Edge of Darkness (2010) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
320 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
This is NOT Taken -- The trailer is misleading
Valcoran29 January 2010
This one surprised me, because I had seen very little advertising or hype for this movie. My friend and I watched the trailer and I thought, "Eh, kinda looks like another 'Taken' or 'Death Sentence.' I'm so glad I was wrong.

This is not another "father goes on rampage to kill the guy that kidnapped/murdered his child." It's actually a very involved thriller that has a fair few twists and turns around a conspiracy Gibson's daughter was involved in. Gibson actually does not go all gung-ho like Neeson did; rather, he was very careful in his investigations. His performance was brilliant, as was Ray Winstone's, though I found myself wishing he had a bit more screen time.

The pacing is pretty quick in some places, so it keeps you interested. Sometimes the plot may be a little convoluted, but it makes sense if one pays enough attention.

Also, I should note that there isn't nearly as much action as the trailer makes it seem. There is FAR more drama, though it's still plenty tense.

First movie of 2010 I've seen, and it's off to a great start. "Edge of Darkness" is well worth it, and certainly not the movie its advertising makes it out to be. Go see it, you won't regret it.
259 out of 307 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
An Icon
daniel-usdirector16 February 2010
Some people have bagged out this icon, but his performance in this movie was as good as ever. It was convincing, honest, and true to script.

I worked with Mel on this movie so feel that any review I give will be biased - reviews are best left to the viewers, after all, they are the ones who determine its success or failure - but I can assure you he was the ultimate professional - his career has many years left!

Bad reviews are of course as welcome as positive ones - as long as they are constructive - they are an avenue not only for others to ascertain the value of a movie but also an avenue for those involved to learn and improve (as well as gather praise where praise is due) - but I would highly recommend you see this one and make up your own mind. It is highly relevant to the current economic stasis in this country and a hint of what may be behind the scenes.
88 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Mel is Back as a detective with drama, intrigue and action
markusws26 January 2010
I saw this movie at an early screening and was delighted.

I give this movie three stars out of four, or 8 of ten points for great characters, intrigue, and some startling action scenes. It looses the 2 points because it does tend to slow down a little and become more dramatic at times but if you are a Mel Gibson fan you probably won't mind that at all. This movie reminded me a little of Taken, with a whole lot of Enemy of the State, and just a touch of Jason Bourne. Mel Gibson is engaging in his first acting role in years, although he definitely looks older now. It's hard to watch Gibson here without thinking of Martin Riggs in Lethal Weapon and there is some carryover but here Craven played by Gibson is the older, caring, Father who is also a cop although there is still some of of the craziness that made Mel so dynamic in a number of his roles. In some ways Mel reminded me here a little of Clint Eastwood in movies like Absolute Power and In the Line of Fire as the more mature protagonist who combines maturity and cunning with a fierce side that comes out in battle.

It's not giving anything away to say that the story is about Mel Gibson's character trying to find out who killed his daughter as that much is in the trailer. Mel plays a veteran detective and so has skills and resources we civilians don't. The movie takes a while to develop and takes great pains to show the love of Craven for his daughter in the opening scenes and then periodically remind us in flashbacks. There are a lot of characters which seem to be critical to building the intrigue of the movie; activists, defense contractors, government officials and various henchmen. The movie does a good job for a while of hiding who is working for whom. Suspense does build for most of the movie but a good bit before the end it is evident what is going on and the movie shifts from an action thriller to more of an pure action movie.

Ray Winstone plays an intriguing role as Jedburgh, deftly showing protagonist and antagonist sides at different times in a mysterious role. Danny Huston plays a multi-dimensional character, Jack Bennet, that is fun to watch. Bojana Novakovic as Emma Craven is a sweetheart. Jay O. Sanders plays a solid role as Detective Whitehouse.

The movie is definitely heavy on violence and acting independent of authority although I don't remember any swearing or sex scenes. Still it requires a mature audience as the hero's actions are probably not ones you want your kids emulating in your house. As with so many movies it portrays sides of business and government at their worst. So,since it is light on sexuality and vulgarity I would suggest that if you let your older kids go that you still discuss the extreme portrayals of the police, use of force, business and government.

It's good to see Mel back in action.
184 out of 249 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
I for one welcome Mel Back
Matt_Layden8 March 2011
Mel Gibsons first stab at a lead role since...wait for it....2002's Signs. He went behind the camera for the graphic Passion of the Christ and the beautiful Apocalypto. With Edge of Darkness he's back with the gun in his hand and on a quest to find answers. His daughter was shot dead right in front of him on their porch. The gunman yelled her last name and fled. Craven, being a cop, thought it was for him, not his daughter. He quickly discovers that there was more to his little girl than he originally thought and is determined to find out who killed her and why.

