written by: Mark Brinker, Allison Burnett & Robert Fyvolent
produced by: Andy Cohen, Hawk Koch, Gary Lucchesi, Steven Pearl & Tom Rosenberg
directed by: Gregory Hoblit
Rated R for grisly violence and torture, and some language.
100 min.
Untraceable? I don't think so. You shouldn't be able to predict every turn while watching a movie with such a title. I can't imagine anyone who couldn't follow such a tepid plot in this day and age of CSI, Bones and Cold Case. That's basically what this is combines with the cinechock of the "Saw" movies. was there anyone watching this who didn't see where the story was going? To be sure, there are worse movies out there but this was crud. Too bad cuz the cast isn't to blame, they're not that bad really. It's what they're given to work with. If anything, they are to blame for reading and saying yes to such a sucky script.
The story is set in dour and rainy Portland, Oregan (too bad, I thought that place was supposed to be nice) where FBI cybercrime profiler, Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane) spends her nights trapping pathetic internet scumbags with her partner, Griffin (Colin Hanks). A new site is discovered called www.killwithme.com that features a live streaming video where victims are killed based on the number of hits received, the faster the hits the quicker the death. Of course, like a traffic accident on the side of the road, millions of people log on, hastening the victims' violent deaths. It woulda been more interesting if the writers focused on the phenomena of gawkers and how these viewers actually became murderers themselves by visiting this site. A unique perspective would be how to legally hold these viewers accountable but instead we're given shots of Diane Lane in the shower.
So, cybercop Marsh, pieces together this so-called mystery at great risk to herself and her family. Isn't that always the case. Why do these protagonists always have to have family? I'd like it if the protagonist was someone that everyone hates, even her family. Ah well. Marsh knows her job and she's a loyal single mom and all but she's just not that interesting. Lane winds up looking tired throughout the film, as her character tries to isolate the location of the killer who racks up a curious roster of victims. With each gruesome execution committed online, the audience grows more impatient for the next thrill, leaving the FBI little time to solve the case.
The film tries to teeter on "torture porn" thrills but thankfully it only shows the kinda tortue you might see on any similar TV show. I got a kick outta the film's need for boring exposition that spells out terms like "LOL" or "ROTFL" possibly catering to those who aren't familiar with online lingo and "clever" internet shorthand.
The killer turns out to be some pretty-faced kid (Joseph Cross, looking like an X-Men reject) wanting to get even and perhaps teach the world a lesson. What's his deal? He's upset, disturbed and unhinged about live-footage of his father's suicide being saturated online. What's bizarre is this killer is revealed not even half way into the film. Where's the suspense in that? I was never sold that this klid was some brilliant criminal sicko, once he's revealed I just wanted to slap him and sent to bed without dinner. It's yet another interested thread that is left frayed and unexplored. Director Gregory Hoblit ("Primal Fear," "Fracture") helps Lane sell the suspense of the script but not by much. He has her spend most of the movie wet (either in the rain or the aforementuiioned shower) and furrowed with a serious look plastered on her face. Too bad Hoblit is so lazy with the camera in that he has to hold on certain characters or locations which blatantly gives away to who and where something will happen. It's obvious that the writes were going reaching for an opportunity to showcase the freedom of internet media and expression that today's technology provides but it's just too obvious making it downright insulting. Every shot was completely leading and predicatble. And the screenplay? Just lame. A