Untraceable Reviews

• Tough, Brutal Diane Lane Thriller With Something To Say About Modern Times

  
  By A3BMRSE8N1858V on 2008-02-27
  Untraceable certainly isn't a flawless thriller, but it's a solid, enjoyable one. It's not only a grisly, hard-at-times to watch film, but it has a brain, and definite opinions about how our culture seems to feed like pirahna on the misery and suffering of others using the immediacy of the internet.
  
  Diane Lane plays an Portland FBI cybercrime investigator who finds herself after a gruesome killer who kidnaps his victims and tortures them to death on the internet, upping the ante as fast as he gets hits on his website. Lane's character is still grieving the death of her husband, a policeman killed in the line of duty, and this case quickly intrudes on her life with her mom and her young daughter.
  
  There's no phony romance with her cop partner, no killer who is somehow connected to Lane, and she gets to save the day without a male cop taking over for her. There are plot aspects that don't ring true, but overall, this is a smart, engrossing film that has something to say, and says it pretty well.
  
  

• Nightmare Low on Extrapolation and Tension

  
  By A3EE0H0NWQ9QVL on 2008-05-29
  Novel in its approach, 'Untraceable' asks interesting moral questions about a plausible technological nightmare. A disgruntled man kidnaps select victims to torture and kill, adding more of a given hazard as the numbers of people log into his website. As his online broadcast is made known, FBI agents (headed by Jennifer Marsh [Diane Lane]) try to keep the situation under the radar and bloggers off the website. Savvy for obtaining a Russian domain for his website, the perpetrator renders the crew unable to pinpoint much less stop the website until they can locate him at his hideout. Sometimes a grizly update of Edgar Allan Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum," the film is often reminiscent of 'Silence of the Lambs' with eerie surveillance scenes. Somewhat cynical and far less tense, 'Untraceable' often remains more educational than entertaining. (2.5 *'s)
  
  

• Surfing the Web for Murder

  
  By A18G7GG53G2X8A on 2008-01-26
  The Internet is capable of many things, some of them good, some of them bad; "Untraceable" is a film that shows not only its ugly side, but the ugly side of humanity, as well. This is an unnerving, suspenseful film that doesn't skimp on social commentary, and this is despite the fact that it hurts like hell to hear it. I knew that I was supposed to feel absolutely icky walking out of the theater, but I had no idea I'd feel that way as soon as the film started: it begins in a dimly lit, grimy basement, where an unseen person begins torturing a kitten. Using a camcorder, this person transmits this awful footage to a live video feed on the Internet. The website--called killwithme.com--is soon up and running, and under mysterious circumstances, it comes to the attention of Jennifer Marsh (Diane Lane), an FBI agent from Portland, Oregon specializing in Internet criminals. She's obviously disgusted by a website showing a tortured animal, but she has yet to learn what it means or even how the website operates.
  
  That quickly changes. The next victim is a shirtless man who's had the website's name carved into his chest. An IV automatically pumps a decoagulant into his body, which prevents his blood from clotting. This means that he'll bleed to death, despite the fact that his chest wounds are relatively minor. But this isn't the worst of it; Marsh soon realizes that the speed of the IV drip is directly related to the number of hits the website gets. In a nutshell, the more hits, the faster the man dies. Sure enough, the hits just keep on coming, and within six hours, the man is dead. Marsh is immediately frustrated because she can't shut the site down--every time she tries, it bounces to a mirror site on a different server and continues to run. It also relies on an original Russian server, meaning the United States has no jurisdiction. In essence, killwithme.com is an untraceable website.
  
  Marsh quickly understands that this case is going to require a lot of planning and precise execution. Assigned to the case with her is Detective Eric Box (Billy Burke)--they both believe that whoever is running the website is purposely seeking attention, and what better way to get it than with press conferences and news reports? An uptight FBI director (Peter Lewis) publicly announces that anyone who visits the website is an accomplice to murder, and of course, his words have the exact opposite effect. That's because there's now a third victim being broadcast on the website, and the hits are greater than they ever were before. I won't continue to describe what the killer actually does to these people, but it's safe for you to assume that, with each person, the methods get more and more unpleasant to watch.
  
