Customer Reviews

Murder by Numbers

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(29)
3 star:		(38)
2 star:		(23)
1 star:		(11)

 

 

Finally, Sandra Bullock has acted in a good film! Ever since I saw her in 'Speed', I always thought that she was a talented actress. But then 'While you were sleeping' and 'Hope floats' were thoroughly cliched and made me wonder if she was just a one-film wonder. Well, she did prove me otherwise in 'Murder by numbers'.

If you thought from the title or the trailer that this film is about a serial killer, you are wrong (I did that same mistake too!). This film is about the perfect crime or what the killer(s) think will be a perfect crime. As is the case with all killers, they do one simple mistake and that is enough for Casey (the cop played by Sandra Bullock) and her partner Sam to solve the case.

Even though there is no actual suspense in the film, I will not spoil the plot by telling who the killers are. The director does not attempt to hide the identity of the killers, it is fairly clear who the killers are right from the first or second scene. In spite of this, the film continues to gather momentum, with Sandra Bullock and her partner doing their detective work meticulously. Where the film lacks in suspense, it more than makes up for it in the tight story-line and the excellent acting by all the actors.

Sandra Bullock is very convincing as the troubled cop who has a checkered history of her own and that comes to light as the film progresses. Ben Chaplin, who plays Bullock's partner Sam is good too, but the best acting in the film comes from the two young men played by Ryan Gosling (who plays Richard) and Michael Pitt (who plays Justin). Gosling is nothing less than brilliant in his portrayal and his future as an actor sure looks bright.

The film drags a bit towards the end, with the climax being a bit cliched. But this is surely a film that is worth seeing!

"Murder By Numbers" is merely the latest version of the old Leopold and Loeb story, wherein two amoral youths plan and execute a cold-blooded murder for the sheer intellectual challenge of seeing if they can get away with it. Alfred Hitchcock had a go at the tale back in the 1940's in a film called "Rope," and now it appears to be Barbet Schroeder's turn this time around. Aided by writer Tony Gayton, Schroeder focuses on Richard and Justin, two high school buddies living in a bucolic seaside community in Northern California, who commit murder in order to prove Justin's thesis that the courage to carry through with a crime is the ultimate form of human freedom. Anyone who has read "Crime and Punishment" will know immediately that this is not a particularly original philosophical position and, in fact, the film even makes some heavy-handed allusions to that famous novel in the fact that one of the characters in the movie keeps referring to Justin, the mastermind of the plot, as "Napoleon" (Napoleon serves as the inspiration for the novel's main character, Raskolnikov). Richard is the pretty little rich boy, popular in school for both his good looks and his attitude of cool detachment, while Justin is the nerdy intellectual, dismissed by most of his peers as creepily eccentric, who has made an exhaustive study of just how to "get away with murder" by circumventing all the forensic techniques used in modern crime scene investigation.

"Murder By Numbers" is definitely at its best when it is focusing on the two youths and the strange relationship between them - and clearly at its worst when it is viewing matters from the opposite perspective, that of the criminal investigating team led by Cassie Mayweather, played by Sandra Bullock. Cassis seems to come equipped with all the standard baggage common to lead female characters who happen to be working in a predominantly ugly (i.e. male-dominated) profession. The brusque demeanor with which she confronts most of her colleagues has earned her the affectionate nicknames "Hyena" and "Scorpion" (the former because hyenas apparently have a pseudo-penis and the latter for more obviously symbolic reasons). Not only is this beautiful young woman (as always) unattached (why are such attractive people in movies never in relationships?), but she drives men away by her refusal to let any of them get truly near to her. The filmmakers have tried to apply some psychological depth to her character by having her suffering from the effects of a traumatic event in her past, but this whole aspect seems strangely unconvincing and tacked on - and rather distracting when what we really want to be doing is following the much more interesting drama taking place between the two boys.

