Dead Man's Wire (2026)

 

We got an early peek the other night at one of the films that will certainly be a highlight of the first quarter of 2026. This movie features two stellar performances, and a very efficient reenactment of a real life event from 1977. I was in college in 1977, but I'd been doing quite a bit of traveling with the debate team, and at the time that this news event took place I was only vaguely aware of it. I'm glad that I didn't have a complete memory of what happened, so although there was an actual historical antecedent I was surprised by the turnout of the events.

“Dead Man's Wire” tells the story of a man frustrated by his inability to overcome economic forces that were crushing him. If you took the hostage drama of “Dog Day Afternoon" and combined it with the injustices that drive the characters in “Hell or High Water", you would have a pretty good template for this movie. Tony Kiritsis  takes a man hostage by looping a wire around the man's head connected to a sawed-off shotgun with another wire connected to Tony. His goal is to recover economically from the dirty deed that a mortgage company has done to him, or at least that's how he sees it. There's been a long-standing dispute between Tony and the company over his mortgage on a piece of property that he hoped to develop in which he claims the mortgage company interfered with in order to force him into liquidation. It's not merely the money however it bothers him. Tony is on a righteous crusade to get an apology from the president of the mortgage company who was his original target, but instead he is forced to take the vice president, who is the son of the president, as his hostage.

The real life incident took place in Indianapolis, and the filmmakers do a good job replicating the feel of 1977. The film stock seems to be from that era, with a good clear image, but a patina of shading it seems authentic to the time. Indianapolis is not a big city like New York, they didn't necessarily have a hostage negotiator available, or a specialized SWAT team trained in all kinds of responses. Frankly the authorities are befuddled as to how to proceed. The suspense derives from the fact that any assault on Tony would result in the immediate death of his victim Richard.

Tony is played with gusto by the versatile Bill Skarsgård, who has become an obsession of my daughter. I think I saw three films starring Skarsgård last year. I can say however that this is his best performance without being under a pile of makeup. Tony has a righteous indignation, but he is not particularly cruel or vindictive to Richard. That helps keep him a sympathetic character which is exactly what the real Tony Kiritsis became to the public back in the day. He feels like a crusading Robin Hood trying to right a wrong that everybody else could identify as a thing they could easily have fallen prey to. The little guy against the system is the main theme of the film. Although the movie is very serious, like “Dog Day Afternoon”,  there are moments of levity that occur because of the quirks of the characters.

Richard is played by actor Dacre Montgomery, best known for his portrayal of Billy in the show “Stranger Things”. He looks completely different in this role, and unlike the muscle bound preening Billy of the TV show, here he comes across as a bit of a nebish with a stoop and an awkward way of being polite that puts him at odds with Tony. These two actors account for most of the screen time but there is some other activity that's worth mentioning. Richard's father, the real villain of the piece, is played by Al Pacino with a little too much of that Foghorn Leghorn  articulation that he's developed over the years. If there is a weak link in the film, it's from the most experienced of the actors. The father is equally self-righteous that he has done nothing wrong, to the point where he abuses his son Richard almost as much as Tony did.

The collection of local officials, some of whom knew Tony, as a local businessman, bar buddy, and occasional public nuisance. The undercover police officer who first arrives at the scene of the original kidnapping, is an acquaintance of Tony from a local bar. No one can believe that Tony is attempting this audacious Act of Justice, which violates the law and decency in an attempt to be treated decently. The cop is played by an unrecognizable Cary Elwes, and he is also terrific in the part. Even more impressive, once again, is Colman Domingo, who plays a local DJ, Fred Temple, who takes Tony’s call and helps mediate the crisis while trying to keep things cool. 

There's also a huge amount of social commentary in the way the news business handles this event. In the days before 24 hour cable news, local stations provided updates but not the continuous coverage that we would see today. The local news gets picked up for National presentation, so the two and a half days that this incident covers was closely watched by a nation that was not used to seeing crimes carried out live on TV.

As an audience, our sympathies are with both men, Tony for the Injustice done to him and Richard for the threat that's being placed on his life. Neither man deserves what is happening. The police, and ultimately the FBI, arrange a deal with Tony, that you hope is going to resolve things. I won't spoil the resolution for you, but I will say that it is a real world illustration of how the justice system can get something right even though they do so in the wrong way.

This movie deserves your attention, and it will command your interest through the performances of the two leads in the improbable  but real life story. It's hard to believe that it took 50  years to turn this into a movie, but first time screenwriter Austin Kolodney has done a nice job taking the unusual aspects of the real life story and turning it into a compelling narrative with an interesting theme. The movie is seamlessly directed by veteran Gus Van Zant. This may be the most accessible film he's made since “Good Will Hunting”. Hopefully it'll enjoy a good deal of success and bring attention to the actors who deserve credit for making us care.

Locked (2025)

 

Here's a simple premise for a film that should be able to be shot on a budget with the exception of salaries for the two main stars. We have been on a bit of a Bill Skarsgård kick for the last year or so, and this film features him in every scene, and he doesn't have to share the screen with anybody for any 80% of the movie. He does have a co-star, Sir Anthony Hopkins, who only appears by voice for the first two acts of the film, and shows up in the last third for an extended sequence with a more direct confrontation between antagonists.

Skarsgård's character plays a petty Thief, who's trying to get enough money together to pay for repairs to his van. He professes a desire to stick to the straight and narrow, in a job is a delivery driver. It is clear however from the cold shoulder he gets from former acquaintances, that he is used up any Goodwill and Trust he might have had, as they all refuse to assist him. He attempts a few minor crimes before encountering I'm unlocked luxury SUV. Thinking he's hit the jackpot he jumps in and discovers that it is an elaborate trap by frequently vandalized and victimized wealthy doctor, who is decided to take some justice individuality form by imprisoning any car thief who deems to try and Rob him again.

We have to suspend our disbelief a little bit, because the technology involved here, well it is all possible, seems very complicated to utilize intervene plot like this. We do however discover that the doctor is motivated by Deep resentment against criminals who have taken the life of his daughter, a promising college student. Scarsgard finds himself locked in the car unable to escape and subject to tortures imposed by his invisible Captor. The actor manages to convey appropriate degrees of panic, resentment, and remorse. They're also frequent outbursts of anger that give an actor the opportunity to stretch those skills that are so often prized by directors. Although at some point we are supposed to pity the thief, there is plenty such to suggest that what he's getting up to a certain point is not undeserved.

The high point of the film occurs when Hopkins takes remote control of the vehicle and drives it to a location that he is found. He gets in and takes physical control not just virtual control of the situation. The film does suggest some political themes, most of which have been around for at least 50 years. Echoing the problems confronted by Dirty Harry or by Paul Kersey in the death wish films, Hopkins is enraged by a system that seems to tolerate criminal Behavior, and value the rights of repeat offenders over the need for justice for victims. Up to the point where he makes clear that he's going to take skarsgard's life, he has a very rational philosophy. When however he oversteps his bounds, Hopkins himself becomes a similar kind of monster, and we are left with rooting for one monster or the other. Because Skarsgård's characters daughter is still alive, it becomes apparent that that is where our sympathy is supposed to lie.

The petty tortures and monologuing provided by Hopkins are the primary reasons that this film is interesting. Most of us would try to identify with the captured Thief and figure out how to survive for the circumstances we find ourselves in. The sense of powerlessness is overwhelming at times, especially when Skarsgård is tortured by lack of water or food. But of course that powerlessness is exactly what Hopkins character felt when nothing was done in regard to the murder of his daughter, or the multiple robberies of his vehicles.

So it is a one-man show for the most part, but when Hopkins shows up in person, it is clear he is having way too much fun playing another villain and savoring the chaos he's imposing on his victim. The climax of the film does involve a lot more action than we've gotten in the previous 80 minutes, so the film is a Slow Burn but with a fairly satisfying conclusion. I can recommend it as an actor's piece, and as a mediation on the injustice of our own justice system.

It

I have seen a building enthusiasm for this film since the first trailer appeared. It has a startling look in the most famous scene from the story, and it is enough to get buzz going for the film. A few weeks ago, as I was watching another Warner Brothers film, they played a five minute sequence from it as a promo for the movie. That short segment was terrifying and amped me up for this movie in a way that I was having a hard time believing. I like some Stephen King properties but I have never anticipated them like a Star Wars film, but something here got under my skin. I am writing this a couple of days late because I have been traveling. We saw the film in one of the Thursday night early screenings and it was packed. This movie is clearly going to be huge.

All that said, I may be bursting a few floating red balloons with this next statement. "It" is not as frightening as you hope it will be, but it is better put together and acted than you have any right to hope. Not having read the book or seen the mini-series that was made from it, I have no reference for how the story is supposed to play out but there are a couple of things that are obvious right away. This movie is really a coming of age story with some fantastic elements and those are designed to scare us almost as much as the daily horrors that are part of growing up. All of the kids in the story are outsiders who have been labeled as losers. Each one is a stereotype that we have seen in other movies before. The sensitive nominal lead is a kid who is struggling with the loss of a beloved sibling. There is a chubby kid with a heart of gold and the soul of a poet who will be overlooked as a romantic interest in spite of being bright and charming. We have a needy Mama's boy who is a little to cowardly to be that shallow and will reveal himself as more than he appears before it is all through. The four other kids include a girl with a secret, the one Jewish kid in town, and a geek with a severe case of coulrophobia and let's not forget the one black kid in the neighborhood as well.

This version of the story begins in the eighties. I understand originally it was a fifties setting so that the adult part of the story would be contemporary for when the book and TV movie came out. The update does a couple of things,. First it will allow the adult story that is going to follow this chapter of the saga to take place in our times. More importantly, it sets the kids story in a period where nostalgia runs deep for modern film audiences. One look at this group of kids and there will be visions of "The Goonies" running through the minds of Gen-Xers and millennials. There is even a sly reference to the John Hughes films that so absorb the geek film audience of these times. All of this is managed with some splendid child performances by the young cast. Finn Wolfhard plays Richie, the geek with a filthy mouth. It is certainly no accident that the thing he is known for is the Streaming series "Stranger Things", a show that wallows in the same sort of 80s nostalgia.Jaeden Liebeher is Bill, the central character who has guilt issues that mimic King's character Gordie LaChance from "Stand By Me". He is a solid child actor, I have yet to catch up with his performance in "Midnight Special" but he was memorable in "St. Vincent" a film I can easily recommend.   Sophia Lillis is the right combination of tough girl and sensitive soul. Her character's story is probably the darkest of the kids and she plays it as a delicate balance of fear and openess. The performer who really steals the movie for me was Jeremy Ray Taylor, who plays Ben, the new kid who also happens to be the chubby kid. His struggle to talk to a girls, walk his bike and hold onto a school project at the same time is a perfect rendition of a kid at that age. His character has been well written but he was also nicely cast and the impact on the audience i a couple of spots shows that he may have generate the most empathy of anyone in the story.

The elephant in the room is Bill Skarsgård, the actor who portrays Pennywise the dancing clown. We get hints of the history of this character but nothing more than musings. Whether he is a real monster or a creation of the id of all these characters, Pennywise will do for clowns what Clark Gable did to undershirts in "It Happened One Night". Along with John Wayne Gacy, Pennywise does more to justify fear of clowns than anything else I can think of. Skarsgård has a distinctive lilt to his voice in this film. At times he sounds almost like a benign entertainer, but one look at those eyes and that deceptive smile and kids will run. The most frightening part of the film happens at the beginning of the film when cute as a button Jackson Robert Scott playing little brother Georgie, meets Pennywise at the storm drain. All the other horror moments in the film seem conventional in comparison to the exchange of dialogue and the slow paced bad choice that Georgie makes. The plaintive expression on the clowns face belies the evil that resides there and the quirky voice pattern makes us doubt that there is any danger at all. The crawling of your skin however should be enough to make you run in the opposite direction.

Like most horror films, every few minutes the audience is provided a jump scare or a sequence of building tension with a visual hook to it. None of these moments contains the same gut level terror in that opening moment. There is one scene featuring an old slide projector that comes close but too much has been revealed in the trailers to make it work as well as it should. At the climax, there is a little more of Pennywise and his dialogue than is advisable. The more tangible the character is, the less frightening he seems. As I said earlier, this is more of a coming of age film than a fright fest. The confrontation at the end makes this feel more like an action film and less supernatural, in spite of all the supernatural elements.  I still quite admire the film, it's just that it is less of what I was hoping for and more conventional than I wanted. Still it is a quality picture and if clowns creep you out to begin with than maybe "It" will succeed in giving you the nightmares that I somehow missed out on.