  Things take a personal turn when Marsh's daughter, Annie (Perla Haney-Jardine), says that a video of their house is being shown on the computer. Marsh runs outside to find an abandoned car with a camera hooked to the antenna and a dead body in the trunk. Clearly, whoever is running killwithme.com has tapped into her computer's personal files. How and why, she doesn't know. But she'd better find out soon, because the website is featuring yet another victim; as this new person suffers for everyone to see, Marsh finally realizes that each victim is somehow connected to the killer.
  
  But who exactly is the killer? That's the obvious question for any murder mystery, and most of the time, we have to wait until the end for the big revelation. This isn't the case with "Untraceable." The audience actually learns the killer's identity early on--it's more a matter of the characters not knowing until the end. It's also a matter of figuring out the killer's motives, because we all know that a motive makes a murder mystery much more satisfying (although not necessarily more realistic). But in all honesty, the killer's identity is not what drives the story; this film is without a doubt a critical commentary on Internet technology, showing how something so benign can be used to showcase evil things. A minor subplot involves a secret DVD stash of snuff films and suicides--I know perfectly well that such DVDs actually exist and that there's a market for them. What does that say about humanity? Why do we like to watch that horrible stuff? The website in "Untraceable" is not a reflection of a screenwriter's twisted imagination, but of the reality that certain people would happily visit it if it were real.
  
  The film's only weakness is the lack of developed relationships. Marsh is established as a workaholic who rarely spends time with her daughter. Marsh's mother, Stella (Mary Beth Hurt), does most of the nurturing. But not enough of this was shown; at a certain point, both Annie and Stella are sent away for their protection, and we never see them again, which is bad since they could have added so much more to the story. For some, the scenes of torture and murder will be too disturbing to watch, as this movie (correctly) steers clear of campy gore. I know that the image of that poor kitten will haunt me forever, which almost makes me wish I hadn't seen this film in the first place. But when taking into account the clever plot, the tense atmosphere, and the harsh social commentary, it becomes clear that "Untraceable" is too effective to overlook.
  
  

• Rental

  
  By A4JP4T1F95D0A on 2008-05-28
  This is a decent rental, but I would advise against buying it. In a movie that fuses a little bit of Copycat with Saw, you have an up and down affair. Though a lot of technical jargon is tossed around, there are many technical errors that even I spotted, and I am far from a computer wiz. There are also several police procedure gaffs that I noticed as well. Still if you suspend some belief, the story is decent, and the deaths are somewhat original. The acting is mostly strong, but nothing incredible. This one is just okay.
  
  

• Horrible

  
  By A1L7M1B0M00CBH on 2008-05-14
  Nothing more than another torture porn movie. It's disgusting to think people actually enjoy watching the suffering of humans and animals as entertainment. I was expecting a good conquers evil thriller and instead I lost an hour and half of my life to trash. I'm disappointed Diane Lane attached herself to this movie; I've enjoyed much of her previous work.
  
  
• Entertaining
  By AFDU35QCUXR5H on 2008-05-29
  This movie has lots of actions, tense, as you would expect from a cyber-movie. The main plot is about a psychotic man who uses his taser to get the people to his "dungeon" and display the torture online. I thought the plot was brilliant. The way he does his torture where the lights increases as the viewers increases which practically baked the victim; the use of chemical (forgot what it was) on the next person; and the voice changer so the psycho can lure his victim - I thought those were all unique and high-concept.
  
  Now adays, though, Feds can easily trace the IP address. In this movie, they have difficulty tracing the IP address of the user. I'm sure that is why the title is Untraceable. The computer forensic folks are a lot savier now. It would have added more mystery if the audience does not know who the person behind the keyboard. That would have given them something to solve.
  
  I laughed at the ending, though. When the heroin broke loose of her captivity where she was tied upside down, one of the users posted a question: "How can I download this scene." (something like this). I thought that was hilarious as it shows us our obsession with live Interent action.
  
  Again, this movie is entertaining enough in a different way. I would still recommend seeing it. Cold Eyes
  
  
• Untraceable Unwatchable? Not At All!
  By A84FLVDK2R5JF on 2008-01-23
  January is usually the dumping ground for movies that didn't cut it for the holiday season, but starting in 2008 with Cloverfield and now Untraceable this is no longer the case.
  
  Untraceable is the story of FBI agent Jennifer March (Diane Lane), a single mother who is part of the Cybercrime division in Portland, Oregon. Life is normally mundane for the Cybercrime division (taking down the normal teenage identity thief) , but all that is about to change with a cat...
  
