I sat through this movie as it was streamed by A&E. I hated it almost from the start, because it was really pretty obvious from the start that it was not going to be a good movie, but I sat through it anyway.
The main problem is that it just isn't a well-written story. Possibly, the directing and the editing may have exacerbated the bad writing, but it is difficult to say. The story itself was so poorly written that not even the very best directing and the very best editing could have salvaged it.
From the start, the sense the movie watcher gets is that the plot will reach some sort of climax when the FBI guy (or Treasury guy .. it wasn't that clear which he worked for) finally catches up to the man he desperately wants to find, i.e., the accountant. This never happens. The story thread that involves this man and the woman that he forces to figure out the identity of the accountant never really connects with the action side of the story. There is eventually some history that the FBI guy reveals, but this doesn't merge with the action side of the story in any meaningful way. This left me wondering why the FBI characters played by J. K. Simmons and Cynthia Addai-Robinson were even included in the movie. If the writer had simply left that side of the story out, and had focused on a better job of telling the main story that involves the accountant and what happens as a result of his discovering financial wrong-doings at a company he is hired to audit, it would likely have been a much, much better story.
And there are a host of things that simply don't make sense. Given that the executive heads of the robotics company were involved in financial wrong-doing, what was there reason for a hiring an accountant with a reputation for uncovering financial malfeasance? This is a glaring question, which was never answered. As some point in the movie the girl (Anna Kendrick) asked this, but it was never answered. The accountant replied that it was a good question and he said that he intended to get the answer from the female boss of the robotics company. When he found her she was shot through the head (evidently by the accountant's long-estranged brother), so she obviously wasn't able to give the answer. The writer (Bill DuBuque) evidently thought that this sufficed as an explanation for this glaring question, i.e., since the person who would have the answer was killed, this glaring question didn't need to be answered! What kind of writer thinks this way? A terrible one, that's what kind.
When the FBI woman had a breakthrough in discovering the identity of the accountant, some fellow who was evidently a computer hacker (modern suspense stories require a computer hacker) already knew the accountant's last name (Wolff) and it was then merely a question of him and the FBI woman deciding which of the four candidates that shared that last name was the target of her investigation. How did the computer hacker come up with the name? This is another pivotal question, and if there was a scene where this was explained, it was evidently deleted by A&E. This was very annoying, and to make it worse, the way they decided which one of the four men was the right one was by noting that in the run-down strip mall where Wolff (two f's) had his phony/front accounting office (ZZZ accounting), there were several other businesses in the same run-down strip mall that were likewise registered by the same accountant, with the same name (Wolff).
Seriously? This accountant is supposed to be this very worldly ghost-like accountant, whose 2nd residence is a small trailer he keeps in a storage locker, who is an expert on financial malfeasance and a gun expert and expert fighter and a savant-genius, but he uses several small businesses to wash the money that he gives away (his real compensation is in fine art and gold bricks that he keeps in the trailer locked in the storage locker), and these small businesses are all in the same run-down strip mall and are all registered under his real name (Wolff)? Huh? For the accounting work he does, he uses fake names, but they are all the names of famous dead mathematicians. If he is smart enough to use fake names in his accounting jobs, why is he so dumb that he registers those several businesses all under his real name, that anyone can use to look up his other, "official" address (a modest house that does not draw attention).
THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THIS STORY THAT MAKES ONE WHIT OF SENSE!!!!!
When I say "nothing", I really do mean "nothing". There is nothing whatsoever about it that makes a sliver of sense. The authorities-in-search angle never amounts to anything, even though they figured out his identity, and the way the figured out his identity doesn't make sense, and in the writing of this side-story the writers have him doing something that a character of this type wouldn't ever do, i.e., set up several small businesses for the purpose of washing money but have them all in the same run-down strip mall and all registered in his own (real) name!!!
Who wrote this piece of garbage? Bill DuBuque? How could someone with any intelligence write this kind of garbage? What he should have done is to have left out the whole side story with the FBI people. He should have made the story mostly about Wolff being chased by the leader of the military-like bunch of men who had been hired by the head of the robotics company to eliminate the accountant (and the girl who also knew about the financial malfeasance). The leader of that bunch of thugs turned out to be Wolff's long-estranged brother. Surely more could have come of that other than the two of them being happy to meet again, at the end of an extended and brutal gunfight, and agreeing to meet for dinner in another week. That's it? They decide not to try to kill each other and to instead meet up for dinner one day next week?
DuBuque, I hope that you give up your aspirations of being a writer. It is clearly not your forte. Hopefully, you have that producer thing that you can fall back on. You are NOT a writer.
The main problem is that it just isn't a well-written story. Possibly, the directing and the editing may have exacerbated the bad writing, but it is difficult to say. The story itself was so poorly written that not even the very best directing and the very best editing could have salvaged it.
From the start, the sense the movie watcher gets is that the plot will reach some sort of climax when the FBI guy (or Treasury guy .. it wasn't that clear which he worked for) finally catches up to the man he desperately wants to find, i.e., the accountant. This never happens. The story thread that involves this man and the woman that he forces to figure out the identity of the accountant never really connects with the action side of the story. There is eventually some history that the FBI guy reveals, but this doesn't merge with the action side of the story in any meaningful way. This left me wondering why the FBI characters played by J. K. Simmons and Cynthia Addai-Robinson were even included in the movie. If the writer had simply left that side of the story out, and had focused on a better job of telling the main story that involves the accountant and what happens as a result of his discovering financial wrong-doings at a company he is hired to audit, it would likely have been a much, much better story.
And there are a host of things that simply don't make sense. Given that the executive heads of the robotics company were involved in financial wrong-doing, what was there reason for a hiring an accountant with a reputation for uncovering financial malfeasance? This is a glaring question, which was never answered. As some point in the movie the girl (Anna Kendrick) asked this, but it was never answered. The accountant replied that it was a good question and he said that he intended to get the answer from the female boss of the robotics company. When he found her she was shot through the head (evidently by the accountant's long-estranged brother), so she obviously wasn't able to give the answer. The writer (Bill DuBuque) evidently thought that this sufficed as an explanation for this glaring question, i.e., since the person who would have the answer was killed, this glaring question didn't need to be answered! What kind of writer thinks this way? A terrible one, that's what kind.
When the FBI woman had a breakthrough in discovering the identity of the accountant, some fellow who was evidently a computer hacker (modern suspense stories require a computer hacker) already knew the accountant's last name (Wolff) and it was then merely a question of him and the FBI woman deciding which of the four candidates that shared that last name was the target of her investigation. How did the computer hacker come up with the name? This is another pivotal question, and if there was a scene where this was explained, it was evidently deleted by A&E. This was very annoying, and to make it worse, the way they decided which one of the four men was the right one was by noting that in the run-down strip mall where Wolff (two f's) had his phony/front accounting office (ZZZ accounting), there were several other businesses in the same run-down strip mall that were likewise registered by the same accountant, with the same name (Wolff).
Seriously? This accountant is supposed to be this very worldly ghost-like accountant, whose 2nd residence is a small trailer he keeps in a storage locker, who is an expert on financial malfeasance and a gun expert and expert fighter and a savant-genius, but he uses several small businesses to wash the money that he gives away (his real compensation is in fine art and gold bricks that he keeps in the trailer locked in the storage locker), and these small businesses are all in the same run-down strip mall and are all registered under his real name (Wolff)? Huh? For the accounting work he does, he uses fake names, but they are all the names of famous dead mathematicians. If he is smart enough to use fake names in his accounting jobs, why is he so dumb that he registers those several businesses all under his real name, that anyone can use to look up his other, "official" address (a modest house that does not draw attention).
THERE IS NOTHING ABOUT THIS STORY THAT MAKES ONE WHIT OF SENSE!!!!!
When I say "nothing", I really do mean "nothing". There is nothing whatsoever about it that makes a sliver of sense. The authorities-in-search angle never amounts to anything, even though they figured out his identity, and the way the figured out his identity doesn't make sense, and in the writing of this side-story the writers have him doing something that a character of this type wouldn't ever do, i.e., set up several small businesses for the purpose of washing money but have them all in the same run-down strip mall and all registered in his own (real) name!!!
Who wrote this piece of garbage? Bill DuBuque? How could someone with any intelligence write this kind of garbage? What he should have done is to have left out the whole side story with the FBI people. He should have made the story mostly about Wolff being chased by the leader of the military-like bunch of men who had been hired by the head of the robotics company to eliminate the accountant (and the girl who also knew about the financial malfeasance). The leader of that bunch of thugs turned out to be Wolff's long-estranged brother. Surely more could have come of that other than the two of them being happy to meet again, at the end of an extended and brutal gunfight, and agreeing to meet for dinner in another week. That's it? They decide not to try to kill each other and to instead meet up for dinner one day next week?
DuBuque, I hope that you give up your aspirations of being a writer. It is clearly not your forte. Hopefully, you have that producer thing that you can fall back on. You are NOT a writer.