Everyone loves a good mystery film right? A detective is solving clues to find the truth behind some kind of cover up? Edge of Darkness thinks it's one of those films. Gibson goes to people, looking for answers. He gets little in return. People are scared, there is something big going down and only MEL Gibson can stop it. For Craven, he has nothing left to loose. His only daughter died in his arms, he's not afraid to die. A bit of a revenge tale like Death Wish, but the Chinatown aspect of it sets it apart enough to make it enjoyable.

Gibson throws on a Boston accent, nothing too irritating. There are a few scenes that you'll have to suspend reality for, like when someone gets hit by a car at the right place at the right time. A little far fetched just for the sake of shock value. Edge of Darkness is good enough to keep your attention for the running time, but not great enough to have you keep talking about it days later. It's a well made time waster for those looking for something that will entertain.
17 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Gibson's intense performance is reason above anything else to see this flawed thriller
DonFishies21 June 2010
Thomas Craven (Mel Gibson) is a good cop whose only daughter Emma (Bojana Novakovic) returns for a visit. While she initially appears to be fine, she turns out to be incredibly sick. On the way to see a doctor, Emma is gunned down in Craven's front doorway. His fellow detectives think the hit was meant for him, but Craven digs deeper and believes the nuclear manufacturing company she worked for may have something to do with it.

When Edge of Darkness was released this past January, it was marketed as a return for Gibson to the action thriller genre he has always excelled at. Except the film was actually more of a slow burn thriller, much like last year's fascinating and incredibly well done State of Play, and both based off a BBC mini-series. Albeit, this film is punctuated with scenes filled with incredibly graphic violence. But that initial flub is not the only thing working against the film.

The film masquerades as being break-neck paced, and uses this as an excuse to never really develop anyone. Emma is killed off less than ten minutes after the film begins, and the film never really lets up afterwards with Craven's search for the truth about his daughter's murder. We get very little on who Craven is, outside of a few dialogue inferences and his "nothing to lose" attitude. In a way, he is very similar to Liam Neeson's absent minded character in last year's Taken, except Craven actually takes the time to talk to people and not just kill them off. We get even less on Emma, outside of seeing her as a child in home video footage that appears to be haunting Craven.

If that were not enough, the film throws multiple characters at the audience almost at random, and very few of them stick. I found it incredibly hard to keep track of at least a handful of them, because they were so similar. Outside of Ray Winstone's Jedburgh and Danny Huston's Bennett, most of the characters are of no particular significance other than to move Craven's investigation along. I imagine this issue is largely the fault of the original six-part mini-series, which had the time to bring in a plethora of characters and develop them as opposed to a two-hour film. But State of Play managed to both keep its focus for the majority of time and develop its main stable of characters fairly well. How could this film not follow suit?

The film also suffers from a fairly ridiculous third act. Getting into specifics would ruin the film, but what can be said is that it ruins everything that came before it. It betrays everything the film has going for it, and boils itself down into a rather goofy actioner. The film is never really a revenge thriller, but more of a thriller about a man trying to find out why his daughter was killed. I really enjoyed the film and its last half when I first saw it theatrically a few months ago. But watching it again at home, it almost comes off as having gone totally off the rails much too quickly. The film's penchant for hyper violence gets far too ahead of itself, and it feels almost like the filmmakers wanted to please the audience with something totally different than what the film sets up for (plus, it feels a bit too close in similarity to the ending of another of William Monahan's previous scripts).

Despite all this, the film is still great when it is playing itself as the slow burn thriller it actually is. It is taut, suspenseful, and a touch unpredictable. For its problems, I really enjoyed the conspiracy filled storyline, and really liked some of the twists it took. It did remind me a lot of State of Play, but never feels like it is trying to steal its thunder or underrated greatness. It does have moments where you are on the edge of your seat, and does have moments where it makes a genuine attempt at making you think.

But this whole film would mean nothing if it were not for Gibson. This film was his first in a significant starring role since M. Night Shyamalan's last good film, Signs. Despite having been off the scene for eight years, this does not seem to have made Gibson lose any of his intensity or gravitas. He owns the screen in every scene he is in, and brings a certain immediacy to the role. It was interesting seeing him in such a wounded and devastating role, but he plays it with such strength and ferocity that you almost forget this was a guy who once cracked jokes as a suicidal cop and helped take down the British as a legendary Scottish commoner. He is a man who knows his craft, and knows just the right amount of seriousness to bring to the role.

Although not nearly as well showcased, both Winstone and Huston pull off great performances in their underwritten roles. Both were clearly much better developed in the series (and remain rather enigmatic throughout the film), but are still equally good here despite being overshadowed by Gibson. I would have enjoyed a whole lot more emphasis on both of them than the multiple other characters thrust at the audience over the course of the film.

Edge of Darkness is not a bad film, but it is not a good enough film to hold up on multiple viewings. I really enjoyed it the first time I saw it, but I found it less entertaining and much more problematic the second time round. But watch it for the driving force of Gibson above anything else. Time away definitely helped him become a stronger performer, and I can only hope his intensity will continue to shine.

7/10.

(Portions of this review originally appeared on http://www.dvdfanatic.com).
18 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Whoa!
CromeRose1 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Wow. So this is what happens when Hollywood doesn't make the movie! You get some real quality and emotional/intellectual substance, subtext, and plot mixed in with your gritty, gruesome and shocking violence (who could say that the scene where that poor informant gal gets hit by the car is not shockingly gruesome and realistic!?). So Mel allegedly made a few off-color comments some years ago while drunk; so what? Who hasn't? (some people have even done it without having being drunk as an excuse). Not only does Hollywood need to get over the things Mel allegedly said all those years ago (and it looks like some of its denizens are doing so if Mel's projects in development are anything to go by), but Hollywood's studio chiefs also need to watch this movie and TAKE NOTES PLEASE ON HOW IT'S DONE. Anyway, with the exception of Warner Bros. being the U.S. distributor, I'm glad Hollywood was hands-off as far as this movie was concerned, otherwise it most likely would have turned out to be complete tripe. As it was, this movie was an extremely well made, well acted, taut and intriguing action/thriller/mystery. Well done Martin, Mel, Ray, Danny, Bojana and all involved with what has to be one of the most satisfying movies I have seen in a LONG time. And may I just say that the flashback/hallucination scenes with Mel and his daughter were heartbreaking and beautiful. Bravo! A full-on 10 out of 10 from me!!

Watch Bedbug on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QI_1YSXt8Y
23 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not on the edge of my seat but decent action flick
montera_iulian17 March 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This movie started in some beautiful old-school way. I mean the way it was filmed, the score behind it, the camera shots, the editing was done in a classic way. Even Mel Gibson looks like in his early movies, except for the fact that he's older and stuff but he reminded me of the beautiful times when action films were on another level.

At first I thought this was same movie as Taken, since it had the basics of that: daughter gets kidnapped (here she gets killed in the beginning of the movie), the search for some own vendetta, investigating and fixing the puzzle to track the bad guys and so on. It's a story that you saw often in an action movie. This was nothing new as far as the experience of watching a great storyline in development. It was none of that. It was simple, dull but catchy in a way. Mel Gibson's acting I think it was the best thing about this movie. Mel Gibson knows how to make action/drama movies without a doubt even after all these years and I applaud him for that. Though this movie is not as good as Taken it's a very good movie to watch either on your home-cinema system or even at the theater if you don't have anything else to do. The art direction and editing, sound and video, of the movie was good but not something great, the cinematography was on point and like I said, it reminded me of 80's-90's action/thriller/drama movies and the score of the movie was on point and I can't really see alternatives.

The ending of the movie I guess it was OK, since Jedburgh, the guy who in the beginning had the duty to kill Thomas Craven actually helped him because he was sick and he was supposed to die soon anyway so he went on some own redemption and actually the end of the movie belongs to him, when he's taking on the things that Craven didn't had the time to deal with.
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A thriller with heart
barbosa-vicki23 January 2023
I enjoyed this a lot, especially Gibson's role and Ray Winstone's portrayal of the ambiguous fixer. The ending is satisfying and a bit surprising. Someone said the ending was corny, which it may be, but I actually think it's true to life and what really happens at the end.

Plenty of guys you love to hate, and the flashbacks of the hero with his child were lovely. I really doubt a US Senator would be so sleazy, but what do I know?

Man, they sure want a lot of characters. Minimalism is my preferred style, so it's hard to think of things to say. I like Gibson, despite his personal problems, which are none of my business.
5 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
What an unbelievable surprise!
dick-froderman6 March 2011
This movie was a huge surprise. I don't ever remember seeing it come through the movie theaters. So glad I found it and watched it via our "On Demand" option at home.

I don't see enough Mel Gibson these days. I think he may have been blacklisted in Hollywood but he is still tops in my book.

