevalence of teen shootings at high schools nationwide, this inside look into two psyches provides an interesting perspective bordering on semi-intelligent social commentary. As it relates to Cassie, however, the film as a character study becomes formulaic and incomplete. Cassie is the cookie cutter; she's traumatized, this trauma affects her life adversely, it affects her work adversely. she encounters a nice man and finds herself, and decides to fight for whatever she thought she lost. The ending of this is too predictable, and while Bullock did a fine job with what she was given, she was not really given much to work with. The character takes few risks because the movie takes few risks, and while this part of it almost wants to be social commentary about certain things, it falls short and flat through the execution of it all. Thus, clearly Murder By Numbers has some flaws, but I was still entertained by the Richard and Justin characters, which made me like the film a bit when I would otherwise have been neutral or lost interest in it. In ratings land, I think the film warrants a 6.5, for being between cute/mediocre and shaky/entertaining, because it's clearly shaky and would almost be mediocre but for Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt. As for the test, however, it's not a passer. This is a film that would clearly not hold up well on repeat viewings, since it barely holds up the first time. Still, for a slice of modest entertainment that doesn't require too much thought, Murder By Numbers is a worthwhile rental, just as long as the viewer realizes that it doesn't get more by the book than this. http://www.spout.com/blogs/edwa8698/archive/2008/10/13/36240.aspx Post By: edwa8698
Post To: edwa8698 Blog
Post Date: 10/13/2008 12:05:22 AM
Body: This starts out like a generic murder mystery and doesn't really go anywhere from there. The plot basically goes like this two bored, rich high school kids plan and commit what they think is the perfect murder, and in the end it turns in to more than they bargained for. I will say this right now I didn't particullarly like this film the only reedemable quality is the performances. Sandra Bullock, Ryan Gosling, and Michael Pitt are phenomenal. Other than that it was predictable and not at all entertaining.
]]>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 04:05:22 GMTedwa8698edwa8698 Blog10/13/2008 12:05:22 AMThis starts out like a generic murder mystery and doesn't really go anywhere from there. The plot basically goes like this two bored, rich high school kids plan and commit what they think is the perfect murder, and in the end it turns in to more than they bargained for. I will say this right now I didn't particullarly like this film the only reedemable quality is the performances. Sandra Bullock, Ryan Gosling, and Michael Pitt are phenomenal. Other than that it was predictable and not at all entertaining. http://www.spout.com/blogs/darkfaerie48/archive/2007/10/8/20496.aspx Post By: darkfaerie48
Post To: darkfaerie48 Blog
Post Date: 10/8/2007 5:04:06 PM
Body: I love Sandra Bullock,and most of her movies,but, this was a good movie,and I am not sure which way to go with this one. I spend a lot of time, watching shows like,"Forensic Files","Cold Case Files,and shows of this genre,but, I think the way they did this movie, was somewhat believable,and, Sandra Bullock does have the intelligence to pull this kind of role off. Her character was a victim of domestic violence,and,seemed to be working off repressed memories of her own, that helped her throughout the investigation of the murder of the girl. Richard Gosling isn't one of my favorite actors,but, he does play a really good, bad kid,and his characters make you believe he could pull off this kind of crime. Michael Pitt, played Justin Pendleton,a young man who was, in my opinion, a very disturbed individual who was a follower,and became the leader type,and could,eventually, pull off the same thing,if ever put in that situation. I liked this movie,but,I don't have any desire to run right out and buy it,any time soon. Chris Penn, was (God rest his soul), not one of my favorite actors either. His brother,Sean, has never been one to ever, get me to eve watch any of his movies. Just don't like him,so, that may be why I am not a fan of Chris', either.
]]>Mon, 08 Oct 2007 21:04:06 GMTdarkfaerie48darkfaerie48 Blog10/8/2007 5:04:06 PMI love Sandra Bullock,and most of her movies,but, this was a good movie,and I am not sure which way to go with this one. I spend a lot of time, watching shows like,&quot;Forensic Files&quot;,&quot;Cold Case Files,and shows of this genre,but, I think the way they did this movie, was somewhat believable,and, Sandra Bullock does have the intelligence to pull this kind of role off. Her character was a victim of domestic violence,and,seemed to be working off repressed memories of her own, that helped her throughout the investigation of the murder of the girl. Richard Gosling isn&#39;t one of my favorite actors,but, he does play a really good, bad kid,and his characters make you believe he could pull off this kind of crime. Michael Pitt, played Justin Pendleton,a young man who was, in my opinion, a very disturbed individual who was a follower,and became the leader type,and could,eventually, pull off the same thing,if ever put in that situation. I liked this movie,but,I don&#39;t have any desire to run right out and buy it,any time soon. Chris Penn, was (God rest his soul), not one of my favorite actors either. His brother,Sean, has never been one to ever, get me to eve watch any of his movies. Just don&#39;t like him,so, that may be why I am not a fan of Chris&#39;, either. http://www.spout.com/blogs/moviebabe/archive/2007/3/9/6233.aspx Post By: MovieBabe
