User reviews

This movie was a real disappointment to me. All the elements for a fine picture were here. Good story, good actors. Sadly, the picture was not put together well. First blame should go to the director who was not able to restrict himself to the story lines he would be able to tell effectively. Next to blame is also the director who edited the film with superfluous characters and dead end plot lines. Several very good acting performances were squandered in this mishmash. Julliene Moore and Samuel L. were great (As always). Ron Eldard is a favorite of mine. He never gets the romantic lead, but provides great dramatic wallop. Unfortunately his character had nothing to do with the story. Typically, the scene where he overhears the confession of Billy is meaningless, nothing comes of it and his character disappears afterward. I'm not sure this was even a good try. Save your money.

Detective Lorenzo Council (Samuel Jackson) must separate the truth from the lies when a troubled woman (Julianne Moore) shows up at the emergency room claiming that a black man from the projects carjacked her, taking her 4-year-old son, who was sleeping in the back seat.

Freedomland is a disappointing film that fails to take advantage of its talented cast and intriguing premise. The movie fails because Joe Roth is a terrible director. He tries to handle a bunch of different issues and he just doesn't mix them very well. He also introduces different characters and subplots but he doesn't build on them. Also, for a movie tackling serious issues, it was pretty unrealistic. The whole lock-down scenario was completely over the top and unnecessary. The kidnapping story had a bunch of holes and the way the cops handled the situation was pretty irresponsible. All the characters were stereotypes and most of them were unlikable. There were a lot of scenes dealing with racism but the film never actually dealt with them or settled them. The ending was total letdown and very little was actually settled, making the whole movie experience pointless.

The acting is the film's only strong point with Samuel L. Jackson giving the best performance. His performance felt a little familiar but it was still effective and his emotions never felt forced. Julianne Moore went completely over the top with her performance. She was annoying and completely unrealistic. Also, it was hard to feel sorry for her character because she was so unlikable and her actions were just terrible. Edie Falco came out of nowhere and she gave a pretty moving performance. She played the only likable character in the film and it was easy to feel sorry for her. The rest of the supporting actors were below average and no one else broke out.

Along with the acting, there were a few other good things about the film. There were a couple of engaging scenes that could have been better if the director had built on them. The script was also decent and it could have been turned into a good film. The movie also had an interesting style to it and at least it sort of engages the viewer. While the film was pretty messy, it held my attention until the end. Of course, the performances helped with that but the storyline had a chance to build. Unfortunately, it didn't and the movie ends with a whimper. In the end, Freedomland is an annoying melodrama with very few redeeming qualities. Rating 4/10

I think Joe Roth was aiming for something deeper with 'Freedomland'. It's not necessarily a bad movie, but it isn't really a good one either. From an acting stand-point, it's great with solid performances from Samuel L. Jackson (Jackie Brown) as a determined police detective and Julianne Moore (The Forgotten) as a whacked-out dead-beat mom who's son has been kidnapped. Edie Falco is also pretty good with a role that's anything but Mrs. Soprano. The writing or dialogue, however, is absolutely terrible. I think 'Freedomland' actually wouldn't be a half-bad movie if the screenwriter put as much work into the character's conversations as he did the creativity of the racial epithets spewed through-out the film. 'Freedomland' annoyed me in a sense that the movie trailers made it out to be something it's not -- a taut, mystery/thriller, when in reality it's a film about racial and economical tensions. 'Freedomland' is pretentious in that it thinks it's an Oscar-caliber film when in reality it's a slightly above-average suspense film filled to the brim with tired clichés. 'Freedomland' is enjoyable if you can see through it's smug undeserved sense of brilliance. Grade: C .(screened at AMC Deer Valley 30, Phoenix, Arizona, 2/20/05)

I'll admit, I read the novel a few years ago and I was a big fan of it. So I went into the theater already wanting to like the movie. I wasn't as concerned with plot details as some other viewers apparently were. Since I knew what was going to happen, I simply focused on reliving the story, and seeing how the filmmakers interpreted it. It's such a dense novel with so much going on, I think Richard Price is the only person who could've adapted it and still kept the spirit of the original material. Now, all that being said...was it a good movie? In my opinion, yes it was. I felt empathy for all the characters (except Brenda's brother, who I felt contempt for). I was surprised that I was able to empathize with Brenda's character, but I credit Julianne Moore for that. She gave a performance that was filled with pain, and confusion, and fear, and all the emotions I would have imagined Brenda would be going through. Samuel Jackson played Lorenzo just as I hoped he would. Not over the top with a bunch of yelling and fist pounding. But as a man who realizes all too well what can happen when a white woman points the finger at a black man and yells "He did it!" The biggest problem I have with the movie is the way that it's being marketed. If I hadn't read the book, I would've never gone to see it based on it's trailer. It looks like just another missing child thriller. So I can understand why some viewers felt cheated when they saw the movie and realized that it's much more complex than that. It's about the politics of race, and how they can be manipulated. It's about the uneasy truce that exists in some communities, and how quickly a fuse can be lit to ignite tension. And most importantly, it's about people making choices that they regret, and the aftermath of those choices.