I am not going to spoil the movie for anyone but will say I was REALLY captivated with this one. It grabbed my attention and kept throwing in some neat twists. This is a movie for those of us who enjoy using our mind and understanding the nuance the directors/writers invest for our enjoyment! If you haven't watched this one you need to. :)
34 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Edge of Darkness is a conspiracy thriller that just feels...odd.
TheMovieDiorama2 March 2018
I can't really describe the feeling when I watch this film, I neither love it or hate it...I just feel really mixed. Like it just exists. Coming hot off of Casino Royale, Martin Campbell revisits the BBC series and turns it into a feature film that incorporates shadowy organisations, conspiracies and vengeance. A good conspiracy leaves you on the edge of your seat, this does not...but it's actually rather mature and intelligent. Sure, remove the improbable ending and slow beginning, and what we are left with is a very mysterious plot that I'm certain probably does happen in reality with big governmental organisations (less extreme of course, I'm looking at you Apple!). Whilst our lead character is playing the detective role and following the bread crumbs so to speak, he is also a father mourning the tragic death of his daughter which definitely brings in some much needed emotion and motive. Crazy Mel Gibson, who hadn't had a lead role since Signs, plays the Boston detective who...can hear the voice of his deceased daughter and engage in conversations with her...maybe he is crazy after all. To be fair, he was pretty decent and was able to hold my attention. Ray Winstone was strange casting and didn't really work for me, who plays a shady agent with his own motives. Danny Huston though, always a good choice although slightly underused. Martin Campbell's directing style felt like it was made for TV, nothing snazzy or spectacular...just functional. Perhaps a well intentioned choice to keep it in the roots of the TV series. Two scenes though, absolutely magnificent or what I like to call "Oh My God" moments. One involves the detective's daughter and the other a collision with a car. Literally happened out of nowhere and caught me off guard, excellent editing! But still...I feel "meh" even thinking about the film. It's finely crafted, and utterly watchable if you had nothing to do on a Sunday afternoon. I just don't think I'll ever fully appreciate it. Worth a watch.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Over Simplified Film Version Of A Bleak Classic From The BBC
Theo Robertson12 July 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Brit TV shows turned in to Hollywood movies have a very mixed success . We've had PENNIES FROM HEAVEN , THE SINGING DETECTIVE and THE AVENGERS which were flops whilst TRAFFIC received much critical acclaim maybe because it did follow the channel 4 mini series plot structure so closely . I was more than willing to give EDGE OF THE DARKNESS the benefit of the doubt however . It is after all of the great dramas of the BBC where a ridiculous premise on paper featuring conspiracies , mysticism and the supernatural comes together to make great , dark , bleak and gloomy television . Perhaps the doubts were neutralized because after making that dark and gloomy chiller it kick started the career of director Martin Campbell who then went on to make Hollywood blockbusters including rebooting the tired James Bond franchise twice with GOLDENEYE and CASINO ROYALE . Surely Campbell being invited to direct the Hollywood version of EDGE boded well that the studio were going to treat this adaptation with some respect ?

Unfortunately the problem with this version is that no matter how much love Campbell may have had for the material the director's vision seems nullified by studio executives . The whole film feels that large parts of narrative have excised or added without little rhyme or reason . In the original Craven has visitations from his dead daughter which on face value is taken by the audience as a hallucination . Except it's not - she is visiting him from the afterlife ! Early in the film Craven does here his daughter's voice but there's no supernatural angle to this this is never really followed up until the final scene which vaguely hints at an afterlife . The afterlife as an after thought ? There's another scene where Craven is in his kitchen , gets kidnapped by the spooks from Northmoor , escapes from Northmoor and is back in his kitchen again with absolutely no explanation as to what the previous sequence was about . Either someone has edited out an important plot detail or someone has failed to edit out a needless and confusing action sequence . One or the other

The screenplay does suffer from being oversimplified . Unlike the BBC series by Troy Kennedy Martin this version is very much a straight forward conspiracy thriller devoid of an of the idiosyncratic , mind blowing and bizarre concepts that made the original so much more than just a mere thriller . Maybe we shouldn't be too critical of this since Gaia theory might be too " out there " for a mainstream international audience but what it means is if someone who saw the BBC version will be bitterly disappointed that this theme is not retained in the film version . To be honest screenwriter William Monahan is one of the weakest screenwriters in Hollywood today . KINGDOM OF HEAVEN had a disjointed script whilst THE DEPARTED is inferior to the tightly plotted INFERNAL AFFAIRS . It is noticeable that Monahan has included references to Gibson's other films such as WE WERE SOLDIERS and PASSION OF THE Christ but is post modernist self reference a good substitute for mind blowing original narrative ? It also leads to plot holes of why would a corporate nuclear company be selling nuclear weapons to hostile powers ? May be it was explained but much of the film it ended up in the cutting room floor ? Despite this there's several scenes where Craven confronts several characters :

" Tell me . Why was my daughter murdered ? "

" I can't . They'll kill me "

" Tell me "

" Okay I'll tell you "

which suggests sloppy writing rather than editing blunders

All in all this is a disappointment , though with hindsight perhaps because the original was so unique , a sort of depressing , nihilistic , hippy film noir that it would be wrong to expect this to be carried in to mainstream money orientated entertainment . That said if you like conspiracy thrillers and haven't seen the original then it's certainly okay popcorn fare . It also probably a film that is remembered for Mel Gibson's last feature in a starring role
59 out of 85 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Criminally underrated thriller - one of the best in recent years
Leofwine_draca7 July 2016
Warning: Spoilers
Mel Gibson makes a welcome return to the big screen with this, a remake of an acclaimed BBC miniseries from the 1980s which has the same director in Martin Campbell. I hadn't seen the original version, but I saw that William Monahan was present as screenwriter and after enjoying his previous remake (THE DEPARTED) I thought I'd probably like this one. I was wrong. I didn't just like this – I loved it! This film contains everything I love about thrillers: a conspiracy reaching to the highest levels, sinister guys in black suits and 4x4s with tinted windows always in the background, a lone hero looking for justice, and a few blistering action sequences thrown in for good measure.

