Dead Mail

After reading almost half of the top comment and rolling my eyes at the OP's sense of self importance, all I will say is that I rather liked this movie.

An eerie and slow paced tale that features a solid first act but sadly the rest is not as great but still worthwhile.

Feels like a senior's film project. The actors are not terrible, but there are few standouts. One of them is Jaspar, whom the filmmakers dispatch twenty minutes into the film, losing one of the most interesting characters whose backstory is merely suggested, and now impossible to explore with him dead and all. The first twenty minutes made me forgiving of its film-on-video look and almost professional acting; it was a compelling mystery and the detective (Jaspar) was a compelling protagonist, but boom! He dead and you, poor viewer, shall now be subjected to a purgatory of a chronological forty-five-minute flashback that explains away all of the initial mystery as its quickly devolves into a movie about a rather quirky "start-up" and then an emotional drama / captivity story. But the two main characters aren't interesting at all, one of them was portrayed by a second-rate Geoffrey Rush and the other's performance was not much better. If the movie is suddenly going to become a two-person character study, then the actors have to be better than good; they must be SUPERB (think Kathy Bates and James Caan in MISERY). Then the movie becomes about a murder spree, then one focused on a female-duo mystery solver (thanks to a Deus ex Machina character, lazy writing), and finally sticks to its disastrous landing with an ending that is anti-climactic to say the least. At 102 minutes the filmmakers think they have a FASCINATING story to tell and its worth EVERY minute of the viewer's life. But there's a scene change where the camera slowly, solemnly, zooms in on a glowing digital clock near a phone on a bedside table and then crossfades into a different later time; the whole thing consumed at the very least SEVEN seconds; it could have been achieved in 3. Bad editing. If you think I am being too minute in my critique, consider the enormous gulf, the vast suspension of disbelief, without a suspension bridge to help, that the viewer must traverse to reach full suspension. A postal worker finds a torn scrap of paper on which there is a stain that could very well be blood and a claim of a kidnapping, along with handy details (that a clever chap like Jaspar solved in about two days), and that scrap of paper doesn't IMMEDIATELY be sent to the police, which has the resources required, but instead it's shuttled off to some back room and a piece of jewelry takes priority. The middle is a REAL slog and it just doesn't end. During the credits the viewer is given updates on the characters' fates . . . so THIS is "based" on real events?! Maybe if the film had been told through a single perspective (the crazy partner is my vote), rather than a jagged arrangement of varied people, it might have held together better. The more I reflect on the film, the less I like it. I remember thinking, more than once, that Jaspar was a cool character whom I'd be happy to see investigate different crimes, but twenty minutes in . . . he's dead! It's like killing Ripley in the first act! Was going to give it2 skulls, but this one warrants 1. I don't usually rate movies so low, but the filmmakers took 102 minutes of my life!

What an amazing film! The pacing, acting, and intensity was all very well done! There were so many twists and turns where I didn't know how the movie would end. Solid five skulls. Would definitely recommend!

great slow burn excellent soundtrack