996 reviews
Panic Room (2002)
There are three reasons to see Panic Room. 1) The titles: understated, gorgeous, uncanny letters floating in the Manhattan cityscape. 2) The photography: camera moving like an animal, slipping between tiny spaces, swinging across rooms and through floors, inhabiting the screen like another character. 3) Forest Whitaker, again (he's so good so often it's hard to not expect a great performance).
The rest of the film is very good, directed with style and intelligence as usual by David Fincher (who did Seven and Fight Club). The plot is good, but maybe a little conventional overall, and if the details aren't completely predictable, the general flow of events is. The whole cast is quite good--Foster in a familiar embattled, determined role, and Jared Leto is an appropriately crazed, if slightly caricatured, bad guy who just wants money. Don't we all.
I saw this when it came out and was dazzled and yet disappointed by the plot. The second time, knowing the events, I was able to just watch how they unfolded, and it was much better. Expect suspense, intensity, and beautiful camera-work.
There are three reasons to see Panic Room. 1) The titles: understated, gorgeous, uncanny letters floating in the Manhattan cityscape. 2) The photography: camera moving like an animal, slipping between tiny spaces, swinging across rooms and through floors, inhabiting the screen like another character. 3) Forest Whitaker, again (he's so good so often it's hard to not expect a great performance).
The rest of the film is very good, directed with style and intelligence as usual by David Fincher (who did Seven and Fight Club). The plot is good, but maybe a little conventional overall, and if the details aren't completely predictable, the general flow of events is. The whole cast is quite good--Foster in a familiar embattled, determined role, and Jared Leto is an appropriately crazed, if slightly caricatured, bad guy who just wants money. Don't we all.
I saw this when it came out and was dazzled and yet disappointed by the plot. The second time, knowing the events, I was able to just watch how they unfolded, and it was much better. Expect suspense, intensity, and beautiful camera-work.
- secondtake
- Dec 30, 2009
- Permalink
- mynameisnat
- Aug 19, 2012
- Permalink
Director David Fincher lays out a tight simple thriller. It takes place all in and around the house. Meg Altman (Jodie Foster) is recently divorced and buying a house in the Upper West Side of Manhattan. It has a panic room. On their first night in the house, they get invaded by three criminals (Forest Whitaker, Dwight Yoakam, Jared Leto) intend on getting something from the previous owner left in the panic room. Only Meg and her daughter Sarah (Kristen Stewart) get there first.
Fincher has striped away all the unnecessary filler from the story. It's a simple cat and mouse game. Nothing could be simpler. Even at almost 2 hours, there isn't a slow moment. All the actors get their fair share. Jodie and Forest lead the cast, but Jared and Kristen also shine. I wouldn't say this was the greatest or the most original. It is simply a good movie.
Fincher has striped away all the unnecessary filler from the story. It's a simple cat and mouse game. Nothing could be simpler. Even at almost 2 hours, there isn't a slow moment. All the actors get their fair share. Jodie and Forest lead the cast, but Jared and Kristen also shine. I wouldn't say this was the greatest or the most original. It is simply a good movie.
- SnoopyStyle
- Nov 23, 2013
- Permalink
David Fincher directs this cleverly conceived thriller about a mother and daughter trapped inside a panic room by three criminals. The film is well-paced and the camera work is slick. The film does well in exploring the confines of the house. Jodie Foster is effective and maintains a high intensity throughout. Kristen Stewart is decent as her daughter. Forest Whitaker plays a slightly sympathetic criminal and does well. Unfortunately, after an engrossing game of cat and mouse, the conclusion is weak. Staple clichés crop up and the film goes for a crowd-pleasing finale that doesn't quite feel right. Still watchable.
