IMDb > Pavement (2002) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Pavement (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]
Index 25 reviews in total 

15 out of 15 people found the following review useful:

It works for me

6/10
Author: sergio choren (psychoren2002@yahoo.com.ar) from Argentina
31 August 2006

This movie is not a wonderful surprise, but a solid thriller with an interesting twist on the "psycho-killer" style, with good performances by the lead actors. The idea of a man from a far and wild land in a big city is not new, or the pairing of a female detective with a victim's relative, but here these elements are presented in a simple and convincing plot that makes you keep interested all the way. Robert Patrick is perfect for the role of a lonesome hunter, and Lauren Holly is both strong and sexy. I really don't understand why so many people here wrote negative reviews about this movie, it works for me as a late night filler perfectly. If you want to see a decent thriller, don't miss the chance. Recommended.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 22 people found the following review useful:

Very ordinary stuff

5/10
Author: George Parker from Orange County, CA USA
17 December 2002

"Pavement" is a very ordinary serial killer flick which sticks Holly out in front as a homicide investigator who teams up with Patrick as an Alaskan wilderness tracker (yeah, right) and together they set out to solve a killing spree with Capetown standing in for San Francisco. The film is full of nonsequiturs and plot holes, does nothing to distinguish itself, and fails to beg an emotional investment leaving the viewer little more than a detached voyeur. In addition the whole tracking thing is silly, the brief sex scene is hokey, and the production is slapped together with a scene here and a scene there cropped tightly so as to not reveal the Capetown environs. In spite of all that, the film does gather momentum, delivers some action and a wisp of suspense, and should make for a nominal no-brainer couch potato watch for those into murder mysteries. (C)

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 7 people found the following review useful:

Intriguing, but falls short of a convincing thriller

6/10
Author: H. Martin (~AleXa~) from Everman, TX, United States
14 June 2005

The opening credits combined with music do a nice job of setting the tone for the movie. Then we cut to the first glimpse of the city, and it becomes blatantly apparent it is being shot with an awful brown filter. I hate filters—they're nothing more than a cheap way to set the mood of the scene.

This is the 2nd HBO original movie I've rented the DVD of in the past two days, and they must be shot with digital cameras because the picture quality is astounding…it's as if you're in the film. The editing give you a sort of off-balance distorted feel which aids you in feeling what the main character is feeling—very impressive. The music is engaging and successfully established a feeling of suspense. However, the slow-motion love scene was a bit random and pointless.

I enjoyed the subtle humorous moments between Sam (Patrick) and Buckley (Holly). I couldn't help but wonder how Buckley is a detective when Sam does her job better than her. As a die- hard fan of "The X-Files", I am well-versed in how to make a seemingly unexplainable phenomenon make sense and have the appropriate facts to support it. Buckley's revelation on the road after they track the killer through the woods for the second time was impressive —it finally showed her true color as a detective.

The film's momentum is disrupted by the fact that Alex Duncan just can't act. As a result, the last scene felt corny and contrived. But the main characters push the story along, so this divergence, while highly noticeable, remains minor.

VERDICT: Adequate character writing, however the plot, while intriguing and thought-out, remains underdeveloped. Simple and yet surprisingly clever—it certainly maintained my interest. Recommended to anyone who likes crime mysteries, but if it's a thriller you long for, you should look elsewhere.

5.5 out of 10.0

~AleXa~

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Unpretentious But Excellent Cop Film

Author: teuthis (Teuthis@knology.net) from Columbus, Georgia
13 December 2002

The plot, development and resolution of "Pavement" were excellent. The suspense kept my interest from start to finish. The characters were realistic and dimensional. The action was good too. I think the director was a little free with police officers as fodder for various occasions; but beyond that I liked what I saw. I enjoy those gritty, realistic, but not overblown cop films, and this is a good one. The element of the tracker as an imaginative addition to the plot was excellent.

I am a total Lauren Holly fan; and I thought she played her role flawlessly as a determined and professional detective, who is still very much a woman. She pulled it off with great aplomb. She is always a great pleasure to watch in anything she does.

If you like really exciting and suspense-filled cop movies, see this one. To say any more might spoil the impact of all the elements that come together in this intriguing film. Just sit back and enjoy it.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:

Entertaining Mystery

6/10
Author: whpratt1 from United States
10 October 2008

This film starts out with Sam Brown, (Robert Patrick) tracking a wild killer of a wolf in Alaska and is attacked by the wolf while on the phone with a call from his headquarters that his sister has been killed in San Francisco. Sam arrives in San Francisco and finds out that his sister was murdered in a very horrible way and he decides to track down his sister doing it his way. Sam meets up with a police woman, Buckley Clarke, (Lauren Holly) who thinks Sam is crazy with his methods of tracking a killer like a wolf in the wild. However, Sam's method starts finding results in this murder and quite a few other crimes that are similar. The relationship between Sam and Buckley becomes very torrid and there is a very sexy love scene between the two of them. This film will hold your interest from the very beginning to the very end. Enjoy.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

Left us shaking our heads...

3/10
Author: Bschorr from Honolulu, HI
22 December 2002

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

It's an interesting idea and it's well filmed, but there are so many little plot problems that it became almost comical. "Sam" is supposed to be an expert tracker, but just about everybody gets the drop on him. The "FBI" folks are predictably inept and [MINOR SPOILER]my wife and I figured out that the killer was using the handicap buses very early.[END SPOILER]

The police seem to overlook the most basic of procedures (find out the connection between the victims?) until the 11th hour while they're extremely impressed with the most basic capabilities (they zoomed in on a photograph; wow, imagine that.)

A few B-movie cinematic effects don't help matters. At least the acting is decent; I feel sorry for Robert Patrick who probably deserves better.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:

intriguing thriller

8/10
Author: g404c
5 October 2006

Robert Patrick is Samuel, the outdoors-type, living in Alaska as a professional tracker. When Samuel learns his sister has been murdered, he bolts for San Francisco where he works with a local police detective, Buckley (nice job from Lauren Holly), to catch the killer. Initially reluctant, Buckley warms up to Samuel and much to the dismay of her boss (Barry Shabaka Henley from Miami Vice), she solicits his help in the investigation, as she is in awe of his skill sets and him in general. Pavement is an intriguing thriller that has some twists and turns leading up to the shocking conclusion. Robert Patrick and Lauren Holly had great chemistry, and both gave equally credible performances. Not bad. Caught this on Lifetime yesterday.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

If you like this movie, you'll like anything

Author: alecspade from Jacksonville, FL
13 November 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

**MINOR SPOILERS HEREIN**

I ran across this movie while looking for something to watch late night. This was the only thing on at the time that was even remotely interesting. Ugh I should have just gone to bed.

Robert Patrick stars as a wilderness tracker who assists a homicide detective (Lauren Holly) to find a serial killer who is bumping off doctors and nurses. Holly was a horrific choice for the female lead and was terrible in this role. Patrick was stiff throughout, thanks in large part to the writing of his character which really makes him a very unsympathetic lead.

Speaking of the writing, it's really awful, especially in the detective's case. Her lines are atrocious and her delivery was comical. Similarly, the killer was entirely bad. You shouldn't be laughing at the end, should you?

Also, the police force in this movie would be hands down the worst department in the world. The SWAT team several times gets lit up like a Christmas tree without coming even close to hitting the perpetrator while the perps can't miss. One scene in particular towards the end with the two cops at a suspect's house, they might be legally retarded.

The tracking used in the movie seems pretty ridiculous. Patrick's character can figure out which way someone went by their tracks, okay fine. But that's literally ALL he does, as he does it over and over again while people watch on with amazement. And where did police work go? I guess when you employ the dumbest cops on the planet in one department, you're not apt to figure things out on your own. The cops seem baffled with every crime despite apparently doing no actual investigating. I suppose they were hoping the killer would still be there when they got there, maybe he fell asleep on the couch or something.

I give this movie a 2/10.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

Ninety one minutes I'll never get back

2/10
Author: MelodyWilson66 from United States
24 August 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I can't believe I sat through this entire film, even though I had complete control of the DVD remote control. Sadly, those are ninety one minutes of my life that I'll never get back. I could have been doing something more exciting like beating my head against the wall. What MIGHT have been an interesting story line was lost in horrible direction, bad scripting, even worse acting. My apologies to Lauren Holly and Robert Patrick, but it seems that they just weren't given anything to work with. It was as though they gave up on creating anything remotely watchable very early in the movie. As a Criminal Justice major, I love serial killer flicks...psychological thrillers, but this was just a waste of film. Did I mention how bad the scripting was?? Miss Holly spent the entire hour and a half parroting back with question, everything her leading man said. For example: RP: I'm a tracker LH: A tracker?!?!? RP: I'm from Alaska. LH: Alaska?!?! RP: I should have never made this film. LH: A film?? Of course those aren't actual lines, but you get the point. Save your time, save your money, there are sooo many better things to do. (I'll refrain from suggesting "watching paint dry" and other clichés)

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:

just your standard cop and partner solve crime movie

Author: MLDinTN from TN
15 December 2002

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

(SLIGHT SPOILERS): There is nothing really new in this film. You have your female tough acting cop who teams up with an Alaskan tracker to solve what appears to be serial murders. And of course along the way the 2 fall for each other even though they have nothing in common. And of course the tracker gets caught by the killer, but for some unknown reason, the killer decides to take him alive. Then the cop uses what she's learned about tracking to find out where the killer has taken her partner. And if it is so easy to be a tracker through woods, then why can't everyone do it. It is not very believeable that the cop is able to do this.

This would have been better if they had added more gore. There really isn't too much in this. And they don't show the crime scenes very much. And the killer, who is supposed to be born with all these genetic defects, doesn't really look all that messed up. They could have made him really disfigured. Give him some fish gills or an extra arm or something like that.

FINAL VERDICT: If you didn't know better, you would think this was another X-Files episode with Robert Patrick. This is definitely a TV type of movie. It is OK for what it is.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 3:[1] [2] [3] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history