FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation

Livestonth I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Leofwine_draca 2:13 is your usual run-of-the-mill style serial killer thriller that looks like it was made and shot in the mid-'90s. Even the way the cast includes supporting roles for various seasoned players like Kevin Pollak and Dwight Yoakam reminded me of the old days of film-making.Although the DVD cover makes this look like a horror movie, it really isn't. It's just a thriller with a handful of gory moments. I find films like this fail or succeed due to the nature of the killer and how memorable he or she is. Unfortunately, 2:13's killer is entirely forgettable. The rest of the film is a muddle of flashbacks and convoluted scenes, with token blonde Teri Polo shining her flashlight around and getting herself into danger. It's not very interesting.

cmoyton While not quite a direct Seven rip off (check out woeful Christopher Lambert thriller Resurrection for that dubious honour)this movie is a feeble addition to the overloaded serial killer thriller genre. The identity of the killer should be obvious early on. There are also various plot continuity errors and contrivances which others on the site have commented upon which really stretch credibility beyond breaking point. Add to the story just about every cops and killer cliché in the book.On the plus side the acting is serviceable, there are quick cut shots of some gore during the murder scenes which are OK and the pace of the story quickens approaching the climax which is ruined by a laborious detention room scene (with the other cops watching behind the ubiquitous two way mirror). This ending gives the opportunity for the killer to spout more of his Shakespere quotations (don't ask) and for the cop to utilise a preposterous hypnotism skill he picked up from earlier in the story."Best" of all is the twist timed for 2:13. Avoid.

Shaun Jackson I am also a bit of a sucker for these types of movies, but I am also aware that many of these are fairly derivative and unimaginative (or in some cases a little too convoluted).This was a slightly better than average entry into the genre, although not ground-breaking or anything. The relationship between Amanda Richardson and Russell Spivey (Teri Polo and Mark Thompson) was fairly tedious and underused. It seemed that the writers thought their relationship would be interesting, started writing it but then ran out of ideas for them.The Amanda Richardson character was fairly underused throughout the movie to be honest.Russell Spivey the alcoholic profiler / detective is also a bit of a cliché which I could do without seeing again - it is a bit of lazy story telling. Writers: "Lets make our detective interesting by giving him guilt about some past perceived failing that drives him to alcoholism", Actors: "But hasn't that been done a 1000 times before?", Writers : "Lets make it 1001" But apart from these criticisms of some of the more generic aspects of the writing and the slightly underused Teri Polo the film was relatively enjoyable. The acting was reasonably strong and the direction performed it's function. The "twist" in the story was OK, I had got the "twist" about 1/2 way through, but I had got the responsible party themselves wrong so it was a half-surprise.Anyway - if you are fan of this genre - don't expect something as good or original as Seven or Silence Of The Lambs, but there are many worse entries than 2:13

alex (doorsscorpywag) I watched this because it looked decent from the reviews pasted here and a bit of internet hype I saw but sadly it was nothing but the usual Hollywood tripe passed off as something original. The usual demon haunted policeman chases the usual demon haunted perpetrator using the usual 'unusual' method to come to the startling conclusion as to who the perp is. The contrived and artificial plot is nicked from better movies such as Seven, from which a large part of the plot is swiped, and is overly complex and unbelievable. Especially in the way the film gets it's title and the Shakespeare plot line and when you consider how old everybody is supposed to be in the film. I can't elaborate without spoiling it but consider how old 3 of victims, perpetrator and the main police character are supposed to be and the film makes little sense. The dramatic conclusion to the film, which also tries hard to emulate the tension of Seven, lacks any real drama and just seems an afterthought as if they thought 'we need some really stupid way to end this film?….I know!'. Overall I rated it 3 but probably was too generous. A very poor addition to the psychological thriller genre and one which tells us that perhaps this particular avenue has been trawled to death now. The FAQ asks 'is it gory' and yes it is a bit but also asks 'is it scary' and the answer to that is NO it isn't. It's just plain daft and about as believable as an episode of Cracker.