Although Bullock is never less than competent in the lead role, the scene-stealers turn out to be Ryan Gosling as Richard and, most especially, Michael Pitt as Justin. These two fine actors command our attention every time they appear on the screen and lift this rather routine script to the level of high drama more frequently than it surely deserves. Pitt, in particular, beautifully underplays the role of the social outcast, a boy so intellectually brilliant that he cannot connect with the flesh-and-blood people around him. Yet, the single finest aspect of the screenplay is that it does not portray Pitt as a hopelessly twisted maniac. He is, in fact, capable of both compassion and fear - a fact which helps to make his character compelling and complex enough to pique our interest.

"Murder By Numbers" is, in a way, an appropriately named movie. But thanks to sharp performances by Gosling and Pitt, the film has more to offer than it otherwise might.

Sandra Bullock does a great job of playing a detective looking for a murderer. The clues are a bit to neat to suit her and she begins to look deeper. This movie was borderline Hitchcock style murder mystery and very smoothly done. Just a little stronger acting by Ben Chaplin and Ryan Gosling and it would have been a major hit. They do a good job but they are not the caliber of Ed Norton in "Primal Fear". If they were they would have got at least oscar nominations if not awards. I still think they turn in fine performances and were not appreciated. I personally think the whole movie was underrated. I think it improves with additional viewings. You begin to truly appreciate the performances and the story. A Hitchcock air about it that makes you think of "The Rope" and "Vertigo". I bought the DVD and I recommend it. Most fans of movies like "Kiss the Girls" and "Along Came a Spider" will enjoy it.

Critics gave this only a couple stars. Fans give it four. If you go to movies to evaluate an art form, stick to the stupid boring movies the critics love. If you want to get good value for your entertainment dollar, go see this movie.

This is the serious side of Sandra Bullock. And it is a good one. Not the funny, girl next door of While You Were Sleeping, or Miss Congeniality. More on the level of Practical Magic. Not so serious as Hope Floats.

She gets a lot of on screen time, which is what her fans pay the money for.

The story - two teenagers with too much time on their hands and not enough hobbies think they can get away with murder. Sandra uses her gut instincts far more than her forensic training to read right into their soul and sniff out the rats for what they are.

There are some twists and turns in the story but the characters are not developed well at all. There is a "deep, dark secret" that motivates her cop character that really get lip service rather than providing any insight into her motivations. Still, it is a one dimensional romp showcasing Sandra's great looks and engaging voice. Very well worth the price of admisssion.

I have seen many worse movies that critics swooned over and even gave Oscars to, so don't put much stock in what they say. If you like Sandra Bullock, you will like this show.

In the past Sandra Bullock never had a role with a deep psychological background like Jodie Forster or Meryl Streep. Now she has this kind of role.
The film is about Cassie Mayweather, a female cop, who chases after two young boys (brilliant: Pitt and Gosling) to find the truth about the murder of a young woman.
The characters of the boys are well written but the character of Cassie is not. I had no business caring about her. But I did because of Bullock. How does she do that? She's very low key. She's so natural she seemes to be remembering a scene rather than playing it. She never overacts. She creates a sensation that although a scene may seem absurd to us, it seemes perfectly real to her. And we buy it. The movie is effective in slow and silent way but still I liked it.
And finally Bullock proved that she is a serious actress and if she ever get a great screenplay we may need seat belts

Two highschool boys decide to commit the perfect murder in order to break up the monotony of their pointless lives. They do it, a tough cop investigates. Sounds great, huh?
The problem with this movie was that it focused on the wrong characters. I think Sandra Bullock was terrific in this role, but her character was just not as interesting as the two murderers. I admired the movie for delving deeper into the psyche of the killers than most serial killer movies would. It just should have focused entirely on them.
The two young actors portraying the killers are amazingly good at showing the subleties of their relationship. Ryan Gosling plays Richard, the arrogant popular kid. Michael Pitt plays Justin, the brilliant outcast. These two unlikely friends kidnap and murder a random victim to "free" themselves. There is clearly a lot of sexual tension between them. It seems that Richard is just using Justin most of the time, but there are a few interesting scenes that suggest otherwise. Look, for example, at the scene where Richard sees Justin kissing a girl. He is devastated, practically in tears. That scene in particular was brilliantly acted.
Sandra Bullock and Ben Chaplin do what they can with their roles, but the cops should have been a footnote. Every time Bullock is on screen, you wish you were finding out more about the two kids. All in all, a good unconventional movie. Could have been spectacular.

I don't particularly care for mind games but this had a sudtlety? that was easy to miss.

Richard, as a moneyed playboy, and Justin who was just too brilliant were bored with life as they knew it. Their dependence on each other to spice things up led me to wonder if the girlfriend was be a next victim.

Hard-nosed Cassie was still having problems with her own past which surely colored her treatment of her male partners. Even her seduction scene showed her twisted idea of how to handle a man.

Her new partner, San [or Sam], let himself get seduced only once and then showed some backbone the next time. But they showed professional respect for each other as they tracked down this random? murderer.

Justin and Richard were great in their acting - they were just short of repulsive, in looks and attitudes.

The backgrounds had plenty of color and I loved the opening scene in the high-cliff cottage.

Not too bad - just a little bit on the dark side, mentally.

Sandra Bullock takes a rare dramatic turn in the by-the-books thriller MURDER BY NUMBERS, playing a police detective who stumbles upon an intricately thought out murder--at least that's what the murderers thought. To their chagrin, and ours, the police here aren't nearly as stupid as said murderers were hoping for--though, it must be said, they are a little on the boring side. Bullock is serviceable here though not entirely convincing in the lead role(sorry, she's more effective at comedy) and Ben Chaplin is pretty much wasted here as Bullock's partner. Only when Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt(as the murdering teens)are on screen does this film spark to life--they are both superb and act circles around their co-stars. If director Barbet Schroeder had played up the tension between Bullock and Gosling more, the film would have only been the better for it(though the final,life-or-death--and ultimately anticlimatic--scene between Bullock and Gosling is utterly laughable for it's ludicrous execution). All in all, not a complete waste of time, but a film with several missed opportunities.

There's nothing really wrong with "Murder by Numbers" - it's just that you've seen it all before. Sandra Bullock, in turtlenecks and authentically messy hair, plays tough Detective Cassie Mayweather, who with her neophyte partner Sam (Ben Chaplin) is called in to solve a murder case in a small California coastal town. A trail of clues leads them to two local teens whose alibis seem suspiciously airtight, but Cassie is determined that they are guilty of what might have been the perfect murder.
The film isn't an emotional thriller like "Silence of the Lambs," but it does have some interesting, smart characters. Some will not like this film because it doesn't offer easy answers. It doesn't have the usual, pat Hollywood ending The film is pretty slow-moving, and it doesn't have much in the way of suspense or drama. It is more of a character study

There's something frustrating about watching a movie like 'Murder By Numers' because somewhere inside that Hollywood formula is a good movie trying to pop out. However, by the time the credits roll, there's no saving it. The whole thing is pretty much blown by the "cop side" of the story, where Sandra Bullock and Ben Chaplin's homicide detective characters muddle through an awkward sexual affair that becomes more and more trivialized the longer the movie goes on. Although Bullock is strong in her role, it's not enough to save the lackluster script and lazy pacing. Ben Chaplin's talents are wasted in a forgettable role (he did much better earlier in the year in the underrated 'Birthday Girl') as well as Chris Penn, who has a role so thanklessly small you feel sorry for a talent like him. Anyway, the plot really isn't even a factor in this movie at all. The two teen killers played by Ryan Gosling and Michael Pitt are the only real reasons to see this movie. Their talent and chemistry work pretty good and they play off of each other quite well. It's too bad they weren't in a much better all-around film. Barbet Schroeder is treading way too safe ground here for such a seasoned filmmaker. Bottom Line: it's worth a rent if you're a genre fan, but everyone else will live a fulfilled life without ever seeing it, except maybe on network TV with convenient commercial breaks.