Post To: MovieBabe Blog
Post Date: 3/9/2007 8:47:00 PM
Body: Ah, formula: Following one may be a smart way to carry out the perfect crime, but it's perhaps not the ideal method to ensure that your thriller will be thrilling. Murder by Numbers, which could be subtitled This Time, It's Personal, has little in the way of surprises and even less excitement. But it does offer Sandra Bullock getting attacked by a screeching red-assed monkey, which is jolly good fun. Bullock meets baboon as Cassie Mayweather, a less humorous reproduction of her tough-gal detective in Miss Congeniality. Cassie and her partner-in-training, Sam (Ben Chaplin), are investigating a murder that we know was committed by two smart-aleck high school kids who, apparently out of sheer boredom, became fixated on executing an insolvable crime. (What, there are no malls where they live?) Although the murderers--Ryan Gosling as the creepily cool Richard and Michael Pitt as the cartoonishly glum Justin--are full of bombastic utterings (the movie opens with each holding a gun to his head and reciting "one cannot live fully without embracing suicide and crime"), chances are you'll be siding with them in this we-already-know-who-dunit. Chaplin gives a staid performance, never allowing Sam's facial expression to change even as he is increasingly emasculated by Cassie's harpy self-assurance; indeed, he seems to exist solely to show how brilliant and wonderful she is, as he not only wrongly solves the crime but also correctly uncovers her double-secret vulnerability (you know, the kind that all hard-working detectives have). And though Bullock does well enough with each femme sarcastique role thrown at her, the mystery here should rightly be the murder, not why Cassie is so hellbent on solving it. Despite its pretensions to depth, Murder by Numbers is expectedly by the book.
]]>Sat, 10 Mar 2007 01:47:00 GMTMovieBabeMovieBabe Blog3/9/2007 8:47:00 PMAh, formula: Following one may be a smart way to carry out the perfect crime, but it&#39;s perhaps not the ideal method to ensure that your thriller will be thrilling. Murder by Numbers, which could be subtitled This Time, It&#39;s Personal, has little in the way of surprises and even less excitement. But it does offer Sandra Bullock getting attacked by a screeching red-assed monkey, which is jolly good fun. Bullock meets baboon as Cassie Mayweather, a less humorous reproduction of her tough-gal detective in Miss Congeniality. Cassie and her partner-in-training, Sam (Ben Chaplin), are investigating a murder that we know was committed by two smart-aleck high school kids who, apparently out of sheer boredom, became fixated on executing an insolvable crime. (What, there are no malls where they live?) Although the murderers--Ryan Gosling as the creepily cool Richard and Michael Pitt as the cartoonishly glum Justin--are full of bombastic utterings (the movie opens with each holding a gun to his head and reciting "one cannot live fully without embracing suicide and crime"), chances are you&#39;ll be siding with them in this we-already-know-who-dunit. Chaplin gives a staid performance, never allowing Sam&#39;s facial expression to change even as he is increasingly emasculated by Cassie&#39;s harpy self-assurance; indeed, he seems to exist solely to show how brilliant and wonderful she is, as he not only wrongly solves the crime but also correctly uncovers her double-secret vulnerability (you know, the kind that all hard-working detectives have). And though Bullock does well enough with each femme sarcastique role thrown at her, the mystery here should rightly be the murder, not why Cassie is so hellbent on solving it. Despite its pretensions to depth, Murder by Numbers is expectedly by the book. http://www.spout.com/blogs/davisfreeberg/archive/2006/12/24/4887.aspx Post By: davisfreeberg
Post To: Davis Freeberg's DVD AllStars
Post Date: 12/24/2006 5:06:00 PM
Body: This movie definetely had it's weak spots, but overall it was actually decent in the teenager horror genre. The movie is about two high school kids who try and get away with the perfect crime. They try and plant forensic evidence, but Sandra Bullock plays a super cop who figures it out. The movie is well cast, although one of the killers is a bit creepy. The plot is a little obvious and really won't keep you guessing, but it tells an interesting story and throws a little danger and adventure at you along the way. I'm not sure that I'd go rent this one, but if it was on TV, it might be worth checking out.
]]>Sun, 24 Dec 2006 22:06:00 GMTdavisfreebergDavis Freeberg's DVD AllStars12/24/2006 5:06:00 PMThis movie definetely had it's weak spots, but overall it was actually decent in the teenager horror genre. The movie is about two high school kids who try and get away with the perfect crime. They try and plant forensic evidence, but Sandra Bullock plays a super cop who figures it out. The movie is well cast, although one of the killers is a bit creepy. The plot is a little obvious and really won't keep you guessing, but it tells an interesting story and throws a little danger and adventure at you along the way. I'm not sure that I'd go rent this one, but if it was on TV, it might be worth checking out. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awesome/MemberTagFilms.aspxawesome
Number of films tagged: 187