The story of a father seeking justice for his murdered daughter is nothing new, but the intelligent and literate script breathes life into the tired premise and makes it seem fresh once more. Despite the presence of some brief, decent action (a fight that recalls the one in QUANTUM OF SOLACE and a car stunt that recalls the one in CASINO ROYALE) this is more of a thinking man's thriller as our hero tries to make sense of jigsaw clues and a conspiracy blackout.

Gibson has long been one of my favourite presences in Hollywood. His films, whether as director or actor, always seem to have heart and I hope his new Viking movie ends up getting made. He's on top form here as the grieving father, accessing some really dark areas and at the same time providing some touching moments when he sees his daughter before him. The supporting cast is also fine, with stand-out turns from Danny Huston as the slimy suited bad guy and Ray Winstone as an ambivalent figure, the kind who "stops you connecting A to B".

The best presence of all is that of Martin Campbell, who directs a film that's extremely polished and well made, with every scene crafted so that it's just right. The climax is inevitable but well handled and it's nice to see the bad guys getting their just deserts in such a well-filmed way. Definitely one of the year's best, this.
44 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Decent cop thriller driven by yet another angry Gibson performance
Samiam36 May 2010
Before seeking revenge, dig two graves so said Confucious. Likewise, before casting a movie about revenge, see if Mel Gibson is available. Few actors are capable of being as angry as he can (both on and off screen). Over the last decade, Mel Gibson has been behind the camera more times than he has been in front of it. Perhaps his ten years absence of screen presence is what makes the film so good. Otherwise it is a fairy conventional cop thriller, which builds in convoluted-ness and unbelievability, but it never gets dull, I'll say that much. Frankly that, and Gibson's performance are enough for me.

Boston PD Detective Tom Craven's daughter visits him from out of town one day, That evening she is shot dead on the porch. At first the police figure that Tom was the intended target, but once be begins a little investigation of his own, strange things come up. It appears that his daughter was trying to expose something illegal about the Nuclear facility at which she was working. Suddenly Tom finds himself in the middle of a very dangerous game.

Mel Gibson's performance is exceptional, but then again, it is easy to argue that this not exactly new ground for him. Mel Gibson's most common face is the 'Good Man, Bad Guy' persona. Second billing is

here is Ray Winstone, whose performance here is his best yet. The screen time that the two share together is not long but it is profound and compelling.

Unless you really hate Mel Gibson's guts, Edge of Darkness is a good watch, and an equally good return to the screen for him.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Nothing Really Special - Edge of Darkness Review
justin_philpott5 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The basic plot outline of Edge of Darkness revolves around Craven (Mel Gibson) a Boston police officer investigating the murder of his daughter. His investigation technique relies on kicking ass and asking questions later. This is kind of a tired genre if you ask me. His daughter, Emma Craven, has just arrived home to visit her father when she is gunned down with her father at her side. Craven witnesses his daughter die in his arms. The course for revenge is inevitably set. Initially, it is thought that Craven was the intended target. However, early in his investigation, Craven learns it was his daughter that was targeted because she assisted in the brake in of an evil, weapons manufacturing company called Northmoor. Ooh, spooky name. Any company called Northmoor has got to be evil, right? The group she assisted was planning on exposing the super-evil Northmoor to the public.

The Good: Mel Gibson's performance was very good, he is a likable character and you route for him all the way. Ray Winstone plays Jedburgh, a sort-of-hit-man style character who organizations hire to clean up a mess by any means necessary. Winstone gives a great performance. His characters interaction with Craven provides much of the films intrigue. Jedburgh represents the films Wildcard for an otherwise predictable film. You never know which side he is really on and you get the sense his actions will play a pivotal role. The Cinematography was great and the film had great energy and tempo for a film that was not rich with action. Moviegoers expecting a lot of action should be forewarned.

