Sleeping Dogs (2024) User Reviews

Crowe and cast keep us hanging in

[ferguson-6 · 6/10 · 21 March 2024]

Greetings again from the darkness. It's easy to forget that Russell Crowe was once Oscar nominated three years in a row, winning Best Actor for Ridley Scott's epic, GLADIATOR (2000), and has probably deserved two or three additional nominations. His reputation has not won him many industry friends over the years, but to his credit, he keeps plugging away - some minor roles in big films, and some lead roles in smaller films. Crowe can still command the screen with his presence, even when the material is slight (see THE POPE'S EXORCIST, 2023).

This project from writer-director Adam Cooper (writer, EXODUS: GODS AND KINGS, 2014) and his frequent writing partner Bill Collage has been adapted from Eugen O. Chirovici's 2017 novel, "The Book of Mirrors". It's Cooper's directorial debut, and it's entertaining enough, especially if one can avoid comparisons to other similar crime drama films, especially the classic MEMENTO (2000). In this one, Crowe stars as Roy Freeman, a former homicide detective who lost his badge after a drunk driving accident. He has recently undergone an experimental brain procedure designed to help him regain some of the memories Alzheimer's has robbed him of. Roy's apartment has notes posted everywhere. These notes remind him of his name, remind him of his shoe size, and remind him that his Hungry Man dinners are hot when they come out of the microwave. Turns out, it's too late for a note to remind him not to put the TV remote in that same mircrowave.

A ten year old case he worked is brought up by a group looking to prevent an innocent man from being executed. Roy has no memory of the case, so he re-visits the files and tracks down his old partner, Jimmy Remis (played by Tommy Flanagan, in a reunion of GLADIATOR actors). What follows is a sufficiently intricate web of characters to keep us interested and guessing. The murder victim was Professor Wieder (Marton Csokas), and the usual suspects include his PTSD-suffering handyman Wayne Devereaux (Thomas M Wright), Wieder's research assistant and lover Laura Baines (Karen Gillan, Nebula in the Marvel Universe), Laura's other lover Richard Finn (Harry Greenwood) who is writing a book on the murder, and a couple other characters tossed in to knock Roy and us off track.

Flanagan and Csokas are two of my favorite character actors - both always bring something interesting to their roles, and here it's Gillan's Laura that seems to offer the most intrigue - changing names, locales, and personalities, all while publishing a book on a theory of how 'bad' memories can be replaced with good ones, or erased altogether (think of another classic film, ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND, 2004). Roy's flashbacks are handled by quick spurts of moments that he struggles to assemble, which allows us to struggle right alongside him. Roy's plight leaves us with the thought that it's possible to find yourself, and not like what you see. Memory is obviously crucial to the story, and for a second-level crime thriller, there is enough here to keep us going until the conclusion.

In theaters beginning March 22, 2024.

Sleeeeeeping something

[italiacaca · 5/10 · 10 April 2024]

Well what can I say, not much of a thriller to me as more of a criminal mystery.the movie seemed very interesting and it was until about half way when I just found it so so slow, un interesting and un realistic. I found my self dozing off during periods of the movie. Thanks to Russell Crowe keeping me a bit engaged with his acting and abilities to do so. This movie started falling apart to me and had the potential to be and do so much more. Endings to these movies never amaze me, and this one is exactly the same, see it once you would know what I am talking about always the same amnesia....b+.

was really good until the final ending

[Luv2Spooge · 5/10 · 13 April 2024]

I rarely talking about movie's spoiler in my review, but this one is infuriating because it literally was up to the ending which just ruined it. What's sad is that they could've still made it work, but they just didn't. The plot hole is too big to ignore.

*** SPOILER ***

So it is revealed Roy (Crowe) actually was the killer. You kinda picked it up around mid point if you were paying attention. But here's why it is so infuriating. It makes no sense. If he was the killer, what does any of this has to do with the other 2 suspect in the end? His partner and Laura.

His partner could've simply told him the truth from the start and this would've ended. There was no reason for any of this role in the film.

