Let’s try to keep this one brief, shall we? To Catch a Killer is not a good movie. I’m sure it will find its audience. All movies do. And to the few that this clicks for? More power to ya. But it absolutely did not work for me.
The Plot
To Catch a Killer begins in Baltimore, New Year’s Eve. Fireworks go off around the city, masking gunshots from an expert sniper. Before the night is over, the shooter will have claimed 29 victims. Obviously this sends the city into a panic. The FBI is brought in to assist the investigation, led by agent Geoffrey Lammark (Ben Mendelsohn). The investigation gets off to a rough start. No evidence was left behind, they have no leads, they’ve got nothing.
But new life is breathed into the investigation when Baltimore beat cop Eleanor Falco (Shailene Woodley) catches Lammark’s eye. He brings her on as a liaison between the FBI and BPD, picking her brain for insight along the way. The two form a bond and start making headway on the case. But the killer keeps evading them at every turn, always staying a few steps ahead. Will they break the case and bring the madman to justice?
Also Read: Ghosted Review – Flat, Generic and Creepy
The Critique
Where to even begin? You name it, To Catch a Killer probably does it poorly. But since story and characters are the building blocks of any movie, let’s start there. On paper at least, the story works. It’s a pretty easy sell, as many police and law procedurals are. There’s a reason TV shows like Criminal Minds, NCIS, and Law and Order have remained on air forever, with hundreds of episodes each. The concept works the same for movies. Or, it should.
But here, there’s nothing done to elevate the story. None of the characters are interesting, we learn next to nothing about them, and there’s little to no development along the way. The studio’s own tagline describes Eleanor as “a talented but troubled police officer” but we barely see hints of either. She has one decent insight into the killer at the outset of the investigation, and that’s enough to convince Lammark. Nothing she does throughout the rest of the movie points to any special talent.
As for her so-called troubles? There are a couple brief references to some past struggles with self-harm, but the script gives no further explanation past “this is a thing that happened.” Even if the movie had gone deeper into her past, it’s still the most base level reasoning for why she would be good for the case. “This officer had a troubled past so of course she’ll have some weird, accurate connection to the shooter who also had a troubled past. Never mind that their pasts have no overlap or similarities.” It’s just lazy.
One aspect that the story doesn’t completely tank is the “why” behind it all. It went it a direction I don’t think many will see coming, and I appreciate the effort. Doesn’t mean it’s done well, though. It doesn’t all make sense and doesn’t fully logically track. But at least it went for something it thought would be unique.
Some of To Catch a Killer’s (many) shortcomings could have been partially excused if it at least had something interesting to say. But it doesn’t. It throws out several buzzwords – 2nd Amendment, mental health, problems with the police at large, the obvious ones you would expect from a movie like this. But it ends there. It doesn’t even attempt to dig into those themes. Everything about this movie is surface level, nothing more.
In Conclusion
There’s not much else to say. Save for a somewhat interesting premise and not-awful-but-not-good performances from Woodley and Mendelsohn, there’s just nothing here to hold your interest. Do yourself a favor and skip this one.
2/10
Follow us for more entertainment coverage on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube.