The Bad: The bad parts of the film all revolve around serious story issues. Northmoor, a secretive weapons manufacture, has this massive, eye-popping, state of the art facility on the banks of a river. Come on get real! This is a company that does not want any attention? Right away I am not taking this film seriously. Everyone helping Craven in the investigation dies. Northmoor is successful at killing everyone except the person that can cause the most threat to the organization; a well respected police officer whose daughter you have just murdered. Of course without Craven you have no movie, but you have to ask yourself why Northmoor didn't arrange to have Craven killed when his daughter was shot. They certainly have no problem getting their hands dirty. And I do not fully understand why they had to shot Emma Craven in the first place. She had already been poisoned with a lethal dose of radiated milk; she was going to die anyway. There are several scenes that serve no purpose, only to add action sequences. There is a car chase scene where Craven is chasing Jack Bennett (Danny Huston), the CEO of Northmoor in his Bentley down a busy highway. He avoids capture from Bennett's thugs/bodyguards and eventually forces his way into the backseat of the car with Bennett. He points a gun at Bennett's head and says "How does it feel?" The scene ends; with Bennett still alive. With all that trouble to catch him, he lets him go? Danny Huston seems to be stuck in the role of the bad guy in his recent roles(Wolverine, 30 Days of Night, How to Lose Friends and Alienate People). I have to say he is very good at getting an audience to hate his guts.

The film strives to not be taken seriously. It's too formulistic and is really quite silly when you think too much. It is two [2] hours of mild entertainment, some decent action scenes, some good performances, but nothing really more. Not a very ambitious release. 5/10
32 out of 54 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
At first glance a standard revenge thriller... at second glance so much more
rooprect21 April 2018
I won't say anything about the plot except that it's centered around an "everyman" who goes on a revenge odyssey. In that respect it reminds me of the excellent "Harry Brown" released a year eariler with Michael Caine packing some artillery. But Edge of Darkness differs from the rest with its interesting layered story.

As "Tom Craven" (Mel Gibson) peels away the truth, so we also get wrapped up in the complexity of this story which touches on political thriller, tenuous loyalties, and--most intriguing--a mysterious character "Jedburgh" (Ray Winstone) who sips whiskey and smokes cigars with our hero, but (as our hero is fully aware) could at any minute put a bullet through his head.

And what's the point of all this madness? The point, or subtle theme underneath all the rollercoaster action, is that each individual must make his or her own choice to act independently. That sentence may not make much sense to you reading it in a review, but trust me it's what drives this story. Returning back to what I said about politics and tenuous loyalties, this story is about reaching that point where you break from the predictable and act on your own. Or as a memorable line in the film goes, "you had better decide whether you're hanging on the cross, or banging in the nails."
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Passable Hollywood adaptation of BBC story
wellthatswhatithinkanyway16 February 2010
STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

Homicide Detective Matt Craven (Mel Gibson) is happy to meet up with his daughter again, but is surprised to find her coughing up blood upon finishing her meal at his house. He gets an even bigger shock when she is murdered right in front of his eyes, shattering his world- he takes it upon himself to investigate her death only to be approached by a mysterious man named Darius (Ray Winstone) who shines some light on her former employers which casts circumstances in a whole new light.

It is really quite surprising just how long Mel Gibson has been out of the limelight- most notable for his role in The Singing Detective, but the most recent film of his I saw was Signs in 2002. He's had his troubles, of course, what with his drink drive arrest and anti semitic ramblings, which couldn't have done his career or public image much good, but no, it would appear he really did slip right off the radar for the best part of the noughties. But this glossy Hollywood cover of the original BBC thriller from director Martin Campbell is as good a springboard as any to get him back on track again.

Campbell is a name more easily identified with high octane action movies than political thrillers, so he's a slightly odd choice to take over things here. But he handles things with enough gusto and aplomb to keep things going. Gibson does a decent job in the lead role, a little too manic and overwrought at times, but he could have been much worse. Meanwhile, Winstone is steardy support, doing a pretty flawless American accent and an intriguing character to watch. As another big screen adaptation of a story that was originally a BBC series, it's easy to make comparisons with the recent Russell Crowe vehicle State of Play, but while there is a fairly gripping and complex story here, it doesn't quite manage the tension and excitement of that film.

Edge of Darkness is ultimately an unremarkable but more than passable thriller that Gibson could have done much worse to make his comeback with. ***
15 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Enjoyable but unexceptional
neil-4764 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I never saw more than brief glimpses of the BBC series from which this movie is derived, although I recall that as a UK TV series it was set in England, with Bob Peck in the Mel Gibson role, and Joe Don Baker taking the part which Ray Winstone plays here. So I can't make direct comparisons, but running time alone means that things must have been simplified somewhat to fit within the movie format.

The plot is simple: Boston cop Mel Gibson's daughter is killed in an attack initially believed to have been directed at him. As he investigates, however, he discovers that she may have been silenced because of her knowledge of nefarious goings on which might have governmental implications.