Number of people who tagged: 158

Number of times used: 291

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:23:33 GMT187158291Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8748

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 830

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 02:57:25 GMT8748157830Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/teenagers/MemberTagFilms.aspxteenagers
Number of films tagged: 3025

Number of people who tagged: 97

Number of times used: 399

]]>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:42:10 GMT302597399Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/highschool/MemberTagFilms.aspxhighschool
Number of films tagged: 864

Number of people who tagged: 81

Number of times used: 291

]]>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 12:23:33 GMT86481291Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/violent/MemberTagFilms.aspxviolent
Number of films tagged: 97

Number of people who tagged: 57

Number of times used: 153

]]>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:28:06 GMT9757153Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/detective/MemberTagFilms.aspxdetective
Number of films tagged: 2345

Number of people who tagged: 43

Number of times used: 105

]]>Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:02:59 GMT234543105Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/psychological/MemberTagFilms.aspxpsychological
Number of films tagged: 48

Number of people who tagged: 41

Number of times used: 74

]]>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:37:13 GMT484174Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Entertaining/MemberTagFilms.aspxEntertaining
Number of films tagged: 33

Number of people who tagged: 28

Number of times used: 40

]]>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:09:49 GMT332840Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/game/MemberTagFilms.aspxgame
Number of films tagged: 354

Number of people who tagged: 20

Number of times used: 28

]]>Thu, 16 Jul 2009 13:02:27 GMT3542028Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/deceit/MemberTagFilms.aspxdeceit
Number of films tagged: 11

Number of people who tagged: 12

Number of times used: 14

]]>Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:08:41 GMT111214Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/policedetective/MemberTagFilms.aspxpolicedetective
Number of films tagged: 440

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 9

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT44089Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/cat-and-mouse/MemberTagFilms.aspxcat-and-mouse
Number of films tagged: 7

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 8

]]>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:48:15 GMT768Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/catandmouse/MemberTagFilms.aspxcatandmouse
Number of films tagged: 104

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 8

]]>Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:02:17 GMT10468Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/decent/MemberTagFilms.aspxdecent
Number of films tagged: 10

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 10

]]>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:49:57 GMT10510Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/forensics/MemberTagFilms.aspxforensics
Number of films tagged: 5

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:04:25 GMT545Tag