Overall 7/10
Overall 7/10
This claustrophobic suspense thriller sets itself up well with a remarkable, if digitally enhanced, one-shot that neatly and necessarily establishes the geography of the central location, while also planting the seeds for the seedy uses of various tools laying about the house, so that the action that comes later is clean and clear without ever needing to slow down for the sake of audience reorientation. 'Panic Room (2002)' is pretty pacy and nicely gritty to boot, being unusually violent for pictures of the kind but never less tense either. It manages to make a compelling home-invasion seem suitably layered, presenting the bad guys as rounded individuals with differing yet believable motives and personalities. It still feels immediately dangerous, though, never losing sight of its protagonists and the escalating peril they're placed in, until it finally reaches its truly edge-of-your-seat and slightly unexpected finale. 7/10
- Pjtaylor-96-138044
- Mar 22, 2018
- Permalink
This was a decent movie, ok? I will just say that right off the bat. It's about Jodi Foster and her daughter who happen to buy what must have cost several million dollars, house in manhattan. Oddly enough it came equipped with a PANIC ROOM. And low and behold, some folks break into the house on THEIR FIRST NIGHT. The Trip is led by the dude from Prefontaine who does a good job as a WHITE MAN with CORN ROWS. Forrest Whittaker does a SUPERB JOB as always. He is one hell of a good actor. I liked that part where Dwight Yoakum stuck the HOT gun tip on Forrest's cheek. Speaking of Dwight Yoakum, geeze. He plays a very good evil burglar. His Character is RAUL and he's just plain stupid AND mean. Also, Jodi Foster's daughter looked like Macauly Caulkin. I thought he was a BOY for a long time. This is a decent movie. I saw it during a matinae because the weather was TOO HOT here. Decent character development. Forrest Whittaker stole the movie though. The care Forrest Whittaker shows the kid is cool. Also, Forrest Whittaker ends up doing something none of us quite expect. Forrest Whittaker should play more roles like this. At first I thought Forrest Whittaker was the MAIN bad guy. Way to go Forrest Whittaker, two thumbs up.
This movie starts out slow, but it builds tension. This would be a very terrifying situation. I can see why Dwight Yoakam wears a stetson all the time. Is acting going to be his new career? He plays a real good creep. This movie has a sense of realism. It is worth seeing on the big screen.
Panic Room stands as a classic horror film that expertly blends elements of thrill and crime. Curiously, despite its clear horror attributes, it doesn't find its home in the horror genre on IMDb. As a fan of well-crafted horror movies that encompass compelling character arcs and character development, this film left a mark considering its impeccable writing which ticked all the boxes.
What sets Panic Room apart is its unique narrative approach. The writer's choice to conclude the movie in a similar fashion to how it commenced is a rarity within the horror genre. Both the protagonist and antagonist are intricately developed characters, brought to life with equally outstanding performances that mirror their well-structured designs and deep character arcs.
Although the trapped-in-a-house subgenre can sometimes be predictable due to its reliance on intense horror and survival, Panic Room is as an exception. The tense atmosphere adds to the film's overall impact. I was engrossed by its gripping combination of thrills, well-crafted writing, and stellar performances thanks to Jodie Foster & Forest Whitaker's stand-out performance.
I felt the iconic dialogue of the classic, Shawshank Redemption (So was Red) was recreated - You're gonna be okay.
What sets Panic Room apart is its unique narrative approach. The writer's choice to conclude the movie in a similar fashion to how it commenced is a rarity within the horror genre. Both the protagonist and antagonist are intricately developed characters, brought to life with equally outstanding performances that mirror their well-structured designs and deep character arcs.
Although the trapped-in-a-house subgenre can sometimes be predictable due to its reliance on intense horror and survival, Panic Room is as an exception. The tense atmosphere adds to the film's overall impact. I was engrossed by its gripping combination of thrills, well-crafted writing, and stellar performances thanks to Jodie Foster & Forest Whitaker's stand-out performance.
I felt the iconic dialogue of the classic, Shawshank Redemption (So was Red) was recreated - You're gonna be okay.
- pawanpunjabithewriter
- Aug 27, 2023
- Permalink
PANIC ROOM is a suspense thriller quite different from what I was expecting since I thought it would be something in the Horror genre, but no, it isn't, the plot is about a robbery that three guys try to do to a house with a panic room (I think it was the this title which induced me in error, because panic room is a protection room to the owners of the house). So, it was different from what I was expecting but I liked it anyway because it's a great thriller, very suspenseful and very well shot. The setting is always the house but it doesn't turn out boring because it has a good pace with very little slow moments. About the cinematography I enjoyed the camera work which is excellent (especially in the first hour when they shot incredible details and the camera does a "travelling effect") and the light (almost the entire film is shot with little illumination, which makes it a suspenseful dark thriller, which I use to appreciate!:). The acting is also very good. I did enjoy it and I score it 7/10.
This was a very suspenseful and exciting thriller from David Fincher who is responsible for my all time favourite film which is Seven. This new film has another very good performance by Jodie Foster but the acting standout of the film has to go to Dwight Yoakam with awesome performance as Raoul. The only problem i had with this film was its ending which was a bit of a let down but did not really spoil the film at all.
8 out of 10
8 out of 10
- rr_jailbird
- Apr 9, 2002
- Permalink
- Girolahozz
- Feb 15, 2009
- Permalink
Way ahead of it's time. If you can come up with a story based in a single room and make it as engaging and exciting as this one... you deserve to be frozen and preserved for future teaching of inspiring film makers. This is a fantastic film and I'm glad Jodie Foster was available for the lead when Nicole Kidman got knocked up and bailed. I loved the off-character casting of Jared Leto and the unbelievable casting of Dwight Yoakam... DWIGHT YOAKAM. Everything worked. Another great, and yet again... underrated film by David Fincher. How long is it going to take for an established directed like Fincher to take a chance and roll the dice on trying to make a script like this work again? ...No one has the guts.
- timothygruich
- Feb 1, 2009
- Permalink
Oh yes, one senses what "Panic Room" is about. Is the loss of ones freedom the necessary price to be paid for total security? And what´s total security worth, when there´s nothing but?
But one doesn´t see it on the screen. On the scree we have a perfectly staged, lit, set designed, orchestrated, written, directed, scored and last but not least edited cat and mouse game between Ms. Foster and mainly Mr. Whitaker. Nothing less. Nothing more.
The premise being that the houses of the very rich contain "panic rooms" as in when in panic go there. No intruder can invade that room and its inhabitant can last longer than the best equipped burglar.
David Koepp´s screenplay introduces a very weak McGuffin but then again that keeps the McGuffin in line with the surrounding script itself. For all the stylishness of Mr. Fincher´s staging, it´s let down by the other David´s writing. It´s only too evident that there once was a brilliant movie idea that pitifully enough never materialized into a real movie.
Keeping that in mind you just have to marvel at what a masterful director Mr. Fincher is, even when his material sucks.
But one doesn´t see it on the screen. On the scree we have a perfectly staged, lit, set designed, orchestrated, written, directed, scored and last but not least edited cat and mouse game between Ms. Foster and mainly Mr. Whitaker. Nothing less. Nothing more.
The premise being that the houses of the very rich contain "panic rooms" as in when in panic go there. No intruder can invade that room and its inhabitant can last longer than the best equipped burglar.
David Koepp´s screenplay introduces a very weak McGuffin but then again that keeps the McGuffin in line with the surrounding script itself. For all the stylishness of Mr. Fincher´s staging, it´s let down by the other David´s writing. It´s only too evident that there once was a brilliant movie idea that pitifully enough never materialized into a real movie.
Keeping that in mind you just have to marvel at what a masterful director Mr. Fincher is, even when his material sucks.
- vocklabruck
- Oct 9, 2006
- Permalink
In her first suspense-thriller since her Academy-Award winning turn in "The Silence of the Lambs", Jodie Foster registers quite well as middle-aged New Yorker Meg Altman, who moves into an EXTREMELY spacious brownstone with her daughter Sarah (Kristen Stewart), a diabetic tomboy. The building is equipped with a special shelter designed in the event of a break-in, known as a 'panic room'. Meg and Sarah waste no time in putting the claustrophobic area to use (on their first night, no less) when a trio of burglars (Forest Whitaker, Jared Leto and Dwight Yoakam) make their way into her building to retrieve a large sum of money. The catch is that the burglars' stash is in the very room in which Meg and her daughter are hiding! While 'Panic Room' is not exactly white-knuckle suspense, it definitely has its moments, especially the heart-pounding moment when Meg leaves the panic room to grab her cell phone, and the the tension-building scene when Whitaker and Yoakam enter the panic room when Foster leaves. The only main plot hole is clear in the very beginning: Why would a recently separated woman with one child want to purchase a four-story brownstone? What does she need all of that space for? Besides that, 'Panic Room' is an intelligently written and directed thriller from director David Fincher (Fight Club). The only characters that don't make sense are Meg's friend in the opening scenes and her husband (Ann Magnuson and Patrick Bauchau). They both seem hopelessly unnecessary; otherwise, 'Panic Room' is a first-rate thriller with similarities to several shockers of the early 1990s, 'Unlawful Entry' (1992) being one in particular. Whitaker has to be one of the nicest thieves in recent film history!
- Momcat_of_Lomita
- May 2, 2011
- Permalink
A movie with such a simple premise, taking place on such a confined set, should be very compact, but David Fincher's thin, disappointing "Panic Room" seems scattered. Recently-divorced woman and her un-girlie preteen daughter take refuge in a "safe room" after three thugs break into their posh Manhattan digs; they don't want to kill anyone, but what they're after is in that precise room. The contrivances in the set-up are very nearly smoothed out (except for a stupid bit involving a flashlight) and the show-off camera techniques are actually welcomed (they add some jazzy visual juice to spike the proceedings). However, Jodie Foster isn't given much to work with in the lead--in fact, nobody is. It's a by-the-numbers exercise in suspense, with echoes of "Wait Until Dark" besides. It does get your blood pumping, but the direction and the editing allow it to flag in the stretch. The finale is hectic and visually confusing--releasing the tension the narrative has built up--and the epilogue is flat. Why not add some offhand humor to the mother-daughter conversation? Something like, "Let's pass on that apartment, Mom, it's got a panic room." **1/2 from ****
- moonspinner55
- Sep 5, 2005
- Permalink
Jodie must have been hard up for some ready cash when she signed the dotted line for this run of the mill production. I enjoyed the thing so I suppose I shouldn't gripe but I have come to expect more lofty attempts at quality from this actress[or is that word out of vogue today?]. There were gobs of stressful nail biting, truckloads of violence, eyesful of sights and earsful of sounds portraying what a evil, anything for the almighty buck world we live in. Yes, it had all this but the film still lacked an ingredient that I always look for in any movie and that is newness. I didn't find it here even as I sat tensely relaxed watching Foster fight to save her ill daughter and herself from the smart, the bad, and the whiney.
- helpless_dancer
- Feb 27, 2004
- Permalink
- filiptabak-23318
- Sep 17, 2016
- Permalink
With two excellent actors and a strong premise, this suspense thriller opens with potential. The basic premise is that new tenants to an apartment, a mother (Jodie Foster) and daughter (Kristin Stewart), inadvertently get caught up in an "inside job" robbery at the apartment building. They're in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The ensuing cat/mouse pursuit, complete with a well crafted claustrophobic atmosphere, provide for what is usually an exciting story. The chess moves made by both sides are logical to the characters, building the plot and suspense level. Forest Whitaker (as one of the three criminals) and Foster deliver the convincing performances expected from these talented actors. However, weaker acting of others in the cast, and inconsistent direction, don't maintain the mood or tension. This weakens the film's effectiveness.