Laura also had no reason for anything in the film because she did nothing illegal by exposing Roy's wife's infidelity. She was not legally liable for any of it since it was Roy acting out of murderous revenge. So why would she do any of this?

These 2 plot holes could've easily been repair with minor additional details, but writer just got lazy.

5/10.

Above average due to solid cast

[allcelebritiesarebald · 6/10 · 12 April 2024]

The movie is just average, things like music, cinematography etc. It's not bad but nothing new or special. The plot is a bit convoluted which will either keep you engaged or annoy you depending on your mood.

Solid performances from the main players, particularly the creepy yet sexy professor guy.

Russel Crowe is the main character, a retired detective with a new/old case. It's basically a mystery detective story with some added drama psychology elements.

The biggest problem is one has to keep ones attention to know what is happening but it's mostly just dialogue and Mr. Crowe asking people stuff which leads to new discoveries so he goes and asks some more.

Interesting crime mystery that would have been better if it had remained realistic.

[movieman6-413-929510 · 6/10 · 30 March 2024]

Sleeping Dogs is a new crime mystery directed, written and produced in part by Adam Cooper. He makes his directorial debut with this film. He also has some experience as a screenwriter for films such as Allegiant and Assassin's Creed.

Roy Freeman (Russell Crowe) is an ex-detective who had to quit his job because he suffered from Alzheimer's. When a prisoner is threatened with the death penalty, he asks Roy to take another look at his case and hopefully find enough evidence to prove his innocence and save his life.

Despite his poor memory, Roy tries to revisit and revive the ten-year-old case. This is how he ends up in a crime web full of brutal actions and dark secrets, in which he must decipher the real truth.

Just like Russell Crowe's character, as a viewer you try to keep up with what happened in the ten-year-old case. This way you can try to solve the matter yourself. The crime web just contains many events and different characters, some of whom are suspects or victims. Everyone also brings their own story with hints, although some hints sometimes contradict each other. Due to the Alzheimer's complaints of the main character and all these different storylines and hints, you do not always get all the traces clearly. Despite the many twists and the main character's poor memory, the real perpetrators of the crime can still be guessed. As a result, all the mysterious aspects of the mystery can be a bit disappointing in the end, because the answer was so easy to guess.

However, they have unnecessarily chosen to add special drugs and science fiction-like medical gadgets to the story, which causes the film to lose some of its realism. In addition to these non-existent things, the film responds nicely to real things and data surrounding the human brain. If they had just stuck to the real stuff, the movie could have been more interesting.

Russell Crowe comes across well and realistically as an older detective who can no longer always trust his own memory. Other cast members also play well on the mysterious aspects of the mystery. With most of them you don't always know whether or not they can be trusted and whether they play victims or perpetrators in the story.

A film noir for the 21st century

[Ajjam1967 · 7/10 · 14 April 2024]

Many of the facets of this story could have been transplanted to the film noir period of the mid-20th century, and bar the occasional reference to technology (which could have otherwise been replaced for something of those times), this movie could have been set then (LA Confidential, anyone?). But it's not, its setting is contemporary. But I couldn't help but think that I would have liked to have seen this movie, and this cast, in a 1940s film noir. A glam Gillan would have been particularly good!

A drunken ex-cop, with memory loss due to alzheimer's, has had an experimental procedure that may help his condition. He gets approached about an old case he worked on, but cannot recall, and where the convicted man is near to his execution date.

Hiding his condition, out of a mixture of pride and knowing that he would not be seen as competent by those asking for his help, he meets the advocate and then the death row inmate, and believes the convicted man's claims of innocence in the murder he was jailed for.

Despite his condition, the ex-cop decides that the case is worth looking at again. No doubt he also thought that the mental exercise might do him some good - as would doing something useful be to his sense of pride (I state for anyone who can't see this premise as plausible).

As the ex-cop looks into the matter, he not only starts to see other possible suspects to the crime, but starts to regain his own memories, as his experimental medical procedure starts to work.

Large elements of the story are shown in flashback, from the point of view of a manuscript, written by one of the characters involved, as well as shorter flashbacks as the ex-cop gradually recalls his own past. Again, this is reminiscent of film noir, where a character may explain what happened and the movie shows it.

Russell Crowe is convincing as the drunken ex-cop with a shredded memory that is starting to come back to him. Tommy Flanagan is solid in support as his old-partner (he needs more character roles so we can see him more often) and Karen Gillan can now add 'femme fatale' to her acting resume.

This movie is better than most people seem to be saying. It's well told, the central cast are all solid and the story should keep you interested until the end.

It is however an end that not everyone may care for and has a penultimate confrontation scene that I found too contrived.

It's not the most engrossing film and is another one of those thrillers that is more cerebral than it is fast moving, but has interesting characters and an interesting enough plot to reach the end.

If you're hoping for a Russell Crowe action flick, you'll probably be disappointed. This isn't as good as "The Next Three Days", for example, but it's good enough to get Crowe and two of Scotland's best acting talents together on screen.

If you don't like film noir, or are expecting a fast-paced thriller, you may not like this.

Summary: Not bad, not brilliant either. Worth a watch (with the above provisos).

TIME SOME OF THESE SLEEPING DOGS WERE WELCOMED BACK INTO TJE HOLLYWOOD PACK

[alanlamont-34154 · 6/10 · 10 April 2024]

Great to see Russell Crowe back on our screens even if it's not in the same standard as past great successes . I don't know or care why he and Guy Pearce appear to not be offered the type of movies they used to get despite both having starred in some great movies while we are being fed a diet of so called " Blockbusters " featuring less talented actors rehashing old movies , mostly with inferior results despite massive budgets . This is not a GREAT Movie but is lifted from a 3 or 4 to a solid 6 by Crowes reliable performance and another excellent performance by Scottish actor Tommy Flannagan who SURELY deserves a major role himself and not just known for his Sons of Anarchy role where he stood out ( not difficult compared to some other " lead " actors ) . I admit that , at first , I didn't recognise Tommy but was struck by his resemblence nowadays to a real LEGEND , the great Anthony Zerbe , who had a great career but like Tommy Flannagan , never quite got the recognition he deserved.

A yawner

[JoeyCeee · 4/10 · 13 April 2024]

Russell Crowe is solid. The rest of the cast is laughably silly. Some decent actors reading silly lines. The plot is Scooby Doo-ish. I am confused where it was taking place. Thought New England but not sure where it was supposed to be. I hope Crowe isn't gonna be the new Nic Cage and take every roll thrown his way, cause that would be sad.

I watched to see how boiler plate it was, who would you think was the bad guy and then the next and the next. Kinda disappointing. Someone else mentioned the music, which is good, but it's there to make the movie seem better.

4 outa 10 mainly for Russell Crowe.

I don't Remember

[nogodnomasters · 6/10 · 15 April 2024]

Roy Freeman (Russell Crowe) is a retired detective with Alzheimer's. He writes notes to himself that we see plastered all over his abode. He liked his drink and was involved in a drunk driving accident which got him removed from the force. He is taking experimental drugs and has electrodes stimulating his brain as his memory slowly returns. Isaac Samuel (Pacharo Mzembe) is on death row and his date is coming up. He claims he is innocent despite the signed confession. He calls on Roy, who investigated the case along with Jimmy Remis (Tommy Flanagan) to help out. Roy, for some reason, has his police case files at home. He starts to investigate as all roads seen to lead to Laura Baines (Karen Gillan). A key witness suddenly dies.

This was an okay crime drama. It is a subdued Russell Crowe. Nice ending. It was one I expected, but had no idea how it would ever get to that point.

Guide: F-word.. Sex. No nudity.

Predictable

[kodiakbear-44098 · 5/10 · 17 April 2024]

Predictable with nothing new or interesting.

It's worth a watch if you enjoy Russell Crowes performances, which i do. Russell is great in the role and the movie is ok but nothing exceptional.

It's a kin to Memento with Guy Pearce and is enjoyable and intriguing enough to watch a couple hours go by....but it's outcome is predictable and the title doesn't help to obfuscate this either.

A good debut for the director etc and watchable but nothing special, It's a one time watch for me.

It's a bit like Damaged with Samuel L Jackson...bland with little thought needed to find the person who done it.

Neat Little Murder Mystery

[stevendbeard · 8/10 · 25 March 2024]

I saw Sleeping Dogs, starring Russell Crowe-Thor: Love and Thunder, Gladiator; Karen Gillan-Thor: Love and Thunder, Stuber; Tommy Flanagan-Sons of Anarchy_tv, Gladiator and Marton Csokas-The Last Duel, The Equalizer.

This is a neat little murder mystery that is based on a 2017 book called The Book of Mirrors by Eugene O. Chirovici. It was filmed in Australia. Russell plays an ex homicide detective that had a bad car accident that gave him memory loss. He is trying an experimental treatment that is repairing his memory and his doctor told him to keep his mind stimulated by reading anything or playing puzzles. Russell is approached by a woman about a 10 year old case that he worked on-before his accident-and the killer is going to be executed in a month. She claims he is innocent and he wants to talk to Russell so Russell goes to see him. Russell believes him and decides to investigate a little more. Marton is a teacher and the person that was killed 10 years ago. Karen was Marton's assisstant and Tommy was Russell's partner. There are lots of twists and suspects as Russell is working on getting his memory back and untwisting all the evidence to find exactly what happened-lots are told in flashbacks.

It's rated R for violence, bloody images, language and sexual content-no nudity-and has a running time of 1 hour & 50 minutes.

I enjoyed it enough that I would buy it on DVD.

Don't mess with the Crowe

[BoBo_Goal32 · 6/10 · 30 April 2024]

Didn't sleep at all. Well...almost, but it wasn't Crowe's fault. Somehow, I don't know how, he keeps me focused with a movie that its end is almost too easy to predict and it is kind of a mashup between cheep version of "Memento" with a "whodunit" genre film and a sprinkle of Neo Noir above - you get Crowe and a fine cast keeping you hanging on.

A man with Alzheimer, which can't remember dick about his life or what to do in the morning, finds the strength and mind clearness in order that he will be able to run an old case from his past as a detective. A lot of the movie's logic doesn't add up, but somehow, this old school thriller gets you. Well he got me.

Russell Crowe is not making appearances on big caliber movies, but somehow, he is not crashing and burning in his mediocre movies and almost also gives a solid performance, like this one; this time he is wrapped with great actors, that gives him good support, though the script isn't consistent at its level.

Adam Cooper isn't a Hollywood big director name, but he manages to survive the scene and collaborate once again with Crowe (their previous time was at "Exodus: Gods and Kings") and almost justify the work with big names like: Crowe, Karen Gillan, Tommy Flanagan and even Marton Csokas.

The final result is a mystery thriller that keeps the viewers engaged, though at most of the time it seems that the end is pretty predictable and Cooper copy-pasted a lot of pf the plot development from larger scale movies, somehow he makes it all work in a pretty forgettable solid movie.

Russell Crowe his performance is solid, but this ridiculous story ruined the entire movie

[imseeg · 5/10 · 24 March 2024]

The bad: a retired cop with Alzheimer who cant remember his own name NOW OUT OF THE BLUE is going to solve an old murder case! Get outa here! Whose gonna buy into such a ridiculous story. If you buy it, then enjoy the show...

The good; the acting aint bad at all, although there are quite a few mediocre supporting actors, but the leading actors all do perform well and Russell Crowe is still firing on all cylinders.

But in the end I must admit this movie was completely out of balance, because the basic story did not make sense. There was also a real lack of thrill or supsense. Definitely not recommended, although it aint a terrible movie either...

Almost made my dogs sleep

[Boristhemoggy · 6/10 · 10 April 2024]

Russell Crowe plays an ex detective (Roy Freeman) who is asked by a man on death row to help him prove he is innocent of murder. Roy agrees and although suffering from dementia, embarks on a long and confusing course to find the real murderer.

I have to say that right from the beginning the first suspect raises his head. And not long afterwards the second one does too. Throughout the film the two suspects in my mind remain suspects until the very end: where they are both revealed as complicit in some convoluted way.

Knowing who the guilty parties are doesn't prevent the film from being quite tense at times, but alas apart from Crowe and Paula Arundel (Susan Avery, who is only in for a few minutes) the quality of acting is pretty poor. I was really sad to see Karen Gillan mangle the accent and speech pattern of an American, and she seemed stiff and tense the entire time. I think she was out of her depth in this role.

However the film meanders on with the plot thickening and the date of execution nearing for the innocent man, and a big surprise comes at the end which I hadn't foreseen, which eventually led to a huge plot twist I had not seen either, a bit like the big reveal in the Sixth Sense. People said they knew, but most lied, most did not have a clue until it was revealed. The same is true of this story because the 'real' truth comes out of left field.

The final scene leaves you with a 'Did he?' or "Didn't he?" conundrum which is great.

All in all a great film, good story, great production, poor acting but worth a rating of 6 for the cinematography and score combined with Crowe and Arundel.

There's a cracking twist at the end.

Recommended

[DaneliusUK · 7/10 · 17 April 2024]

Well, what can I say? This film is a captivating ride from beginning to end. With a solid directorial debut, it skillfully incorporates elements reminiscent of classics like Murder by Numbers and Oldboy. Throughout the narrative, I found myself fully engrossed, a rare feat that kept me glued to the screen without the usual urge for a smoke break. While it draws inspiration from various films, its unique blend creates an intriguing and immersive experience. For aficionados of crime thrillers and murder mysteries, this film is definitely worth adding to your watchlist.

If you're a film junkie like myself then you'll appreciate the time and effort that Adam Cooper and everyone else put in to make this happen.

I enjoyed it. Not my place to say where it could have been improved. It is what it is.

Thank you.

Elegant, With An Unpredictable Twist

[JoshuaMercott · 7/10 · 29 April 2024]

I can't imagine what memory loss would feel like to a former cop, and a homicide detective at that. Adapted from E. O. Chirovici's novel "The Book of Mirrors", this movie soon took on a life of its own, breathed in large part by Russell Crowe.

Subtle performances and attentive characterisation defined the "Sleeping Dogs" movie. It gradually became a nightmarish nostalgia trip for Crowe's character Roy Freeman, who'd retired after suffering from severe memory loss.

But a case from his past and his past itself both came back to torment him. "Sleeping Dogs" contained an arresting story, rife with suspense, betrayal, experimental meds, and well-timed revelations.

Returning to an earlier case meant Roy reconnecting with so much that was lost along with his brain's ability to process memories. He soon found himself working with his old partner Jimmy Remis (played notably by Tommy Flanagan).

Between Roy's inability to recall and the many loose ends he discovered in the 10+ year old case, "Sleeping Dogs" began to live up to the phrase it emulated. Roy ended up not letting sleeping dogs lie.

The plot picked up in earnest and demanded my full attention as I tried to piece together what happened in the case involving death-row inmate Isaac Samuel (played by Pacharo Mzembe) and the detectives who'd gotten his confession to a murder he seemingly hadn't committed.

Richard Finn, later found deceased, became the hub around which a lot of clues revolved. Harry Greenwood did good work bringing this character to life, so to speak, and connecting some clever dots to the murder which sent Isaac away.

The portions that featured Karen Gillan (as Laura Baines / Elizabeth Westlake) were intriguing. Though she only came and went every now and again, she played a potent role in this story. Her interactions with Dr. Joseph Wieder (played with Marton Csokas) raised plenty of suspicions.

But nothing was as it seemed in "Sleeping Dogs". The story was slow-paced but exceedingly clever. As detective movies go, this one had a curious gravitas that made it seem like it followed a typical genre formula but with just the right amount of creative differences to make it come across as deeply suspenseful.

"Sleeping Dogs" was one of those movies where the clues were hidden in plain sight but you'd never really guess the cause-consequence angle until the plot itself revealed them.

--- --- --- Adding to the engaging performances in the movie were Thomas M. Wright (as Wayne Devereaux), Elizabeth Blackmore (as Dana Finn), Simon Maiden (as Eddie Finn), Kelly Greyson (as Emily Dietz), Lynn Gilmartin (as Diane Lynch), and Paula Arundell (as Susan Avery).

Unknotted Threads.

[bmaamoon · 6/10 · 13 April 2024]

Actually my dogs had gotten slept, while they were trying to find answers of missing plots that movie kept open in our imagination, what was the car accident of detective Roy? How it happened? What really happened to his wife Linda? How did she dead? How has Roy himself gotten into this case, as a result of the shock of what happens to his wife or as a direct effect of the car accident?

Plenty of unknotted threads need to be treated first before issuing movie end, that Russell with his overwhelming presence successed in making forgive or maybe sometime forget. So I think this is the aimed symbolism or reference by "Sleeping Dogs".

The plot

[fedfed_fmbs · 3/10 · 16 April 2024]

If you don't know how to write a plot, there is no shame to ask how. First act is good, seconded with 50/50, third act is out. You don't have to make a Shakespearian plot without a proper incident accident or dealing with audiences as they are not intelligent. Actually the whole plot could be revealed so quickly if his friend told him the truth, and from then you can build whatever you want. But i think the writers had a fixed idea and they insisted to make every character and the whole drama to serve even if it's not making sense. The making itself could be way much better if he knew what he was writing in first place.

A contemporary neo-noir thriller that Isn't as clever as it thinks it is

[The-Last-Prydonian · 6/10 · 28 April 2024]

Suffering from memory loss following a car accident, Roy Freeman is a former police detective who follows up on an old murder case he investigated. Believing there is a possibility that he and his ex-partner had the wrong man convicted, and is facing the death penalty. It's not made easy by the fact that he can't remember the case. As he tries to piece together evidence as to what truly happened he finds himself uncovering dark and disturbing secrets about his past. Is it sometimes better to let sleeping dogs lie?

It wouldn't be less than generous to say that this noirish thriller from Adam Cooper, who cuts his teeth here with his directorial debut, covers old familiar ground. There's most definitely a whiff of the mind-bending thrillers Memento and The Number 23. Relying on many of the common tropes, we have Russell Crowe's damaged protagonist attempting to dig into his past, and the murder of Marton Csoka's sleazy college professor. It's all here, sex, greed replete with a relatively brief voice-over from one of the dead supporting characters, as he reads through a book he had written, where he chronicles events that led to the professor's death. It's as if Cooper is ticking off as many boxes as he can.

Technically Cooper is very proficient in terms of the direction, and pacing it never feels lethargic. Although in terms of the stakes, It's difficult to truly become emotionally invested in Pacharo Mzembe's Issac Samuel who is facing execution as he is given very little screen time, making it hard to sympathize with him and his predicament. The plot also has an air of predictability about it, and given the movie's title, you pretty much know from the start that Crowe's retired detective is going to get more than he bargained for. It's nowhere near as clever as it attempts to be, with a final twist in its denouement that fails to deliver the sort of sucker punch that Cooper was undoubtedly aiming for. While it raises more questions than it awnsers due to an all too gaping plot hole.

Crowe as ever gives it his all and is a magnetic presence, managing to elevate proceedings, and it does help that he's abetted by a strong supporting cast which besides Marton Csokas includes Tommy Flannagan and Harry Greenwood. This is more than can be said for Karen Gillen, who fails to completely convince, as the femme fatale of the piece.

The movie eventually proceeds to unravel in its final act, with Cooper's attempt to gradually wrap up the movie's plot feeling awkward and clumsy. Leading to its underwhelming climax. Sleeping Dogs is by no means the worst movie of Crowe's career, but still, needless to say, It's not one of his best either, and wouldn't be deserving of being mentioned in the same sentence as his better work which includes LA Confidential or A Beautiful Mind. It's an attempt at a contemporary neo-noir, from a writer and director whose lofty ambitions exceed his mediocre talent, and doesn't quite deliver on what it promises.

Memento meets Shutter Island... Badly

[iamoliversmith · 4/10 · 13 April 2024]

Sleeping Dogs starts with promise, despite a reliance on a few tried-and-true tropes, the film initially offers moments of genuine intrigue. Russell Crowe, as always, delivers a solid performance, anchoring a decent cast. The soundtrack, too, complements the film's atmosphere well.

However, as the main plot unfolds, the film stumbles into predictability. What begins as a potentially clever twist devolves into a series of disconnected scenes where characters seem as absent as Bruce Willis in "The Sixth Sense"-only without the payoff. Instead of a clever reveal, we're left with a plot so foreseeable that it saps the viewer's interest.

The script, unfortunately, is the crux of the issue. Rather than developing characters and deepening the narrative, the screenplay flounders with irrelevant references and red herrings that lead nowhere. By the film's conclusion, the audience is left feeling indifferent towards the characters, detached from their fates due to the weak writing.

It's a disappointment, especially given the clear effort by the cast to elevate the material they were given. "Sleeping Dogs" might have been a compelling psychological thriller but is undermined by its screenplay, making it a forgettable entry in the genre.

Gripping thriller

[lyhendy · 9/10 · 12 April 2024]

I'm not going to give anything away- the reviews don't do it justice. This movie is a lot better than the low score rating it has.

I'd say this is one of Crowe's best films he's been in.

The film is gripping, twists and turns, stories that intertwine and I really enjoyed it.

Follow the storyline of Crowe's character who is living with Alzheimer's due to an accident . He is requested to see a prisoner he got placed into jail before the prisoner is sent to death - he wants the truth to be found out.

The movie retells the whole ordeal.

Just because it's not all gun hoe means some won't like it but if you like physiological thrillers then you'll enjoy this.

Acting is on par, you do have to sit and watch the movie as you'll lose the plot line.

It was fine crime mystery movie but you would know the end far before you reach it

[alb_arsllan · 7/10 · 13 April 2024]

The movie is solid in every aspect, but it's at a certain point where the flashbacks kick in that you start piecing things together. Picture this: an Alzheimer's-afflicted crime detective finds himself unravelling a decade-old case, and as time goes on, he becomes deeply involved. Everyone's a suspect, yet the lines are drawn so clearly, pointing directly to the murderer with each new piece of evidence. Motives are unveiled gradually, like in any classic mystery, but what sets this movie apart is the romantic entanglement of the obvious suspects, making it easier to identify the true culprit. They've excluded the convicted from scene one, leaving only a handful of people under scrutiny.

Predictable in its unpredictability

[telbertocarlos · 5/10 · 14 April 2024]

Read a 5 line description of the movie before I watched it and figured it out there and then before the credits even rolled. It was so predictable the end was about as shocking as putting your tongue in the plug hole.... of the bath! Scenes in other recent movies not withstanding of course 😉. Biggest surprise of the whole film was that I lasted til the end. It's a big wet trump of a film which like so many nowadays could have been half decent but falls well short. Did anyone else notice Crowe's mole switch cheeks BTW? I can only guess it's playing on the whole mirror theme and ironically trying to be too clever for it's own good.

..its Russel Crowe. What else is there?

[apollothesun · 7/10 · 10 April 2024]

Russ is that blue chip actor, never fails to bring the performance. Such a treat to watch. As for Sleeping Dogs, its good flick.

Its crinkles around the narrative of "who done it". It does good job, selling and keeping loose ends spread out.

Basically, Russ is lab rat for an Alzheimer's experiment. He struggles with memory loss and the quality of life, that has taken a down turn. Until positive effects begin to work in his favor. Thanks new treatment.

The story builds fine, the actors are complacent. No one searching for that academy award here, with overblown theatrics. The movie is the reward in itself. You have to respect that. Especially in today's hyperbole of want to be's.

I gave it seven.

Enjoyable movie, but the fake accents

[wilfredwaites · 6/10 · 9 April 2024]

No 'OMG this is amazeballs ' moments, or unexpected 'well did not see that coming' twists, but enoyed the movie.

Would rate it 7/10 except it lost a star for me because of Karen's fake accent. I'm not blaming her for this but just don't understand why she had to fake an American accent, when it was a) it was irrelevant to the character and b) her natural accent is so freaking hot. (like so very hot). C) multiple other characters could just roll with the actor's natural accents with no impact the film.

Subtext: dear americans if you need subext for Scottish accents, widen your horizons. (I only put the last bit in to meet the word limit)