Summit Entertainment | Release Date: April 17, 2015
5.6
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 138 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
63
Mixed:
42
Negative:
33
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
MattBrady99Jun 28, 2015
I know this is a really late review as this movie came out in April, and the reason for that is that too be honest I forgot about this one until I was looking through what I've seen to review and I came across this and I thought to myself "OhI know this is a really late review as this movie came out in April, and the reason for that is that too be honest I forgot about this one until I was looking through what I've seen to review and I came across this and I thought to myself "Oh I remember that the movie, well I should just get my thoughts out since I got nothing else to review until tomorrow".

The movie is not very good. Pretty disappointing, it had such a big name cast to it but they did nothing really special in the movie. I'm going to forget about this movie and so will you at the end of year so I'm not going to waste my time or your time taking about this movie as do you really care about me going into detail about a film that's not good, nobody cares about and just forgettable.
Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
5
Enforcer122Jul 28, 2015
Very poorly put together film. Great setting and acting, but the story is just completely scatter plotted. I realised I was an hour in to the film and didn't really have a clue what was going on in it... Such a shame, if it was a little bitVery poorly put together film. Great setting and acting, but the story is just completely scatter plotted. I realised I was an hour in to the film and didn't really have a clue what was going on in it... Such a shame, if it was a little bit more pragmatic it could of been excellent. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
ydnar4Aug 2, 2015
Child 44 is directed by Daniel Espinosa (Safe House) and stars Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman, Noomi Rapace and Joel Kinnaman. The film also features famous director Ridley Scott (Alien, Gladiator) as a producer. The film is based on the novel of theChild 44 is directed by Daniel Espinosa (Safe House) and stars Tom Hardy, Gary Oldman, Noomi Rapace and Joel Kinnaman. The film also features famous director Ridley Scott (Alien, Gladiator) as a producer. The film is based on the novel of the same name written by Tom Robert Smith from 2008. The film revolves around Leo Demidov, a troubled military police officer who investigates several child murders around Russia during the Josef Stalin era. I was interested in Child 44 after the trailer was released. It seemed to promise a mysterious film about child murders and began to resemble Prisoners from 2013 which was one of the favorite movies of the last few years. Tom Hardy also appears to be reaching the peak of his career where has done a very good job of choosing his roles at it seems like there are no roles that he can't play. Gary Oldman and Noomi Rapace have both appeared in films with Hardy before, Oldman in The Dark Knight Rises and Tinker Tailor Solider Spy and Rapace in The Drop. The performances are almost the only reason that you would want to watch this movie. Tom Hardy does an excellent job and he does the best he can to try to keep this movie afloat and Noomi Rapace shows that she can hang with the big boys as she does very well also. Gary Oldman was the second billed actor in the film but he does not have a constant presence in this movie, his first appearance is almost an hour into the movie and even after he gets underway he only appears in spots so he and Hardy share very little screen time. Hardy and Rapace get most of the screen time and Oldman seems to take a bit of a back seat. Kinnaman even seems to have more of a presence in this film. The trailer displayed a totally different film than we got here. The serial killer component is just a sub-plot in this movie and it is really about Tom Hardy's character searching for some sort of redemption after he refuses to turn his wife (Rapace) into the authorities who believe she is a traitor. The plot gets even more clogged up when an unnecessary rivalry between Hardy and Joel Kinnaman as the two do not see eye to eye and it is obvious almost from the outset, but the rivalry just makes the movie more complicated and takes us away from the content that we are really interested in. There is nothing wrong with Kinnaman's performance here I would even say he does pretty well but there is no need for his character to have such a prominent role in this movie. Then the biggest problem with Child 44 is the pacing. This film is really never very exciting and since the plot is so stuffed the movie runs way to long and there are some extremely boring spots. I would really not recommend this film because you are really not getting what you're expecting and I must say that Child 44 may be my biggest disappointment so far this year. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
6
hadiaec20hAug 11, 2015
this film may not be truthful about soviet union but is not a bad movie. there are good characters played by good actors/actresses. not a perfect crime movie but OK.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
The3AcademySinsSep 29, 2016
This movie was a very disappointing watch for me. The pacing didn't have me at the edge of my seat at all, there was no joy or exploration of the detective work, and the story is simply bogged down by way too many subplots. The performances,This movie was a very disappointing watch for me. The pacing didn't have me at the edge of my seat at all, there was no joy or exploration of the detective work, and the story is simply bogged down by way too many subplots. The performances, however, are very good, and Tom Hardy especially shines and stands out. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
4
NerdConsultantApr 20, 2015
Child 44 is well acted that's all. i'll give credit to Tom Hardy he gives a brilliant performance but it's in aid of a film that's too long with a plot that is unfocussed. there's way too much going on and none of it's fleshed out enough andChild 44 is well acted that's all. i'll give credit to Tom Hardy he gives a brilliant performance but it's in aid of a film that's too long with a plot that is unfocussed. there's way too much going on and none of it's fleshed out enough and i suspect it's due to many aspects of the Book not making it into the film though that is pure speculation on my part as i haven't read the book. it's well shot and most of the amazing cast are trying there hardest but they can't make up for the script issues and I came out of this film feeling nothing and that will make the film ultimately forgettable Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
5
Movi3R3vi3werApr 22, 2015
I am very disappointed to say that Child 44 isn’t the movie I was expecting going into. Tom Hardy is absolutely fantastic leading the movie and Gary Oldman has a few great moments sprinkled in there. After a nearly flawless first act to theI am very disappointed to say that Child 44 isn’t the movie I was expecting going into. Tom Hardy is absolutely fantastic leading the movie and Gary Oldman has a few great moments sprinkled in there. After a nearly flawless first act to the movie, the second act starts to turn the story nearly tedious and it is a thriller that lacks many thrills. Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
4
ProductiveMindApr 20, 2015
Rhetorical Child, history; concepts of history put together with a poor chosen story line. To begin, the story arc is not really viewed, it is nothing but unstable with the vision of the director. Secondly, if they are going to depict aRhetorical Child, history; concepts of history put together with a poor chosen story line. To begin, the story arc is not really viewed, it is nothing but unstable with the vision of the director. Secondly, if they are going to depict a Soviet era placed film then they should have put more depth into the layering of the scenery as well as the characters. There are countless errors and with that the presentation approaches throughout the movie. The director Daniel Espinosa seems to have average rated movies, which is irrelevant since it is just the opinions of everyone other than the visionary. We shall never see the true form what this manifestation could have become. Now we enter this movie, what is this movie? Is this movie good or bad?
This movie is exactly what it is, it is a movie. If you want to kill a time hours of your time instead of sitting around doing something else, you could watch this.
Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
6
TVJerryApr 22, 2015
Although it's set in the paranoid nightmare of 50's Russia, this is basically a murder mystery. Tom Hardy plays a secret police agent who sets out to track down a serial killer, but since "there is no murder in paradise, he encountersAlthough it's set in the paranoid nightmare of 50's Russia, this is basically a murder mystery. Tom Hardy plays a secret police agent who sets out to track down a serial killer, but since "there is no murder in paradise, he encounters barriers from the political regime. It obviously adapted from a novel, because there's a sprawl and scope to the story that veers away from the primary plot. Sometimes these detours confuse matters and muddy the focus. At other times, the convenient coincidences strain believability. While the creation of the era's mistrustful denouncements and grim conditions is captivating, the rambling narrative dilutes the dramatic power. Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
4
duncan1964Jun 29, 2015
Tom Rob Smith's best selling novel should have made thrilling cinema, but this tale of a Russian secret police officer hunting a child killer in 1953 suffers from being overly complicated, over long and too pompous for its own good. Having aTom Rob Smith's best selling novel should have made thrilling cinema, but this tale of a Russian secret police officer hunting a child killer in 1953 suffers from being overly complicated, over long and too pompous for its own good. Having a selection of great British actors using varying Russian accents is also very off-putting, but what is most unforgivable is that a best selling thriller has become a very boring movie Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
LeZeeOct 4, 2016
A war hero who turned a police officer struggles with his departmental feud.

It is a strange title. In the narration as well it does not properly reveals, more like an approximate count of something. It is a Russian story, I mean the
A war hero who turned a police officer struggles with his departmental feud.

It is a strange title. In the narration as well it does not properly reveals, more like an approximate count of something. It is a Russian story, I mean the Russian characters and the locations. It begins after the world war two, in Moscow, a top police officer caught between the departmental politics and a case. After the his investigation ended without a result, the sacked officer gets a lifeline to begin again life in another town. But the trouble follows him when he started to investigate the children's deaths. The result of the case brings the end to the tale with a tiny small twist.

The actors were decent, not very impressive. Especially I understand since it was internationally produced, they preferred English language, but I would have liked it in the original language to get best appeal. It was too long film, the first half was very boring. Because it was most unrelated to what comes in the later part of the film. When the narration shifts its base out of the Moscow, that's where it really gets very interesting. So after first 60 minutes, the real story begins.

This where the actors got better. Noomi Rapace and Tom Hardy, both were like the kicked off with full of energy. So the second half of the film makes it watchable. Directed by a 'Easy Money' filmmaker who also brought in his Swedish actors to play the smaller roles. It was not good as I expected, but ended well. I don't think it is worth a watch, but who knows what you like. So I neither recommend nor reject it. But it was an average film to me.

5/10
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
sanyrubDec 6, 2015
Pretty underrated film with two of the best working actors we have today: Tom Hardy and Noomi Rapace. It´s also a nice change seeing a story unfold in Russia and not the usual States or West Europe. The film is not a masterpiece of any kindPretty underrated film with two of the best working actors we have today: Tom Hardy and Noomi Rapace. It´s also a nice change seeing a story unfold in Russia and not the usual States or West Europe. The film is not a masterpiece of any kind but develops the characters enough to make you care, and the story despite taking weird turns is still enjoyable the whole time. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
SEROJOct 20, 2016
There is one thing for sure - the acting was superb! Even the kids in this movie were acting like pros! The movie itself was intense but had flaws and i don't know if you'll like it or not!
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
5
eagleeyevikingApr 25, 2017
The film benefits when it focuses on the child murders instead of rapidly introducing and resolving new characters and subplots without allowing them to develop. Tom Hardy is fantastic, and so is the Soviet-era setting. The plot, which was soThe film benefits when it focuses on the child murders instead of rapidly introducing and resolving new characters and subplots without allowing them to develop. Tom Hardy is fantastic, and so is the Soviet-era setting. The plot, which was so much better conceived in the novel, falls short in this adaptation. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
AproxxAug 12, 2018
Starts as a Political Thriller. 2nd act as: Horror Thriller. 3rd Act: Hollywood happy ending Action Thriller?

Yeap. Its THAT WEIRD. But even if that "makes it bad" by definition, all the scenes and segments and sequences are well done, in
Starts as a Political Thriller. 2nd act as: Horror Thriller. 3rd Act: Hollywood happy ending Action Thriller?


Yeap. Its THAT WEIRD.

But even if that "makes it bad" by definition, all the scenes and segments and sequences are well done, in my opinion. Some better than others, of course.

Maybe I just like Tom Hardy that much, but I though it was a good movie, overall, if you can forgive the fact that it jumps from genre to genre (quite clearly, actually). I can do that, do you?
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
4
JLuis_001Sep 6, 2017
Once again I declare myself a follower of the genre but here it is not exploited properly due to the political inference of its plot and also the time in which the events ocurr, so it is not very clear what the purpose of its plot is, if itOnce again I declare myself a follower of the genre but here it is not exploited properly due to the political inference of its plot and also the time in which the events ocurr, so it is not very clear what the purpose of its plot is, if it is a thriller about a murderer or a kind of old-fashioned and antiquated criticism of the Soviet Union, which is more than obvious today no longer exists.
Otherwise, the film is not merely a disposable work, there are several elements that rescue it and it is mainly the work of its cast.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews