Hangman (2017)

I don t know what is harder to believe : the inability of the detectives to arrive BEFORE the murders or the extraordinary effort of the killer to hang those bodies God knows how...

May be for TV... Not the same as The collector, that WAS good.

I agree that Pacino just did it to pay his bills. Well, it is entertaining nevertheless...

Fmovies: I wasn't going to leave a review of this waste of time, money and fake blood because all of the other 33 reviews gave it one star as well, so, hang on a moment, how come it has a rating of 5.0?! Something fishy is hanging in the air here. This film is a complete and utter barrel of bollox from start to finish. It's preposterous in every way shape and form, most importantly because the script is clearly written by a seven year old who has no idea what a story is, much less motivation of characters. It's insulting, superficial, mindless twaddle, and I agree with other reviewers, Mr Pacino clearly did this for the money. He's considered to be a great actor (though not in my opinion) and he should know what a good script looks like before he accepts a role, so, obviously he just took this on to pay into his pension fund. What happened to the integrity of film-making? So called 'producers' with lots of money to invest to try to make a profit and get a credit on imdb probably.

This movie was a big disappointment for me. The trailer made it look like it might have some substance to it but alas no. With Al Pacino, one of my two favorite actors of all time, and Karl Urban, a fellow kiwi of mine, I thought it would be at least half decent. Poor script, poor acting on all fronts and just nothing worth writing home about. Pacino does seem to be doing more and more stuff that seems like he is just paying the bills these days. I would disagree with another reviewer here about Wind River though. I thought that was pretty lacklustre also. Haven't seen Snowman so can't comment on that one but as for this movie I can honestly say give it a miss.

Hangman fmovies. The deal here is expectations. Al Pacino playing a crusty cop practically being forced out of retirement by a serial killer as well as his old fellow officer with a connection to the officer's murdered wife. This could be a taught thriller. Well, forget about taut and lower the thrills. Hollywood mediocrity and bombast has spit out another wannabe "7" that goes south. The central thread of the crimes is the use of the hangman game by a daily kill. Don't ask how the perp can possibly string his murders together with intricate staging in such a compact time frame. This fact is suppose to be horrendously creepy and sinister one is to suppose? It comes off quite silly. Because the cops can't keep our attention even with Pacino the viewer gets the device of a young journalist who is signed-off to do a story about their dedicated under-appreciated jobs. Conveniently this reporter gets in just in time for The Hangman. Another layer of Hollywood that doesn't gel with a real crime story. So, the movie feels absolutely contrived and fake. Pacino is a waste as his laid back style doesn't add the element it's going for. The co-lead, Detective Ruiney as played by Karl Urban, barely registers even in comparison to Pacino's pedestrian Detective Archer. And as for the reporter Davies played by Brittany Snow it's so thrown in to the stew it comes off as pandering pure and simple. Hangman dashed all expectations for a return to some form for Pacino as it is a lame story with blah performances. Maybe because I'm stubborn I watched it to the end because I can't think of any other excuse?

Watch it if you're a fan of Karl Urban, he broods and stares the whole way through, which kind of helps distract from the movie, which has not plot, no focus, and is ultimately trying to be too clever for its own good. AL Pacino, who I was excited to see in it, was disappointing, it's almost as if he was playing a caricature of himself. The story was muddled, and had too many holes, and way too many inconsistencies to be taken too seriously. Some nice direction, and fairly decent direction, but that doesn't mask what is all in all a poor film. Just enjoying it for a bit of smouldering from Urban, otherwise it's a shambles. 4/10

Love crime thrillers, and the storyline for the movie was actually really good. Serial killer who leaves clues taunting the detectives to try and catch him...

Unfortunately the words given to you describing the plot of the movie is the best that it gets.

Pacino couldn't figure how to pull of that deep Louisiana accent. Seemed to be casted to play a support role, but he either didn't believe in the movie or didn't care because that was some of his worst acting.

Karl Urban's character story was a mess, Wife was brutally murdered, what could have been key in the focus of the movie was just lost until it was as if the writer/director was like oh yeah, about that.

Brittany Stone was the lone brightspot in the movie. She did a better job "playing detective" (was a reporter) then the two lead actors who were actually playing detectives.

Movie had a strong resemblence to the Saw series, go figure as this was also a Lionsgate film.

Overall felt the story was promising, but as the movie progressed, the acting, writing, and directing regressed.