Two gifted high school students execute a perfect murder - then become engaged in an intellectual contest with a seasoned homicide detective.Two gifted high school students execute a perfect murder - then become engaged in an intellectual contest with a seasoned homicide detective.Two gifted high school students execute a perfect murder - then become engaged in an intellectual contest with a seasoned homicide detective.
- Awards
- 2 nominations total
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
It's a swell thriller: a reasonably sophisticated plot, with some neat twists and turns, good camera work, and a kind of satisfactory ending. But just as with the murder story in question, the flaws become apparent at closer examination.
Most important, the characters are not sufficiently presented and explained. The deadly duet shows a very close relation, but not what keeps it so close. It would be easy enough to understand, if they were lovers. Then their quarrel over a girl also makes sense. Since they are not - as far as the movie shows us - their relation remains a mystery.
The same, to a lesser extent, is true about the detective duet. Bullock is not really able to convince with her tough exterior to hide inner wounds, although that should be easy for an actor of her experience, and her male colleague gets no room in the film to show us why he stands her, after what she puts him through the very first days they work together.
Although it's mainly a thriller, I guess this movie would have needed some additional efforts on the drama of it, the emotional processes included in it. Maybe it's all too logical - like numbers.
Most important, the characters are not sufficiently presented and explained. The deadly duet shows a very close relation, but not what keeps it so close. It would be easy enough to understand, if they were lovers. Then their quarrel over a girl also makes sense. Since they are not - as far as the movie shows us - their relation remains a mystery.
The same, to a lesser extent, is true about the detective duet. Bullock is not really able to convince with her tough exterior to hide inner wounds, although that should be easy for an actor of her experience, and her male colleague gets no room in the film to show us why he stands her, after what she puts him through the very first days they work together.
Although it's mainly a thriller, I guess this movie would have needed some additional efforts on the drama of it, the emotional processes included in it. Maybe it's all too logical - like numbers.
I definitely liked this movie, despite several flaws. The premise is fairly original (although Hitchcock's "Rope" inmediately comes to mind), the pace is fine, and the acting is overall great, with a 22-year old Ryan Gosling standing out in his multi-layered portrayal of the self-assured, manipulative, spoilt rich kid Richard. And in my opinion Sandra Bullock did a pretty convincing job (while watching her is by the way always a treat). I even liked the cliché shoot-out ending, it gave this otherwise low-on-action movie an exciting finale.
What did annoy me however, was the way Bullock's character detective Cassie Mayweather was written. Why this elaborate traumatic background?! It did not serve any purpose for the central story of the movie (the ordeal in her past being totally different from the crime that she now had to investigate) but did take lots of screentime. I guess it had to explain her cranky behavior, and maybe her apparent casual attitude to sex. But she was also pictured as a brilliant professional detective. So why this totally inappropriate sexual harrassment of her newbie partner? Or the innuendos of a sensual attraction towards her major crime-suspect?
It's a strange convention in so many crime-movies, that detectives on duty have to have some troublesome past or an addiction or a conflicting bad divorce or whatever, I always yawn when yet another one of these traumatized police-officers comes along. Either make it essential to the story, or leave it, I would say.
Anyway, as an interesting psychological portrayal of two young wannabe killers, and as an extended well-acted CSI episode, it made for an entertaining but slightly overlong two hours.
What did annoy me however, was the way Bullock's character detective Cassie Mayweather was written. Why this elaborate traumatic background?! It did not serve any purpose for the central story of the movie (the ordeal in her past being totally different from the crime that she now had to investigate) but did take lots of screentime. I guess it had to explain her cranky behavior, and maybe her apparent casual attitude to sex. But she was also pictured as a brilliant professional detective. So why this totally inappropriate sexual harrassment of her newbie partner? Or the innuendos of a sensual attraction towards her major crime-suspect?
It's a strange convention in so many crime-movies, that detectives on duty have to have some troublesome past or an addiction or a conflicting bad divorce or whatever, I always yawn when yet another one of these traumatized police-officers comes along. Either make it essential to the story, or leave it, I would say.
Anyway, as an interesting psychological portrayal of two young wannabe killers, and as an extended well-acted CSI episode, it made for an entertaining but slightly overlong two hours.
The movie was better than I thought it will!
I didn't had any expectations for this since I never really heard about it, the reviews are so-so and it came out 21 years ago.
BUT, plot-twist (including the end), I was captivated by the story and how things will turn out. The cast was fantastic (hi to baby Ryan Gosling!) and I thought it was an original and intriguing story. I could imagine a remake of this.
Of course some parts were a bit cringy and didn't aged very well. We can also see a few times that it was definitely a green screen behind the characters.
I recommend it if you like murder-mystery movie without being too complicated. It's definitely a movie you can put on a week night when you don't know what to watch.
I didn't had any expectations for this since I never really heard about it, the reviews are so-so and it came out 21 years ago.
BUT, plot-twist (including the end), I was captivated by the story and how things will turn out. The cast was fantastic (hi to baby Ryan Gosling!) and I thought it was an original and intriguing story. I could imagine a remake of this.
Of course some parts were a bit cringy and didn't aged very well. We can also see a few times that it was definitely a green screen behind the characters.
I recommend it if you like murder-mystery movie without being too complicated. It's definitely a movie you can put on a week night when you don't know what to watch.
Like I said in the header it's definitely cliche but it'd harsh to give a 6. Ive seen a lot of 6's but I couldn't personally go that low. It definitely didn't blow me away. You've got to remember though this film came out nearly 20 years ago. The acting was all round was really good absolutely no complaints there. I'd have to say Ryan gosling shined the most, he played his psychopath role really well which is a hard role to master well especially at his young age. There's not much to say on it, it's good but not amazing. You won't be disappointed, it's also just fun watching younger actors then compared to now.
I predicted too many things in this movie and the only thing that kept my interest were the two young actors playing teenagers. They seemed to have the stronger and by far, more interesting scenes. They definitely seemed to have more to do than our star, Sandra Bullock.
Bullock always plays this independent character that lives alone and has predictable "back story" issues. I would like to see her do something a little more challenging.
Not bad, just not great. 6/10
Bullock always plays this independent character that lives alone and has predictable "back story" issues. I would like to see her do something a little more challenging.
Not bad, just not great. 6/10
Did you know
- TriviaThe characters Richard Haywood and Justin Pendleton are loosely based on real-life murderers Richard Loeb and Nathan Leopold.
- GoofsIt is said that there are no fingerprints from Justin or Richard, but they are shown carrying Olivia's dead body wrapped in plastic to the car and neither of them have gloves on, thus there should have been fingerprints from Richard and Justin found on the plastic that the dead body was wrapped in.
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Cálculo mortal
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $50,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $31,945,749
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $9,307,394
- Apr 21, 2002
- Gross worldwide
- $56,714,147
- Runtime
- 1h 55m(115 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content