If you're looking for a missing child thriller, or a theatrical version of a CSI episode, this probably isn't for you. If a tough examination of race and class makes you uncomfortable, then don't bother with this one. But if you want to challenge yourself as a viewer, and get inside the minds of characters who are trying desperately to hold their worlds together, then I think you'll get something out of this film.

"Freedomland" will not be a popular movie. The movie doesn't have enough action and the action is does contain is more to promote a message than to titillate. Its message is basically about inner city racism. Its about the fuss made over a missing white child in a black community. The story is about a white women who was car-jacked in a housing project and, unknown to the jacker, her 4 year old son was in the car's back seat. You'll have to see the movie to see the rest since revealing the story would completely ruin the movie. I really enjoyed this movie. I thought the performances by Samuel Jackson, William Forsythe and Ron Eldard were realistic and affecting. One standout was Edie Falco. She played a very unglamorous role and was powerfully affecting. She should get an Academy Award nomination for this role. She was fabulous. Another standout was Julianne Moore who was very miscast. I did not like her in this role. She played a very weak, flawed and emotionally stunted individual whose behavior at times turned my stomach. I did not like the character. The character was not written to be liked, maybe pitied and I think that aspect is what Ms. Moore was trying to evoke. I think she did too good a job at making her character weak and flawed and missed a toughness that the book's character had. To live in the environment that she did she would have acquired more emotional survival skills than the movie's character portrayed. Ms. Moore's character looked like she wandered onto the set from a suburban mall. Her looks and demeanor next to the strong Black women characters made her appear too weak and her obstinacy appears to be more stupidity. I think Edie Falco could have played this role better with her strength and then the revelations and breakdown when the toughness crumbled would have been more effective. The movie is unfortunately being advertised as a thriller and audiences expecting action and things blowing up will be disappointed. "Freedomland" is one of those movies that Hollywood doesn't get or know what to do with but it is a very worthwhile movie to see. I gave it a 7 out 10. I downgraded it slightly because of Ms. Moore's performance.

"Freedomland" falls flat in every possible way a movie can. The story is boring, the viewer does not care about the characters, and the movie goes nowhere. The film is set in 1999, which is odd because nothing during the course of the movie makes it necessary for it to take place during that time period.

The story begins with Brenda Martin (Julianne Moore) walking into a hospital with wounds on her hands after being carjacked. Detective Lorenzo Council (Samuel L. Jackson) is called in to ask her further questions. Brenda then tells him the story and blames the carjacking on an unidentified black male. It also then occurs to her that her son was also in the stolen car.

Brenda's brother is detective Danny Martin (Ron Eldard) of a neighboring police department. Trying to find his nephew quickly he puts the all black neighborhood where the carjacking took place under lock down. Since no one is allowed to leave the residents of the area start to get upset and unruly.

To diffuse the situation Detective Council rushes to find Brenda's son before riots break out in the neighborhood or Brenda's son is found dead. As the story unfolds we find that there is more to the story then we know.

"Freedomland" tries to deliver a twist ending at the end, but everyone in the audience can see it coming. Ironically the movie openly tells you many times what the ending is going to be. Though when the truth is told we are supposed to be shocked and amazed.

Even this strong cast of actors cannot save this movie from being totally lost. Samuel L. Jackson really underplays his role as Detective Council. Jackson is probably the loudest actor in Hollywood and the one role that needs it he does not deliver. Julianne Moore on the other hand overplays her role as Brenda who instead of a grieving mother comes off as a lunatic. By the end of this movie the viewer has no sympathy for her character because she is so annoying and irrational.

The true shame about this movie is how it poorly tries to bring in themes of racial inequality. It seemed like an original set up by using the characters in the black neighborhood in lock down. Unfortunately the points the film is trying to make take a back seat to the boring story of Brenda and her missing kid. The racial ideas are then never fully developed and just fall short as a type of afterthought.

Also, what happened to this movie being a supernatural thriller? Every advertisement has shown the movie involving the child going missing for some mysterious reasons. The real story has nothing to do with the supernatural. The movie should not even be considered a thriller because nothing exciting or suspenseful ever takes place. Instead we just dragged along with these characters knowing exactly what is going to happen at the end.

"Freedomland" is one of the worst movies I have seen in a long time. It really should be an educational video of how not to make a movie because there is nothing good about this film.

This movie was better than people give it credit for. I thought I was in for an average flick, but I was pleasantly surprised. And no, I don't mean that you couldn't figure out the gist of the plot, but it was well done, especially the scores. The music really made the film. Julianne Moore delivered an accurate ex-drug-addicted, scattered person, and Samuel l. Jackson was right-on. I'd recommend this film to anyone who has an open mind. This film is probably a lot closer to reality than people would like to think, that's what makes it good. No, it is not a smash 'em up Hollywood style action/suspense film, but it was good nonetheless.

First mistake of this film was marketing (after all, it's all about marketing) Billing it as a thriller/action movie with some paranormal slant was wrong. This is strictly a psychological drama with zero paranormal stuff in it.

Second mistake was to make reality too real and not idealized or artistic to stay away of the touchy issues addressed: Race, police prejudice, social differences.

So if you went to the movie theater or the rental place to watch a thrilling action film staying right on the surface of entertainment and shock value, you will be disappointed. This is a nicely acted, well constructed and most importantly, realistic drama in which a white woman blames the kidnap of her son as a carjack conducted by an African-American male.

As far as I am concern, there was no stereotyping, just realism. There was no siding on the moralistic virtues of one or other side. Actually, this is a quite profound exploration of the reasons to lie, the be racist, to fear prejudice and to resist the fact that a social interaction between poor and rich, white and black, civilian and policemen will probably be fair in a near future… not now.

My only concern was to see Ms. Moore so stressed during 90% of the film, quite impressive performance. Just hope she doesn't take this as her type-cast.

I have always been a fan of Samuel L. Jackson (Shaft, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Pulp Fiction), and do not miss a chance to see his films.

Yes, there are some major errors in this film. How come local cops are handling a kidnapping? Why didn't they look for the car? Hello, fingerprints? However, those can be ignored to focus on what this film really is. Like Crash, it is a study of racist cops and how they treat minorities differently that whites. It doesn't matter that Jackson is a black cop. he is not in control of the power. It is also a story of how cops start race riots. There have been at least 15 reported incidents in one year alone (1967) of cops starting race riots.

The film also stars Julianne Moore (The Hours, Boogie Nights) and Edie Falco (The Sopranos).

Damn, I really hated this movie. It's just so annoying and frustrating. There are like 30 different characters and I didn't even know what half of them had to do with the movie. It's hard to keep up with the story because all kinds of events occur that just don't make sense. And Moore was just so annoying!! She cries in almost every scene but she never says anything that could be of use to the detective. It's torture! It's just the Chaos and the stress that makes this such a bad movie. I feel sorry for the actors who preform rather good. I mean; I have seen some bad movies in my time but this more than just a bad movie. I couldn't think of a single scene that was worth watching. The stroy is weak and it pretends to be some kind of deep, smart and intriguing thriller but it's really quite dumb and shallow. I really don't understand what the director could have thought when shooting this film. It even gets so superficial at the end that I thought this movie was maybe meant to be funny. I hope I will never have to watch a film by Joe Roth again.

Lead actors performances are simply over the top and the film itself is challenging and moving. It manages to deal with such subjects as racism, drug abuse, loneliness; that's why the power of the movie is its being part a cop drama, part a race drama, part a women drama, all in one. The director handles complex matters without conventional images and clichés; in short a committed movie with grand - slam performances and a strong direction. Not the frequent kind of movie over the last five-ten years because the majors nowadays bet on different stories. Nevertheless Freedomland has been quite successful so far.

I offer no guarantees that you will enjoy "Freedomland" (2006), but don't avoid it merely on the basis of negative comments and reviews. I found it generally entertaining, as good as most films and better than some. Julianne Moore is the real reason to see the film, she is a first rate actress and she delivers arguably her best performance in this challenging role. Without this performance it would just be a high budget Lifetime network movie exploiting many elements from the Susan Smith case (the woman who drowned her kids by driving her car into a lake).

In many ways it will remind you of those student radical films from the 1969-1972 era such as "The Strawberry Statement". The idea is to juxtapose a human-interest story against a backdrop of student or civil rights protest. As usually happens, in "Freedomland" the larger story ends up seeming silly and contrived. But the more intimate story has Moore playing off of Samual L. Jackson (a detective investigating her son's kidnapping) and Edie Falco (the leader of a victim's support group). Moore's quirky and extraordinarily complex character (Brenda) is a complete wildcard and manages to turn this thing into a pretty decent thriller. Wherever Moore goes inside herself to draw out this sort of character (think "The Hours") must be quite a place.

"Freedomland's" biggest problems appear to be in to the post-production assembly of the film. Red herrings abound, not by design but by the inexplicable omission of motivational elements and the introduction of story details that are made to appear significant but simply vanish without follow-up. For example, Jackson has a couple asthma attacks early in the film, but his asthma condition is never a factor in the plot or the resolution-it is simply noted and dispensed with. And Brenda has a hothead brother who is groomed throughout the film to play a significant part in the resolution, but he ultimately just fades away. Were follow-up scenes trimmed and the editor too lazy to go back and delete the now completely irrelevant earlier material?

The film begins with Brenda appearing in an emergency room with a story of her car being hijacked near a low-income housing development where she works as a volunteer at a community children's center. Eventually Jackson extracts from her the additional fact that her son was in the back seat of the car when it was taken. Racial tensions mount as the police seal off the housing project.

The best scene is a lengthy conversation between Brenda and Falco's character during a group search of a section of woods called "Freedomland". The name is intentionally ironic as it the former location of a notorious children's home.

"Freedomland" is a must see for Julianne Moore fans. Others should enjoy it as a suspense story if they can get into her character and cut the rest of the stuff in the story a bit of slack.

Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

Caught an advance screening a week ago, the same one attended by the other reviewer.

It's a sad day when a movie is made with its sights set on an Oscar award AND box office at the same time. For me, the mere intent can undermine a good idea - what to say of a bad one? That's what happens in this botched and overblown attempt at a drama/thriller (some may say a cross between a 70's racial drama and "The Forgotten" - on speed). IT IS a bad idea from the start - everyone in Hollywood knows the trouble that is adapting a lengthy book to the screen. But when you couple that with Oscar aspirations - for acting, I suppose - you have a recipe for disaster.

The basic story line is that of a single mom that gets car-jacked while lost in a public park and then proceeds to tell the police (after much "emotion") that her son is still in the car with the criminal. Pretty much what all thrillers are about, right? Well, everything is kosher except that she is white and the park where it all took place happens to be right in the middle of a poor, black neighborhood.

As the viewer would have guessed, the main topics here are the racial conflict - "violent" white cops versus "angry" black mob - and the desperate search for the kid.

As director and screenwriter tried to keep every single thread present in the book, things eventually get extremely confusing. We never get a feel for the characters or a sense of fulfillment. Many of the threads feel incomplete and others seem like mere sketches that went along for the ride.

More so, Joe Roth's directing style is frenetic and restless. I'd say he could do a great action flick, but here so much movement ends up wasted and actually annoys the viewer.

Finally, to keep this short, the acting goes from OK to histrionic. I truly feel sorry for Julianne Moore - she is a great actress trapped in a recycled role. Samuel Jackson is another casualty; his talent is wasted on another empty character, an amalgam that doesn't work despite his visible effort. Many dislike the score, but I did enjoy it for some obscure reason.

Well, as you guys can see, "Freedomland" is a disappointment and I would highly recommend a DVD screening for this one since it is my personal belief that we should see a little bit of everything in a protected environment.

I saw this film on DVD with a friend last night, and we were both stunned at the amazing performance turned in by Julianne Moore. She seems to have gotten into a little bit of a "missing child rut" (she also starred in "The Forgotten", another one with a theme of a lost child), but here her performance had me glued to the screen. In particular, there is a scene in the police station where Moore is talking to Samuel L. Jackson in an interview room which was just an amazing piece of acting. I hope she gets an Oscar nod for this work. Some of the reviewers who have read the book seem to have been disappointed, but not having read the book, I didn't have anything to compare it to.

This is not a regular thriller with car chases, etc. It doesn't really fit into any of the categories people normally plug their movies into. I'm glad I saw it, and I have a new respect for Moore as an actress.

The movie is set, according to an opening title, in 1999. Not sure why it wasn't just set in the present, as nothing particularly time-specific happens, but given that they set it then, there is a goof. In one of the scenes at the projects, a kid is repeatedly shown wearing a "G-Unit" shirt. I'm no expert on 50 Cent and his crew, but I'm pretty sure G-Unit, or at least the merchandising of it, didn't start until 2002 or so.

By the way, if you liked the movie at all, I highly encourage you to read the original book by Richard Price. It's a huge book, and has a lot of fascinating details on the characters, who have to be rather hastily presented in the movie. Another interesting difference: Freedomland in the book is an abandoned amusement park, not a children's home.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW That was horrific, one of the worst movies I've ever seen, Moore is trying but her performance is laughable, Jackson can't even save this film about a missing child, you will know the ending in the first 10 minutes, the premise is idiotic and the execution even worse, one of the worst performance by a leading lady EVER, I like Moore in other films( big lebowski, Boogie Nights, ext) but she is terrible, I don't know if she is supposed to be mentally challenge or what but she can't or act, the police station scene was one of the worst exchanges by two top notch actors ever, the twist was strait as an arrow, very very very bad 1/10