The other two villains start out menacing, but when you see some idiot trap his hand in a doorway (and some other slapstick behavior), it's too awkward to take it seriously. The intent was clearly not a Home Alone type satire, but sometimes resembles it. The line reads by the the two dumb crooks, as well as Stewart, just aren't convincing; they each become caricatures. The latter's role is a tom-boy diabetic teen with an attitude, but she plays it more like a mumbling zombie that spikes her insulin shots with heavy depressants.
Whitaker and Foster carry the film, and ultimately, succeed in saving it. The ending sequence works well, and has a nice irony attached. Good for one-time viewing, but you probably won't want to revisit it.
The ensuing cat/mouse pursuit, complete with a well crafted claustrophobic atmosphere, provide for what is usually an exciting story. The chess moves made by both sides are logical to the characters, building the plot and suspense level. Forest Whitaker (as one of the three criminals) and Foster deliver the convincing performances expected from these talented actors. However, weaker acting of others in the cast, and inconsistent direction, don't maintain the mood or tension. This weakens the film's effectiveness.
The other two villains start out menacing, but when you see some idiot trap his hand in a doorway (and some other slapstick behavior), it's too awkward to take it seriously. The intent was clearly not a Home Alone type satire, but sometimes resembles it. The line reads by the the two dumb crooks, as well as Stewart, just aren't convincing; they each become caricatures. The latter's role is a tom-boy diabetic teen with an attitude, but she plays it more like a mumbling zombie that spikes her insulin shots with heavy depressants.
Whitaker and Foster carry the film, and ultimately, succeed in saving it. The ending sequence works well, and has a nice irony attached. Good for one-time viewing, but you probably won't want to revisit it.
- MartianOctocretr5
- Apr 16, 2010
- Permalink
- thomasmitilis1995
- Apr 17, 2020
- Permalink
Panic Room has a tight premise with an effectively simple set up and it all works wonderfully in a way that not every 2000s thriller could achieve. The pacing in particular is ideal, making sure it's constantly evolving which ensures the contained location never gets stale whilst making sure every possible narrative option is covered.
Jodie Foster is terrific as usual. She absolutely nails the balance between being resourceful and scared, prioritising trying to hide that fear for the safety of her daughter. Speaking of Kristen Stewart, she's so good with a believable mother daughter dynamic with Foster best exemplified in the scene early on where Stewart tries to teach her how to swear convincingly.
Jared Leto is a really good pathetic villain who's used sparingly so the film can maintain a strong sense of danger. On the other end of the spectrum, Forest Whitaker conveys the inner turmoil of his character so well. He poses the biggest threat as he knows how the house and its systems work but at the same time you can always see how uneasy he is with the overall situation.
David Fincher brings his full technical prowess here to truly elevate the material. The camera work has his trademark methodical structure and he really leans into the fear of it all with some scary imagery in the initial home invasion. The CG flourishes on the other hand, don't work as well even if they are still distinctly Fincher.
Jodie Foster is terrific as usual. She absolutely nails the balance between being resourceful and scared, prioritising trying to hide that fear for the safety of her daughter. Speaking of Kristen Stewart, she's so good with a believable mother daughter dynamic with Foster best exemplified in the scene early on where Stewart tries to teach her how to swear convincingly.
Jared Leto is a really good pathetic villain who's used sparingly so the film can maintain a strong sense of danger. On the other end of the spectrum, Forest Whitaker conveys the inner turmoil of his character so well. He poses the biggest threat as he knows how the house and its systems work but at the same time you can always see how uneasy he is with the overall situation.
David Fincher brings his full technical prowess here to truly elevate the material. The camera work has his trademark methodical structure and he really leans into the fear of it all with some scary imagery in the initial home invasion. The CG flourishes on the other hand, don't work as well even if they are still distinctly Fincher.
Good camera work but a very predictable plot. Frustratingly tedious situations and toe curling stupidity as often seen in thrillers. It seems hard to deviate from the trodden path of excessive violence induced by predictable behavior of the victims... If you have friends over, spend the night talking about things that matter in life; don't waste their time on this movie...