Endure (2010) Poster


User Reviews

Add a Review
11 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
A really good "Without A Trace" show that doesn't really hold as a movie. Great in parts, slow in most of it. Very OK. I say B-
Tony Heck28 May 2011
Can you find someone in the middle of nowhere with no clues? After an attacker, who kidnaps a woman and ties her to a tree in the middle of a forest, dies in a car accident there are no clues to where she is at. Detective Lane (Nelson) and his partner Arnold (Sawa) are in charge of finding her before it's too late. From the opening shot the movie grabs you and doesn't let go...for 20 minutes. It slows down quite a bit, but does pick up at the end. This was actually a pretty good movie, but it would have been much better as a "Without A Trace" episode. The movie really did drag a lot in the middle, and if it was a 60 min show it would have been great. The extra half hour hurt it a little. The acting was not terrible, but Judd Nelson is past his days of carrying a movie. Tom Arnold, who is in it for about 10 min, is very creepy. I would be interested to see if he takes on more roles like this one. Overall, not a bad movie, just a little too long. As a TV show I would say A-, as a full length movie, I give it a B-.

Would I watch again? - I don't think I will
14 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Somehow, I endured.
oowawa11 February 2012
I see lots of bad movies--usually with an understanding shrug and some appreciation of the difficulties involved in making the film. There are very few films that actually make me angry, but the script and direction of "Endure" were infuriating.

A pregnant girl is chained to a tree by a serial killer, and if the detectives don't find her quickly, she is going to die an agonizing death. And so, you would expect the director to create a sense of urgency. Hurry up and find her before it's too late! But there is no sense of urgency at all. A totally unnecessary subplot involving one detective's seriously ill wife slows the action down to a crawl. When he isn't by her bedside holding hands and exchanging "I love you's" and listening to her complaints, he's answering his cell phone with continual updates on her condition. And when he's sitting by her bedside engaged in these slow sad conversations, there is nary a thought of the pregnant girl out there tied to a tree. The plot is further chained by constant adolescent banter between the veteran detective and the rookie who resents being talked to as a newbie. On and on and on. Frequent flashes to suffering girl, hanging nearly comatose from tree; return to extended scenes with sick wife and boring banter, the detectives in no apparent hurry to do their job. And yet, still I watched, onward and onward, slogging through the cinematic tedium, hoping that these boring and seemingly uncaring slugs would finally get moving and show some signs of urgency about rescuing the poor pregnant girl....Ugh!
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Mesmerizing - brilliant performances
pgamble-36 March 2012
I don't know what the other reviewers saw - but I was blown away by the movie particularly the performances by Judd Nelson and Joey Lauren Adams. The rest of the cast were just going through the motions but every scene these 2 were in was mesmerizing. Main story is a girl is brutally kidnapped and left in the woods, her kidnapper dies in a car accident and a photo of the girl is discovered in the car wreck. Meanwhile a seasoned detective who is put on the case has his own story - his wife is dying. Also he gets a new partner - a college kid still wet behind the ears.

I loved the script -especially the scene at the end where Judd Nelson visits the girl they saved and his partner in hospital and then walks past the newborn babies in the hall. Brilliantly filmed, brilliant scene - definitely worth watching again just for Judd Nelsons acting and the final scene. Where has Judd Nelson been hiding?
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Great movie, Great story. Only one little issue
fire-589 October 2011
So i liked this movie a lot. The opening scene gets you interested right away and the movie moves fast enough to entertain but does not rush the story. There are some little side stories about characters that pull on the heart strings. Over all i really liked the movie.

My only issue with the movie is with some of the dialogue between the characters. There is a scene where one of the leads in sitting on the bed with his wife and they are talking. The entire scene seemed forced and not real at all. There are also a few other scenes where the two leads are exchanging sarcastic blows to each other where it seemed really forced.

I think the older lead was trying to hard at times, but later in the movie the acting leveled out and was fine.