  Untraceable's suspense never lets up , and with quick witty dialog by the characters (and a great performance by Tom Hank's son, Collin Hanks) the movie is over even before it starts. While most movies fall into the typical plot devices and settings Untraceable easily avoids them.
  
  When a studio decides to mix technology and movies they usually have two dilemmas.; How to make the movie understandable for the normal moviegoer and the technological advanced once (aka geeks) Most movies choose to dumb down the "cyber talk" however Untraceable gets it right, even with the correct using of TTL (Time to Live)
  
  In general, today's audiences have been desensitized to gore and even crave it with movies such as Saw or Hostel. In fact from the opening of Untraceable you would think this will occur, but Untracacle's director, Gregory Hoblit is extremely skillful and takes his cues from Alfred Hitchcock and just shows enough for our imagination to take over for the rest.
  
  From the teenager to the baby boomer Untraceable offers something for everyone, action, suspense, an intelligent story that is relevant to our times, and something to keep everyone entertained during the cold days of winter
  
  -- Nathan M Rose (flickdirect.com)
  
  
• Untraceable
  By A1GHUN5HXMHZ89 on 2008-05-16
  Based on reviews I expected something like "Saw", but that wasn't the case. This wasn't a horror, it was a crime drama like "Bone Collector". An FBI investigative team tries to track down a murderer that has a website tied to the method of murder. The problem is he hides his tracks to well on the internet. His murders are conducted based on the number of hits the website recieves. In one case the more people visit the website, the water the person he kidnapped is soaking in turns to battery acid. So this is not for the squemish or young. This is also the one thing I have trouble with in the movies given perception. Being a computer geek for over twenty-four years I know if you want someone shut down for killing people, there is a way including going to their ISP if not the networks or IPs they're bouncing through. That aside it was a pretty decent movie. In fact scarier when you consider the popularity of public websites for people to post videos. One can't help wonder if people at least initially would think something like this was a hoax and tell all their friends to check it out. Hence one facet of this is feasible. The texted graphic comments we see would then be understandable as well as I have seen people make comments like those about online game characters. When they don't think it is real, but just fake with acting and props, then you can see why it is believable. The acting was good, the directing, story, and music were all well done. Overall I would recommend it if you like movies like "Along Came a Spider" and "Kiss the Girls". Good quality DVD with decent replayability.
  
  
• Unwatchable
  By A2MNMZMM6BGLTA on 2008-05-18
  Another poster wrote, "This movie disguised as a crime thriller, is an excuse for watching torture. How sadistic."
  
  Couldn't agree with you more.
  
  
• More Cent-Com Propaganda, Written by Feds?
  By A2J57EQ9KPGXR9 on 2008-05-19
  Other reviewers call this "Torture-Porn", its much worse than that. This is another Cent-Com (Central Command) Psy-Op designed to push the idea that Net Neutrality is evil. The film depicts Feds spying on people's Internet browsing as angels looking out for those evil criminals.
  
  It was chilling to watch how, in the beginning of the film, the Fed played by Diane Lane zeroes in on a "cyber-criminal" in a suburban housing tract - and then calls in the Assualt Team to "take him down". (YOU SLAVES BETTER NOT BROWSE THE WRONG SITES, OR ELSE!!) Then the film tries to humanize the domestic spy by showing her at home with her daughter - see, she's just like you and me..
  
  The killer in the film is completely one-dimendional, another "evil Internet user" who kills people using the evil Internet. In case you missed the movie's underlying message:"We must control this evil Internet" - kinda like the way they do in China. Yeah, that will fix everything! The killer is caught, because he decides to do something really stupid. Then the film just ends. No epilogue, nothin'.
  
  This film is worse than torture-porn, its treason.
  
  
• Tense enough, but stretches credibility
  By A2R1HAXRNU0QX7 on 2008-01-26
  Once again, we are given a movie in which the homicidal maniac is a true master puppeteer, pulling all the strings and knowing FAR more about what's going on than the brilliant and intuitive police following him.
  
  In UNTRACEABLE, the killer ensnares his victims and then subjects them to slow, horrifying deaths that only pick up in pace the more that people tune in to his web site. This implicates the viewing public in the murders...see! The movie implies that upwards of 14 million people from around the US (the rest of the world is blocked) would eagerly log on to such a site within seconds just to watch a stranger die a horrible, graphic death. Unfortunately, the movie is not interested in exploring the implications of this...it's really just a device to make a standard thriller seem more cutting edge. Roger Ebert, in his review, said he did not doubt for one second that people would tune in to see this site. In my heart, I hope that isn't true...that a plea to help save these lives might be heard.
  
  Anyway, my main criticism is that once again the bad guy moves too fast and has too many elaborate (and expensive) devices to actually be credible. Hannibal Lecter had mostly his mind to assist him. Later, he had wealth, but truthfully, he didn't use it much...he used his intellect. In UNTRACEABLE, we have a killer who probably doesn't have a good source of money, but is still able to move with impunity around Portland, setting up elaborate traps, more elaborate surveillance and even more elaborate technology.
  
  If you can get past this, there is a solid thriller here. This is mostly due to the commited performance of Diane Lane as an FBI agent specializing in cyber-policing. Having an actress of her stature lends the film credibility. And all the technological babble (which almost no one would be able to make sense of) gives it a sheen of possibility. But at the end, even Lane has to do some stupid things just to make things too easy for the bad guy.
  
  The movie has several squeamish moments...it occasionally drifts into SAW territory. It has some solid, tense moments as well. No doubt it will entertain...but by no stretch of the imagination is this film more than a cheap thrill.
  ---see more of my reviews at www.afilmcritic.com
  
  
• Wait a minute...what are you trying to say....are you blaming us for loving violence!?1?
  By A3C6CZC2JP67VK on 2008-05-21
  Untraceable seems like the perfect thriller. And it deals with something that not a lot of thrillers have yet dealt with and that's the idea of cyber crimes and a very disturbing cyber-crime at that. Untraceable could have been the perfect set up for a very disturbing, gory thriller with homages to Silence of The Lambs, Saw, and other thrillers. Unfortunately where the idea was great the execution was awful. I think many mistakes were made with this dud and done differently it could have been great. The unfortunate part is that director Gregory Hoblit is not lacking experience. In fact he has directed some fantastic thrillers and should have been able to make this a far more worthwhile cause. Not only that but he has years of experience of TV Cop Drama and yet fails miserably in creating any sort of character arc or real thrill to the story. Its not a complete wash I mean there are moments where you slide forward on the front of your seat as they dangle this murder in front of you and you think "All right, here we go" and then the next scene sends you slouching back into 'this is boring' mode. Its the perfect collection of the wrong elements.
  
  One reason being Miss Diane Lane. She's a pretty good actress and I like her in a couple of films though I never been a major fan of hers and always seen her in mostly supporting roles. In here I find her boring and just with no emotion to her and that's exactly what she brings to the table. She leads the film in a boring manner without ever really getting into the case besides showing a lot of perseverance. Colin Hanks, probably the most talented on board, does show a lot of potential but they never give him enough to work with so he mostly is just there. Billy Burke is the hot detective who shows up to help out the single Lane. Burke barely is a blip on the radar other than being some sort of lame romantic contact for Lane that never really pans out.
  
  Perhaps given a better, more dynamic script this cast could have pulled together and done something but I think they were an unfortunate ingredient because there was no chemistry no spark, except for maybe a slight connection between Hanks and Lane as partners. Now the real key to this film should have been the murders. The idea was the more people that visited a web site where someone was strung up and dying in a different way, the faster they died. This could have opened up a huge door for being diverse and interesting and they do a half decent job and the murders are grisly and disgusting but everything else around it is so tame and boring that you can easily forget about this film.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• Terrible! Just terrible!
  By A1SX4RZCS86GLV on 2008-05-24
  Without disclosing much details, let me just use two scenes to illustrate my point:
  
  1. the opening, when the agent identifies a suspect who uses his neighbor's wireless router to access other people's bank accounts. Now, how does she identifies the suspect? By guessing. He's a programmer, he's a renter, and the most hilarious one, he's registered for 3 hand guns and 2 assault rifles. Let me pause, owning firearm is protected by the constitution, and people, who own, especially "register," their firearm are the ultimate good guys - you cannot buy a gun from grocery store. you must go through a serious background and criminal check first. In fact, more than half of American families own firearm.
  
  Obviously, without any probable cause, the agent orders a raid. That must be sweet!
  
  2. Some time down the trail, the agent claims that the bad guy got into her wireless network and got into her computer etc. OK, I thought the agent was a computer wiz who worked for FBI cyber lab. any half brained IT person would know how to secure their wireless connection, not to mention how to fortify their computers, but a FBI agent doesn't? any decent security would prevent even the most determined hackers - they don't try to break down your firewall and security, they do social engineering. Even they break down the firewall, it's virtually impossible to break in even a well firewalled Windows XP... oh, you are not running Linux, Ms FBI?
  
  Should have at least hired me to be the technical adviser.
  
  Oh, FBI cannot shut down someone's website??? You are joking, right? Even an 8 year old knows that.
  
  
• I want a server that robust!
  By A20UHWR387EFAG on 2008-07-22
  I understand I have to suspend my disbelief with movies like this, but I wasn't interested enough in the characters to make it worth the effort. And it's not about the people tuning in; a troll through the videos on the internet make it obvious that people would watch it, though I have a hard time believing there were 12 million viewers and the load doesn't crash the site. It's more about the FBI's inability to take down a website. I find that... highly unlikely. Still, I could have overlooked it (goodness knows I'm no computer expert, perhaps it's possible, but there are plenty of governments out there blocking a lot more than a single website...) had the rest of the story been compelling or interesting enough to make me care. If I cared at all about the characters in the story. But I didn't. They were flat and boring and I honestly cared more about his first victim than I did all the others put together.
  
  I suppose there was some high, moral message to the story, in the end, but it was so smothered in... fluff and tedium that it lost any real meaning. It felt like Saw or Hostel without the gore (okay, there was a little bit of icky, but nothing compared to the levels of those movies). Which leave you with a vague plot, some action sequences, and a lukewarm, predictable ending. It's fine for an evening when there's nothing on, or for watching with a group of friends (and throwing popcorn at the screen), but overall you won't be missing out much if you pass it by.
  
  
• Undeniably Mediocre
  By AEL6AD2AL2UX8 on 2008-07-23
  Untraceable? You mean UNreal and UNbelievable. Everything that's been done before is done all over again and done badly. The dialogue is one of the worst, you'll find yourself cringing over some of the lines said in places where no one in their right mind would utter in the particular situation. Even worse cringing over how poorly acted some of the supporting cast delivers those lines. The saving grace? Diane lane for one, does a good job at pulling it off and keeping us interested as well as just the right sprinkle of suspense to keep you peeled to the screen long enough to get to the end debating on if it was worth it or not.
  
  
• Unwatchable
  By A2VXN342M87F6M on 2008-02-01
  I left after the first 30 minutes. The FBI unit investigating cyber space crimes is dumbfounded after watching a cat and some dude get tortured to death on streaming live video. The unit seems more interested in the gory details of the progress of the torture then in stopping it. This movie disguised as a crime thriller, is an excuse for watching torture. How sadistic.
  
  
• Leaves you feeling dirty, appalled, and disgusted
  By A1RNMPOY4XIAA8 on 2008-02-06
  The most terrifying part of Untraceable is not the scenes of suspense or gruesome torture; but the image this film left me with--this could be the next step in societies demand for "reality" entertainment.
  
  
  Jennifer Marsh (played by Diane Lane) a cybercrime FBI agent who fights online criminals most of who are stealing credit card numbers to buy a watch off eBay or downloading music illegally. She receives an anonymous tip about a new website that streams live features of victims being brutally tortured to death as the more people visit the site. Her job suddenly intensifies, and a heightened beat-the-clock investigation begins as the body count rises. Even with all the FBI computers, there is one small problem...the killer is (hint it's in the title)...untraceable.
  
  
  I will admit it, I was engrossed. Director Gregory Hoblit (Fallen, Fracture) knows how to build suspense with a quiet, taut pacing, but unfortunately he lets it quickly spiral out of control as it shows every torture in gruesome detail, similar to the Saw and Hostel movies.
  A big disappointment is that there is no "twist" as you see who the killer is fairly early on, and the motivation for the killer's actions is rather weak. Even as I write this review there are a myriad of "how did?"s, "why did?"s, and "that is not possible!"s
  
  
  Another that bothered me, was the fact that this story felt hypocritical. It seemed to almost to be a message of how horrible our ravenous appetite for "torture porn" is. Yet, its' portrayal of the general public who logged on to this site, as no better than the killer committing this inhuman crime, was pointless as you witness everything they did, making you feel no different than them.
  
  
  I was sad Diane Lane was wasted on this film as she delivers a strong, intelligent performance despite the mediocre material, and Billy Burke (playing a detective on the case with her) holds his own well with her as their scenes are laced with attraction.
  
  
  Untraceable shocks you with people's pitiless, inhumane reactions to the vile torture of another human being and leaves you feeling dirty, appalled, disgusted, and no better than the people who logged on.
  
  
  
• Virtually Untraceable
  By A3G36K8ORL9BFI on 2008-03-29
  I must say that this movie was a very good idea, and I was intrigued about seeing it in the movie theater. So I took my boyfriend against his will to see the movie with me. The problem with this was he is very tech savvy. The premise for the movie states the villian is untraceable, but there are many factors that prove otherwise.
  
  Basically the movie starts at the very beginning with a kitten, and the closer the kitten gets to the milk, it gets shocked. This is to test the waters and see how many hits the sight is capable of getting, and as more and more people hit the site, the quicker the kitten dies. The movie is basically punishing the fans of gore, as many believe its a joke, and others are showing the villian to be a hero.
  
  It is an interesting idea as I stated before. I have to give it credit, because the premise was very good. Diane Lane and her partner try to go after the guy but cant trace him as quickly as they have been able to track other internet predators, and the risk of their timeliness stands a persons life. The villian soon makes the stakes personal and it becomes an obsession.
  
  Note to people with weak stomaches, there are a few scenes where you may need to look down. :( It is worth seeing, but not worth owning.
  
  
• Unblameable
  By A139ZF7CJVVTJU on 2008-09-10
  In a firing squad, the victim is blindfolded and faces a line of sometimes a dozen men with guns. The men take aim and fire at the same time. A practice grew of informing the executioners that one of them had been given a blank cartridge. This prevented the possibility that the men would aim away by diffusing the subsequent guilt. Even the notion of a firing squad itself is meant to help assuage the weight of responsibility. After all, who's to say which man's bullet actually did the killing?
  
  Populations that grow as fast as America's begin to lose that basic human value. Like any other resource, the more of us there are, the less we are worth. And the easier it is to act like the act of observing death and pain isn't the exact same as causing it. UNTRACEABLE takes the creepy, anonymous lecherousness of the internet, and both admonishes and capitalizes off of it.
  
  Because there's a new website, you see, and if you go to it, you can watch something die. In fact, the more people who visit the website, the faster the death occurs. Don't worry. Sometimes it takes millions of visitors to kill the victim, and you're just one visitor. Just take a peek. And don't worry! The website is completely (refer to the movie title)!
  
  It's possible the movie is arguing that things like Youtube have destroyed our last vestiges of shame. At best, it's pointing out that it's a back-handed blessing (but hey, even the depopulation caused by the Black Plague led to more competitve wages and, arguably, the Renaissance. Perhaps Youtube is just the ugly gate to a new and better world. Ha ha. I'm sorry. I'm off track.) In any case, although it might spur some interesting discussions, the movie only sustains interest when it exploits the very thing it's complaining about. Much like the dispassionate news reporters who "tsk" at tragedy and turn practiced sympathy on the viewers at home, UNTRACEABLE is mostly just distant and disingenuous.
  
  The torture bits, of course, those have spunk and verve, to use a few poorly chosen adjectives, but the story itself doesn't have the same staying power as the topic matter. Even the presence of the lovely Diane Lane (I still can't believe she was in Judge Dredd) doesn't add much spirit to this by-the-numbers techno thriller. Watch it, if you must, for the sticky questions it might prompt, but don't expect to be engrossed anymore than you would by a grisly highway accident.
  
  
• Silence Of The Lambs for the Internet
  By A1COG8T9MPP3KA on 2008-02-01
  I have one problem, they are hyping it as the new "Silence Of The Lambs" for the internet age.
  I doubt any film will ever come close to that phenomenal movie.
  It was alright. Although some of the technical stuff the killer was doing with his equipment and computers was not realistic and impossible with what he was working with and the time frames.
  But, watching a movie is about suspending disbelief.
  I actually laughed out loud when she stuck her badge into the camera at the very end, it looked like a mentos commercial.
  All in all, it was a good movie though.
  
  
• Aside from a couple scenes....
  By A2O97GKCSISM3F on 2008-02-03
  Me and a good friend just saw this film last night, we both enjoyed it.
  But let me tell you, this is 10times better than fear dot com-ha! Doesn't take much. The acting is very good, and the death scenes are sadistically clever, the only real dissapointment was the killer's motive. A couple scenes made both of us turn our heads. The violence is not puke-factor graphic, but it's definately not for the squeamish. The critics once again, wouldn't know a good murder mystery if it conked em on the head-this is not a slasher flick, not enough blood shed, plus every victim has some connection with the killer. Slasher flicks rarely have any real charecter development, and usually with those the killer has only primary target, not with this one. Any murder mystery fan should give this a look, you probably won't regret it.
  
  
• "Untraceable" as we are Disconnected
  By A3V96P0M0EB451 on 2008-02-03
  As I write this review, you should know that I have deliberately avoided reading any commentary about "Untraceable," other than its synopsis. I say this because I am personally acquainted with one of the film's co-authors, and wanted my impressions to be as unfiltered and forthright as possible.
  
  So here goes:
  
  Given the times in which we live, the fact that this film ever saw the light of day is a far bigger story than the script itself. At its core are a group of loosely-connected, dialogue-deprived characters who do little more than facilitate the film's over-riding objective: To showcase a series of horrific and nauseating executions unwittingly facilitated by viewers of the perpetrator's internet website, KILLWITHME.COM.
  
  At its core, this film is a reflection of our society's obsession with spectacle violence, compliments of internet-generated, streaming media delivered to anyone with access to a computer...anywhere in the world. In a grander sense, "Untraceable" is a portrait of modern life, a place reduced to two-dimensions, with violence serving as a conduit for connecting; feeling something...anything.
  
  The dialogue is relevant only in a "card-board" context of moving the plot; not creating real people with real lives and real motivation beyond their immediate jobs and circumstances. As a result, their relationships are tenuous, disconnected and just as dimensionless as the audience's unwitting collusion in cold-blooded murder.
  
  I was sickened by the casual nature of the killings, given the lack of sufficient motivation, intent, reason - and from an audience perspective - empathy with the characters and their circumstances; including the live footage of the killer's father [another person we don't know, and don't care about] having his head blown off and then falling off of the Brooklyn Bridge onto a car below.
  
  If the point of the film was to make a statement about alienation, vis-à-vis the ubiquitous internet, it largely succeeded. And if for just a moment it makes us stop and think about how deadened and immune we are becoming to violence, and how violence itself is, ironically, is the way we reconnect with what it means to be human, then spend the money and put yourself through it. Personally, I think the film would be better suited to a college social studies class in just how sociopathic we have become.
  
  The film was written by Robert Fyvolent and Mark Brinker. Diane Lane stars as FBI agent Jennifer Marsh.
  
  None of the rest really matters...kind of like life these days.
  
  [postscript] I could give this film 5 stars for relevance, but I happen to love intense character development, because I still like to connect with other human beings; and prefer films that do the same.
  
  
  
• It is what it is!
  By A2HWZ0VREZJBB8 on 2008-02-05
  A pretty good depiction of internet technology...a bit violent...story was somewhat predictable...BUT, if you like watching this kind of a thriller, I think you'll enjoy this film. It doesn't pretend to be anything more than a few hours of entertainment. One of the better "no hidden message" films recently released.
  
  
• Untraceable
  By AW99SBGWEXP0J on 2008-02-13
  When the website Killwithme starts up and shows the cruel killing of a kitten, FBI agents Jennifer Marsh (Lane) and Griffin Dowd (Hanks) are on the case. They work for the cybercrime division of the FBI, and are skilled at tracking down criminals over the internet. One week later, the site is back up, this time with a human being tortured. To make matters worse, the more traffic the site gets, the quicker the victim dies. The killer has somehow made the site untraceable, and the FBI can't stop it and as the public finds out about it, it gets more and more visitors. Soon, the killer's game becomes personal, and if Marsh cannot stop him, she might be the next victim.
  
  "Untraceable" is an average thriller with moments of greatness. It starts out well, but spirals downward as it progresses. That's not to say it is bad though, just that it could have been better. Clearly the movie is criticizing the type of material available for viewing on the internet. That being said, the director has no problem showing the audience exactly what he seems to be rallying against. Sometimes less is more, and this would have been a good opportunity to leave things to the imagination rather than providing torture scenes worth of a "Saw" movie. Again, this is not a bad movie, just one that is flawed and could have been better. Wait for the DVD.
  
  
  
• Millennium Episode Rip-off!
  By A1PY4BCMI543EX on 2008-04-13
  Maybe it's not fair to give this movie one star seeing how I haven't seen it yet. However, after reading everybody's review, I have a pretty good idea what it's about and I have to say this is a rip-off of an episode from the Chris Carter show "Millennium", which predates this movies by ten years!
  
