Old Man

Single-setting thrillers are kind of my jam. They're cheap to make and often end up being some of the most entertaining movies because they demand a strong script to carry them. 'Old Man' didn't quite work for me sadly. There was an idea here that could've been pulled off if executed differently.

The main problem stems from the characters. There are only really two of them of note in the film. One is characterless because of the way he is set up. He adds some mystery to the proceedings but otherwise he is just clueless and going along for the ride. The other character is a crazy old man who rambles on about nothing for minutes on end. Those two don't equal a particularly enjoyable 97 minutes of viewing.

The thing the film has going for it is the intrigue over what exactly is going on. There were a few routes the film could've gone down at the end, so if anyone is saying this one is predictable I would take umbrage with that. Unfortunately though the whole experience is very forgettable and not one I'd recommend. 5.5/10.

Lucky McKee ("May", "Red", "The Woman") and Stephen Lang ("Don't Breathe", "VFW") were two, big, bold horror reasons to check the "Old man" out, while knowing it's most likely a risky low-budget adventure, and sadly not exactly in the horror genre. Well, Lang delivered, McKee too, but writer Joel Veach succeeded only halfway in this dialogue-based, one-room (cabin) character mystery, which feels like a seriously overlong "Twilight zone" episode.

An Old man of questionable mental state and with the strong smell of mystery, played by veteran actor Stephen Lang, awakens in his remote, isolated one-room-has-it-all forest cabin, and goes about his day, before the unexpected arrival of a lost hiker. Neither of them could imagine what the late night conversations will lead into... "Old Man" is 90% dialogue and 100% never leaving the room, so if you're a fan of such genre characteristics, this one might intrigue you. The movie leans on, no, hinges on the performance of Stephen Lang, embodying an erratic, unpredictable, funky old guy with a double barrel. And he does deliver an entertaining show, with the script he's carrying never being entirely unengaging. However, the twist finale can be seen long before the talks are over, and for a thriller, the pacing is certainly not very thrillsy. It takes a bit of time, delusion and paranoia, before the story takes its intended direction. In terms of violence and disturbing material reminiscent of other works by Lucky McKee, there is almost none. There is a portion of grittiness, but don't expect any horror shades really. Besides Lang there is Marc Senter in the clothes of the lost hiker, and I'm not sure if it was the acting or the little-too-oblivious character, but he rubbed me wrong at times. It is Lang's show all over. Despite the very limited space and setting, cinematography proves to know how to utilize it, and McKee summons an overall atmosphere, aesthetic and psychological, that works, but like only half-powered.

Though I won't talk about the mystery itself, I'll say it's nothing new... It's not a bad vision, but can't describe "Old Man" as original. However, If you're a fan of Stephen Lang and/or one-room movies, I recommend. My rating: 5/10.

This movie starts promising: An interesting setting and enigmatic characters let you hope for a 90 min play full of twisted dialogues and psychologically complex interaction, maybe warfare even. In a few moments, it skillfully achieves to build up an atmosphere of subtle, lovecraftian horror -- but only to tear it down a few seconds later with meaningless, down-to-earth dialogues. In general, this movie looses momentum very fast and makes you wish it would only run 30 min tops. It boils down to its ending and so it would have been a perfect fit for "Alfred Hitchcock presents". I recommend this for fans of Stephen Lang and die hard mystery movie lovers only.

I was completely unaware of this movie. But it was mainly the handsome poster that made me curious about the story. So I set it up totally without a trailer or any prior knowledge.

The film starts in a hut and that is where it takes place for 90%.

You quickly get the feeling that you are not watching a movie, but a play.

Stephen Lang's acting is very clever and believable. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said of Marc Senter (who also co-produces this film).

As for the story, it is very easy to guess what is actually going on and the "twist" can't really be called a twist.

It feels like a missed opportunity, unfortunately.

5/10 for Stephen Lang's acting performance.

No pun intended - if you like or even love Stephen Lang ... well I do not need to convince you. If not, this may be able to convince you to to love him - his performance is everything! Yes there is the script (with a twist or two on your way or rather the movies way) ... but it is how he delivers whatever they give him.

That said, we do realize something is off from the get go. But what is it? Maybe you will surprised, maybe you can guess way before I did, where it goes with it. Maybe the new character late in the game will throw you off, maybe it won't ... there is a lot of factors that have to work for you, to like the movie. One is the pace - the other your patience with the performance - which is excellent of course, but might not be something that floats your boat ... just saying.