Watch this movie!
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One life for another
TheHrunting23 July 2011
A bound and gagged woman in central Florida is driven to an out of reach location in the middle of the night by a stranger and has her photograph taken as she's tied against a tree in the woods. Leaving her alive and alone, the man drives off and somewhere on his trip suddenly has a deer go through his windshield killing him. An experienced detective named Emory Lane (Judd Nelson)--who's at home with his terminally ill wife Sirena (Joey Lauren Adams)--is called out to what initially looks like a normal car wreck but because there is a photograph, blood and handcuff keys the police want to look further into the suspicious evidence that might point to foul play.

A young, former west coast detective named Zeth Arnold (Deven Sawa) is called in as an apprentice in account of Lane being tied up in his personal life. They frequently butt heads as Arnold is over-confident and has a somewhat brash way of handling the case than the by-the-book veteran. Judd Nelson plays the character somewhat reserved and contemplative to the point of appearing detached. His character has trust issues, but gives some leeway as he can't be two places at once. Devon Sawa delivers some dry banter and his character speaks what's on his mind, which comes off as cocky but might actually have something to offer under that rookie demeanor.

There are hundreds of miles of roadway and five hundred thousand acres of swamp to comb through, so the detectives start with what they know. They question the dead man named Macey's neighbors, who explain that he was a loner, not right in the head and doesn't have any living relatives that he keeps in touch with. The girl is identified as Daphne (Clare Kramer) by a friend who said she just talked to her last night but is currently missing. A profiler is called in and suggests that there might be an accomplice that he seeks approval from. Taking cues from John Lithgow in "Dexter" of who you wouldn't expect, Tom Arnold brings a good-guy face to his role as Simon but makes you think twice about what's underneath. From one revelation to the next the detectives uncover an underground network, which gives them more to contend with to save the young woman's life before it's too late.

This is a gradually paced drama about searching for answers. It also deals with saving a life and watching one depart. Lane's wife is cooped up with nowhere to go, and he wants to stay but has everywhere to be; though he eventually uses the time away to push aside his feelings and in an odd sense cope. What a viewer gets: a basic story about human suffering that isn't confusing or muddled with layer upon layer of twists as it keeps it conventional as far as crime plots go. This is more held back than the typical shoot-'em-up-warrantless-bustin'-down-the-door-alcoholic features you normally see in the genre. This injects some feelings and leaves ample room open for the viewer's own interpretations, as well as the actions and motivations in the movie seem reasonable.

The major issue with "Endure" is it doesn't always capitalize on its own story line due to trying to meld two different subplots and be thoroughly realistic while at it. This isn't going for the usual cinematic experience, as the editing and cinematography are restrained, the dialogue is close enough to how real people speak and the situation isn't glamorized or sensationalized. There's drama to be had here though the delivery felt somewhat flat and the characters didn't end up being as memorable as they could have. At times it comes across as cut and dry, even when a piece of evidence is unraveled to get closer to finding the victim while she's still alive. Not until the latter portion is there much in the way of being gripping. There's no sense in over-dramatizing the story like so many do and force it, but the atmosphere feels calm and relaxed to the point of being dozy and less important than it should be, as the dire circumstances at hand don't always have the capability of captivating one's undivided attention for the then and now. (Also submitted on Cinema Freaks, http://docuniverse.blogspot.com)
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Mystery w/o suspense, not CSI
djderka8 May 2012
Nice plot and a chance for suspense. But don't expect any.

After finding an accident scene, two detectives discover a Polaroid of a girl tied to a tree, indicating that this guy is a hostage/ransom guy.

But despite this great set up, there is no suspense. No OMG, and pulse driving content, like Silence of the Lambs. This is a eat your popcorn slowly type movie, take a bathroom break, check email, type of suspense.

Why? The focus is too, too much on the back story of Detective Llyod's wife. And the faux anger between the two detectives is too much Nolte and Murphy in their forgettable movie 48 hrs. This cop diversion is way to Hollywood. Doesn't the victim have more importance than personal squabbles? Do real cops work this way? Doesn't the girl ever try to escape or chew through the gag.

Aren't they forgetting that time is of great importance in finding the Polaroid girl???

Ånd no search party? Why not try backtracking the accident scene and look for tire tracks that turn off the road. Duh! Going a mile per 1/2 hour, that would allow for a 30 mile back track of only 15 hrs. The first thing cops do is set up a search, even based on scanty clues. Detective Lloyd is not taking those yearly detective seminar classes.