The story is essentially a detective story with elements of action and revenge thriller thrown in and, on that level, it succeeds well enough without ever rising to a level where it registers as special. Gibson, in his first acting role for some years, looks noticeably more grizzled than he did last time we saw him, and also noticeably shorter - presumably as the years go on it becomes less important to downplay how relatively diminutive he is. The other performers all fulfil their functions adequately, although Danny Huston's character may just as well have "Villain" tattooed across his forehead. Winstone is great fun as murky solution-deliverer Jedburgh, and I seem to recall reading that Joe Don Baker had a similar impact in the course of the TV series.

So this is enjoyable enough, but it's not a patch on Martin Campbell's Casino Royale.
13 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Welcome Back Mel!
g-bodyl31 May 2010
This is Mel Gibson's first movie since 2002 Signs. He returns to form in this movie and that's why I rated this barely adequate movie so high. I only saw this because I loved every single Gibson movie with the exception of Signs. I saw this to see Gibson return to glory.

After watching his 24-year-old daughter die from the hands of a company she worked at, Thomas Craven decides to go for revenge. The plot happened before therefore the movie is predictable. I could have told you the plot without watching the movie.

But the high point of the film is the acting. It doesn't seem if Mel Gibson lost a touch from his brilliant acting from the 90's. I liked Ray Winstone somewhat. He just has an annoying voice.

Overall, this is a decent cop thriller. I seen these kind of movies before so I wasn't thoroughly impressed. But, I'm glad that Gibson shines. I rate this film 7/10.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very decent and well-made
With its dense and sombre mood, EDGE OF DARKNESS is indeed a film that seems to come from another era of filmmaking.

Mel Gibson delivers as he usually does, but the real star of this film is its competency when it comes to tone and pacing. Martin Campbell is a great director, and he stays exactly where he needs to be - neither overshooting nor undercranking, keeping things interesting, and drastic when they have to be.

Howard Shore's score underlines this perfectly, even if it feels like some of the cues are directly from the LORD OF THE RINGS trilogy. What matters is that it fits, and it does.

All in all this is an absolute recommendation if you don't expect over the top action and a dumb plot but instead are a fan of stories that unfold in a very entertaining and well-crafted way.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
You have nothing to lose in seeing this movie, unlike Thomas Craven
the-movie-guy27 January 2010
(Synopsis) Thomas Craven (Mel Gibson) is a veteran homicide detective in the Boston Police Department. As they are walking out the front door of his house, his 24-year old daughter Emma (Bojana Novakovic) is blow away by a shotgun blast. Everyone assumes that Thomas, who was standing next to her, was the killer's intended target. However, Thomas begins to suspect that Emma was the real target. Driven by heartache and blame, Thomas initiates his own private investigation to uncover Emma's secret life and the reason for her murder. His investigation leads him down the path of corporate and government cover-ups, which resulted in his daughter's elimination. Thomas receives some help from a government operative, Jedburgh (Ray Winstone), who has been sent in to clean up the situation. Thomas Craven's search for the truth brings him closer to his daughter and his own deliverance.

(My Comment) This is an intense movie about family and closure, and of course, Detective Thomas Craven has a little different type of closure in mind. Some of the movie is a little hard to follow when Thomas does something, and you ask yourself, "why did he do that." But that might be part of the puzzle he is trying to solve. The reason the bad guys use for keeping everything secret is a little far-fetched. Mel Gibson's masterful portrayal of a man with nothing to lose is excellent. Everybody better get out of his way. From the movie trailers you would think that Thomas is going around threatening and killing everybody he meets, but that is not the case. Thomas does take out some of the bad guys, which will meet with your approval. This is a good action movie, but you must remember that it is definitely heavy on violence. (Warner Bros., Run Time 1:57, Rated R)(8/10)
162 out of 228 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Doing what he knows best
ckalexandridis22 February 2017
This movie is a great example of the fact that an actor is made to be good at one or two types of movies and not all.

Anyway, Mel Gibson is the actor that knows how to handle the part of David fighting against Goliath and actually win. He did it in Payback, Patriot, Braveheart and so many more. For God's sakes he also did it with aliens in the Omen. Being a good father except from a hero is even better since I believe it's a quality he has in him.

Sometimes he is a little over dramatic when he wants to show he gives more than 100% in his effort, but he is still way better than the average father character we see.

Apart from Gibson, the story is good even though to much of a conspiracy theory for my taste, and the plot is solid.

It is definitely a movie worth watching (at least once).
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Many Problems With This One
Willie-126 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
It was almost a year ago exactly when I saw Taken. It was a revenge thriller that was less concerned with plot, and more concerned about pulse-pounding action sequences. Indeed, it was one of those movies where one could just sit back and enjoy the ride. And it worked quite well. This year, we have Edge of Darkness. It's a revenge thriller too, and it has some pretty decent action sequences as well. But it is also quite concerned with plot. And therein lies the problem. Darkness' plot becomes a bit too complex for its own good (perhaps as a result of it being adapted from a six-hour long BBC miniseries). And I don't mean too complex in that it becomes difficult to understand. It doesn't. I mean too complex in that, at times, it feels clunky and convoluted. Some of this had to do with the editing and the poor transitioning between scenes. There were actually a few places where I thought a commercial was about to come on. Then there's the seemingly endless assortment of characters, some of which felt as if they were purposeless (i.e. Emma's hood surfing friend, or the creepy senator). And the screenplay was sub-par, at best. But really, when it comes down to it, the biggest problem that Darkness had, is that much of what was taking place on screen just didn't seem believable. I think it would have served the makers of this movie well if they had learned a lesson from the makers of Taken. Often times, less is more. Especially when the "more" is not very well done.
37 out of 65 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Edge of Darkness sheds light on humanity
MovieZoo29 January 2010
Anyone who has seen the trailer can expect to get exactly what the trailer depicts. A cop loses his beautiful daughter and sets out to solve the murder that others conclude was self explanatory as a shooting in an attempt to get revenge against a cop. Taking things at face value sometimes just don't cut it.

Gibson and Ray Winstone were so perfect for the roles they played. The tension from both kept me clinging to my seat and wiping my brow. Gibson probably had his best role in this movie. I have seen most of his movies starting with Lethal Weapon and I could not see one potential likeness of Martin Riggs in Edge of Darkness, except for the fact he played a cop. As Craven, he was truly believable as a dad on a mission to make things right. Winstone is someone I didn't recognize even though he has been in a ton of movies. But after this, I will know and respect him for the rest of my life. Trying to understand his role was a treat, but while doing that, I kept my distance for fear he might have caught me trying to get too close. His thick Brit accent and command of those around him was absolutely a great treat.

Danny Huston is someone I came to enjoy since seeing him in 30 Days of Night as the lead Vampire. He did not disappoint but he could have had a meatier role. As far as I am concerned, he has been added to the list of great seasoned actors to look for anytime you expect to see quality acting.

I mean no disrespect to any of the actors. Everyone did a great job, including some of those in smaller, yet relevant roles.

Everything about the movie was believable and memorable. Some of the violence that you will need to endure will catch you off guard. There is no need to brace yourself because you will get caught off guard.

Excellent emotional roller coaster getting an 8 and a great big "welcome back" hug for Mel.
131 out of 184 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Well done
Arcturus198030 March 2011
I so wanted to like this film because it really is hit and miss with Mel (What Women Want, Conspiracy Theory, Bird on a Wire vs. Signs, We Were Soldiers, The River), not to mention the recent global humiliation I would like to see him overcome to whatever extent possible. Putting aside my respect for Mel Gibson as an actor/director, I'm not the sort to abstain from watching a film due to someone's irrelevant private life. Seeing him on screen again was weird for about one minute, rather like Michael Richards. In keeping with this spirit, I'm enjoying Wagner as I write this review.

Edge of Darkness is well acted and directed. The pacing and resolution of the storyline are quite satisfactory. Ray Winstone does a hell of a good job, as he does elsewhere. Robert De Niro gave up the same role over creative differences, notwithstanding the garbage he has been a part of again and again. After hearing all those appalling rants, I felt a good film was in order. Mel and company delivered.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A poorly written script based on a strong premise
jimsaf31 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
What an appalling movie with such a strong cast.

Just to start out, I am actually big fans of Mel Gibson, Ray Winstone and Danny Huston. Unfortunately someone forgot to write a screenplay to match them. This movie is based on an original UK TV series written in 1980s and shown over 6 episodes. What has obviously happened is a failed attempt to squeeze in the suspense, built up over those episodes, into 2 hours of drivel.

The script was slow moving and so blatant, it didn't allow the viewer to build up any suspense in their own mind. The most comical demonstration of this was in the scene with Caterina Scorsone and Mel Gibson, just prior to her being hit by the car. The very fact she had to say "Im so scared" twice, just in case the viewer was in any doubt seeing as her acting resembled a 14 year old in a High school play; breathing very fast and holding her face in a state of (from Joeys Tribiani's school of acting) bemused sadness.

The script just moved so slowly, with the occasional action sequence that was not in keeping with the story line as a whole, it really didn't fulfil the promise of a good conspiracy thriller. If they had concentrated more on the screenplay, and less so on the cars rolling over, it might have been good.

Those who think it intelligent scripting clearly should try reading a book (Thomas the Tank Engine would be a start), since the story is not complex; it is basically explained within the first 45 minutes.

What saddens me the most is the fact that the BBC have put their name to it, when it compares so poorly to dramas like Spooks or Silent Witness.

As always, my criticism is not of the actors but of the script writers. However on this occasion, it was not due to forgetting to write a script, it was just because the script was poor
51 out of 98 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed