Let me start by saying I actually saw the whole movie and that is the only reason I'm giving it two stars. I sometimes just quit, but they had me thinking along the way; hey this might be very interesting.
But the acting (and directing) was of another planet. And not a good one. It was absolutely cringeworthy. Not believable in any scenes at all.
The script was loaded with stupidities like: How are two people - one of them not even close to being fit for police work and the other quite a helpless dude - left working on a case with a mass murderer on the lose? Why aren't they backed up by a ton of police people when they find out where the murderer is? Two people on the mass murderer case has to be enough, right?
And how does the murderers skinny mum 1) capture three grown ups in three different places - one of them a police man - 2) carry them all into a car or a truck, 3) carry them out nicely and place them on the ground outside the crowded facility she is running, not tied to anything, and 4) have them stay there while she picks up one more victim? She has to be gone for at least an hour, but still they just sit there on their knees waiting to get killed or whatver else they might suspect could happen.
Are we sure no one sees them there? The women inside has a tendency to look out the window a lot in the other scenes, but not while all this is going on. In the final scene we even see a person in the back ground moving along. I thought: it must be a person about to enter the scene, but no, it was just an amateur film shoot with a Director not yelling "cut, cut, cut. Please remove the person at the back and let's go again". At least that person could have heard or seen them for the hour (or whatever) the murderers mum was gone.
And why the f... is the main character not just trying to shoot the mum when she is handed the gun? She has at least two bullets. Why should herself instead of just the killer? There's a fair chance she knows nothing about whether the bullet would go all the way through herself. If she knew a lot about the particular gun she is handed and is aware of exactly the bullet it's loaded with, she probably would be a good shooter, and had she been a good shooter, she would have killed the mum almost instantly without shooting herself. There's plenty of opportunity.
And what about the revealing of the killer? I was guessing along: "could it be the husband? No, because he is dark skinned and the murderer is visibly caucasian. Could it be the medical examiner? No, he is a little too old - on the videos he sends in the murderer appears younger by his moves and the shape of his body. And so on.... " I was in the dark - we never met the murderer in civil (or any other instance without the mask) untill he was outed.
The killer calls the main character "Englemager" in the scene where he gets shot, so why the hell doesn't he shoot her in the scene where he shoots the third victim and "Englemager"? Stupid is, stupid does, I suppose.
I'm sure there are a lot more plot holes, but this has to do it. Don't waste your time on this. The only positive thing probably is that the movie has the usual "glittery" sort of Netflix look to it. I don't know if that is actually enough for anybody, but the photographer's and the color grader is not to blame.
But the acting (and directing) was of another planet. And not a good one. It was absolutely cringeworthy. Not believable in any scenes at all.
The script was loaded with stupidities like: How are two people - one of them not even close to being fit for police work and the other quite a helpless dude - left working on a case with a mass murderer on the lose? Why aren't they backed up by a ton of police people when they find out where the murderer is? Two people on the mass murderer case has to be enough, right?
And how does the murderers skinny mum 1) capture three grown ups in three different places - one of them a police man - 2) carry them all into a car or a truck, 3) carry them out nicely and place them on the ground outside the crowded facility she is running, not tied to anything, and 4) have them stay there while she picks up one more victim? She has to be gone for at least an hour, but still they just sit there on their knees waiting to get killed or whatver else they might suspect could happen.
Are we sure no one sees them there? The women inside has a tendency to look out the window a lot in the other scenes, but not while all this is going on. In the final scene we even see a person in the back ground moving along. I thought: it must be a person about to enter the scene, but no, it was just an amateur film shoot with a Director not yelling "cut, cut, cut. Please remove the person at the back and let's go again". At least that person could have heard or seen them for the hour (or whatever) the murderers mum was gone.
And why the f... is the main character not just trying to shoot the mum when she is handed the gun? She has at least two bullets. Why should herself instead of just the killer? There's a fair chance she knows nothing about whether the bullet would go all the way through herself. If she knew a lot about the particular gun she is handed and is aware of exactly the bullet it's loaded with, she probably would be a good shooter, and had she been a good shooter, she would have killed the mum almost instantly without shooting herself. There's plenty of opportunity.
And what about the revealing of the killer? I was guessing along: "could it be the husband? No, because he is dark skinned and the murderer is visibly caucasian. Could it be the medical examiner? No, he is a little too old - on the videos he sends in the murderer appears younger by his moves and the shape of his body. And so on.... " I was in the dark - we never met the murderer in civil (or any other instance without the mask) untill he was outed.
The killer calls the main character "Englemager" in the scene where he gets shot, so why the hell doesn't he shoot her in the scene where he shoots the third victim and "Englemager"? Stupid is, stupid does, I suppose.
I'm sure there are a lot more plot holes, but this has to do it. Don't waste your time on this. The only positive thing probably is that the movie has the usual "glittery" sort of Netflix look to it. I don't know if that is actually enough for anybody, but the photographer's and the color grader is not to blame.