  The episode is entitled "Mikado" and it's from the second season.
  
  In fact, I'm sure if you watch Mikado, you'll agree that this Millennium episode does more in less than one hour than what Untraceable does in 101 minutes.
  
  Okay, don't believe me, just Netflix it and then decide.
  
  
  
  
• (2.5 STARS) Passable Thriller with Diane Lane's Strong Performance
  By ABO2ZI2Y5DQ9T on 2008-04-18
  I am not quite sure whether or not the plot of this B thriller "Untraceable" is really plausible, where a serial killer sets up a site called KILL WITH ME to show tortures and killings live on interne, but still I can say Diane Lane gives a strong performance for the film as she always does.
  
  Actually, Diane Lane's typically committed performance to give us something credible is amazing, considering how unoriginal her role and other supporting characters really are. Diane Lane plays a FBI agent whose latest job is track down a killer streaming gruesome murders over internet. She has a lovely daughter waiting her at home; her sidekick (played by Colin Hanks) is a techno-savvy guy, and so on. And the way the film ends is very disappointing, which is something so unbelievable and even silly.
  
  Though "Untraceable" deals with cyber crimes, the slow-paced film hardly offers thrill. The film's idea of suspense (if I may call it suspense) heavily relies on torture scenes, but watching defenseless victims and helpless FBI agents soon becomes repetitious. The film certainly tries to be intelligent, telling us something about Cyberspace, but not much. In fact, the film has so many gaping plot holes and incredible events, all of which suggest that it is basically a concoction of ideas borrowed from other films made since "The Silence of the Lambs."
  
  I am not saying I was totally bored while watching "Untraceable," thanks to Diane Lane and capable supporting actors including Billy Burke and Mary Beth Hurt, but for all its use of cyber crimes and the FBI unit fighting them, the film is only a passable crime thriller.
  
  
• Dexter was on CBS last night
  By A126KX6FVI4T66 on 2008-05-06
  A serial killer as a hero?
  Somebody must have missed the Unibomber?
  I don't think it is good to encourage this sort of behavior
  on TV or in movies...
  This one was well acted and staged with botnets and a Trojan horse
  virus.
  Do we really need more government controls
  or just better people?
  
  
• Not exactly an "edge of the seater"
  By A234H4HFNHIOHM on 2008-05-09
  The plot is great.
  Serial Killer. Not a new theme but always worthy of a look see.
  He, or she, kidnaps the victim and tortures them on streaming internet whilst the police and FBI watch. The morbidity arises when the victim is hastened to his demise according to the number of viewers clicking on.
  Diane Lane heads a good cast.
  It is for the most part predictable. No real thrills or chills. No wows when the killer is identified. Character interaction is blandly held to a minimum. No twists or turns.
  It's an ok flick up to the finale.
  The final scene is annoying. Extremely so.
  The viewer deserved a better wrap-up.
  
  
  
  
• Neat Crime thriller...
  By A21VQDGHP3T7Y on 2008-05-20
  Many 'reviews' here are very misleading in comparing this to Saw, Silence of the Lambs, Hostel, porn, etc. This is a neat detective thriller about finding and stopping an obviously demented killer. Unsuitable for pre-teens, it's rated R for violence, images of torture and some f-words. There is no nudity and certainly no under the cover action, so why the porn reference? It's not great, but worthy of a rental. I liked it.
  
  
• B Grade Thriller Which Almost Pulls It Off
  By AL1PNYDIILV4D on 2008-05-21
  I had no idea what to expect from this movie. But with the first scene in which the killer takes the life of a kitten, I figured it would get even more disturbing as the movie progressed. I was correct. Interesting concept nonetheless. The son of a man who commits suicide avenges his father's death which was exploited by the media. He does this by selecting people involved in reporting his father's suicide and proceeding to torture them for all to see via his web site. The more people who watch, the quicker the death. There's social commentary being made but first you need to get through the creative methods of killing people. There is an ironic twist at the end which I'll leave for you to see and ponder. Not a bad movie and certainly not for the squeamish. BnB Beatles Depot
  
  

• Jumper
• Vantage Point (Single-Disc Edition)
• The Bucket List
• 10,000 B.C.
• Fool's Gold (Widescreen Edition)