Great set up and plot, but was to dry and slow for movie release, and as others have said, great TV, Lifetime movie. Had a non-aggressive mushy Canadian and video feel to it.

There was kind of a Hannibal/protégé deal with the baddies, but not played out much. Worth a look though, but not edge of seat suspense. You know, you have to have audience participation in mystery movies. They are trying to figure out the answers too.

If you can figure out how to put suspense/drama in this movie, which has a great set up and plot, you are the next Jonathan Demme.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
benjamincookson21 April 2012
This is the worst display of overacting by no body actors and washed up c listers. The timeline in the story doesn't match up. The dialogue is awful. I hate the main detective and his mustache is huge and the worst. Do not watch. I am dumberer just fer wachin dis stoopid moovie. Do nt waste 2hours of your life on this crap. I think the worst part was when I realized that I was almost to the end of the movie and still did not know the wife or main detective's names. The fact that the bad guy is Tom Arnold is kind of far fetched too. I mean come on that is like putting Barney as a killer. Oh and the young detective cannot stop wearing tight fitting shirts that show off his tattoo on his arm. No cop looks or dresses like him. Please don't endure this junk for more than this review.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Ultimate Movie Review! - http://tss5078.blogspot.com - @tss5078
Tss507823 February 2015
There is nothing more fun to watch than a good mystery and the truth is that I loved every minute of the film, Endure, but it did have a critical flaw. Similar to what you see on TV, the film tells us who the bad guy is almost right away, making the film about the investigation rather than the mystery. A fatal car accident on a desolate highway has led to a shocking discovery. Inside the car, police find evidence that a woman has been abducted. Now the clock is on to find her and to see if in fact the man was working alone or had help. The cast pairing in this film appealed to me before I'd even seen the film, as in 2010, you have an investigative team made of an 80s teen idol and a 90s teen heartthrob. Right away, I knew there would be an interesting dynamic, but it was far an above what I expected. 80s party animal, Judd Nelson, stars and this time he's the seriously uptight, by the book guy that he despised and challenged for a decade. Nelson is paired with Devon Sawa, a favorite actor of mine, who long ago proved that he had a lot more going for him then just his looks. Together the pair are complete opposites, and go about things in completely different ways in order to achieve the same goal. As horrible as it sounds, this film was just a lot fun to watch. The material may have been dark and serious, but watching each man do his own thing and then try to work together was fantastic. I am just really bothered by the fact that we know the whole story twenty minutes into the film. That's fine for an episode of Law & Order, but in a film with such a unique dynamic, I would have loved to have seen a surprise ending. All that aside, Endure has a great cast and really does stand out from the dozens of other films produced every year about simple police investigation.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
really really bad movie
myopnionis15 June 2012
Warning: Spoilers
This is a comically bad movie. Judd Nelson used to be a good actor - not in this - it broke my heart to see his acting so horrendous! His performance was truly awful- Given, the script was terrible and the directing was too, but it broke my heart to see how bad the acting was. His wife/story line part didn't even fit into movie at all. He was more emotional about his partner that he supposedly didn't like than his dying wife. And why didn't they like each other - it is like they tried to manufacture animosity but never gave any clues as to what the issues were. There are too many things wrong with this one to list them! I wanted the wife to hurry and die so we could get back to the movie. I laughed every time they mentioned needing to hurry and do something because they talked and moved so slowly in every step! HA! HA! I would never recommend this to anyone.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
We're psycho killers... but you won't know why....
blondien467 April 2012
Overall a good movie that grabs you for the 1st few minutes and then kind of drags a bit. I wish the movie would have explored the psycho killers more so you knew what made them that way... The movie was only 1 1/2 hours so even if they added another 15 minutes, it would have helped. Also, there was no urgency to find the girl. The detectives upon discovering the photo and other evidence in the car should have brought in search dogs and at least made an attempt to find her. They wouldn't have had to go into the woods very far. But then, we wouldn't have had the movie.... But overall a good film. The filmography was beautiful.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews