Locked (2025): A Hilarious, Torturous Thriller That Dives Into Humanity’s Entitlement

© The Avenue

“Locked” is directed by David Yarovesky (Nightbooks, Brightburn) and stars Bill Skarsgård (IT, Boy Kills World) and Anthony Hopkins (Thor, The Silence of the Lambs) in a film where a carjacker gets trapped inside of a luxury SUV owned by a mysterious man who wants to teach him a lesson about his lifestyle.

It has been hard to find time to go to the cinema in March, so any opportunity I can get to do so, I will take in a heartbeat.

Well, except for “Snow White.” I am honestly not interested in any more Disney live-action remakes for the time being. Additional apologies to “Lilo & Stitch” as well. I think I will be giving my money to the new “Mission: Impossible” the weekend that film comes out.

Thankfully, in March’s second half, the trailer for “Locked” sold me and got me to buy a ticket shortly afterwards.

Not only does “Locked” have solid talent on display like Bill Skarsgård and Anthony Hopkins, but the film looked like it would have fun with its simple concept. Essentially, a man named Eddie enters someone else’s unlocked car, and when he tries to get out, he is stuck and must deal with the unfamiliar surroundings as well as the virtual presence of an utterly hilarious geezer named William. Sounds simple, right? It might. Yet the film goes balls to the wall with its execution between a couple of powerhouse lead performances, and its implementations of one obstacle after another, no matter how convenient or absurd.

I did some research while writing this review and found out that “Locked” is the latest adaptation of a 2019 Argentinian film called “4×4.” I did see that title during the credits, but I was surprised to know that this was the fourth iteration of a film that was finished less than a decade ago. Apparently the film also has a Brazilian remake, as well as another in the Telugu language. To be fair, the premise works in several environments.

For the record, “Locked” was technically shot in Canada, but the English-language film has done much of its marketing in the United States, and uses well known Hollywood stars. Therefore, when connecting this movie to the United States, it works perfectly not only because we are a car-centric country. Not only because we sometimes put significant value on cars. But in regard to this movie’s deeper meaning, it also helps that the United States may be one of the most individualistic countries on the planet. While the movie is about someone being trapped in a car, if you look deeper, the movie is a dive into humanity’s selfishness.

Take Eddie for example. The movie taps into some addiction complications Eddie has. Early on, we see he does not have enough cash to pay for an important vehicle repair. Granted, cars can be pricey to maintain, but we also see that some of his other investments such as drugs and gambling could be getting in the way of more important aspects of his life. Additionally, he has a daughter who he seems to care about, but is not perfect when it comes to supporting her or being there for her. I do not have kids, but in one of my favorite movies, “Interstellar,” there is a line from Cooper that I think about sometimes where he suggests the reason why he is still around is to be a memory to his children. In comparison to Cooper, Eddie is not a role model by any means. He is far from a perfect protagonist, but I like him as a character despite his issues, he clearly loves the people in his life. That is despite him showing barriers that keep him from showing that love.

At the same time, we see Eddie questioning William, and how he got to live a luxury lifestyle. After all, Eddie entered a clearly expensive vehicle, so it is not surprising to see him ask William if he had a head start of some kind. Meanwhile, the film reveals that the two have different educational backgrounds. William has book smarts, Eddie has street smarts. William spent time in the classroom, Eddie was self taught. There is clearly a sense of snobbery when we dig deeper into William’s point of view. The movie shows that entitlement, a quality that both of these characters possess, does not necessarily come from having it all. Entitlement is not specific towards one class of people. Humans, at their core, want everything. And at the point where we do have everything, we do not necessarily have the urge to settle down.

The film mainly takes place in a car that is almost always in park. Yet pacing-wise, the narrative gets into gear to the point where several cops would be following it in a high speed chase. “Locked” is heavy on language, and by the midpoint, violence. This movie dials things up to an 11 by that point. Every random gag, no matter how unnecessary, landed for me. I do not want to reveal every single one, but there is one constant back and forth that had me dying in the beginning where William would call out Eddie for his vulgarity and lack of manners. When it comes to his delivery, Anthony Hopkins at first sounds like a sweet, reserved old man. As the film progresses, we see further hints of aggressiveness within his character. The more of a loose cannon Anthony Hopkins becomes, the more fun the film gets.

The film is quite a short watch. Granted if I had another positive to add, it is that every minute of the runtime is either essential to the story, or at the very least, downright entertaining. On that note, I will say the film does end somewhat abruptly. Is it a fitting ending? Sure. Is it a satisfying ending? One could say that. But I think the movie would have benefitted from being a minute longer and letting the actual end scene play out just a little. Even so, the film does end on a decent note and fulfills all the important arcs. That is perhaps my one gripe with an otherwise near-perfect film.

In the end, “Locked” is an exhilarating joyride. Even when the movie stays in the same place, the overall pace is fast and furious. Unsurprisingly, Anthony Hopkins is on fire with his role. The same can also be said for the film’s lead, Bill Skarsgård, which is also not surprising because that whole family is loaded with talent. I have been impressed with Skarsgard’s script choices lately. Sure he has done mainstream titles like “IT,” which was fantastic. The sequel, not as much, but it was still enjoyable. But he has had an impressive run in recent years with smaller films like “Barbarian” and “Boy Kills World.” “Locked” is yet another small wonder for this talented actor. I hope he continues to land roles as captivating as this one. The film made laugh, and then think. It is a great time overall. I am going to give “Locked” a 9/10.

“Locked” is now available for preorder on VOD and will be available to stream starting April 22nd.

Thanks for reading this review! If you enjoyed this review, I have plenty more on the way! My next review is going to be a first for me. For the first time in Scene Before history, I will be sharing my thoughts on a concert movie, specifically “Hans Zimmer & Friends: Diamond in the Desert.” I very rarely watch concert movies, but I love Hans Zimmer’s scores, so I jumped at the chance to check this film out in theaters last month. Also, stay tuned for my thoughts on “The Luckiest Man in America,” “The Penguin Lessons,” “Novocaine,” “The Ballad of Wallis Island,” “Secret Mall Apartment,” and “A Minecraft Movie.” If you want to see these reviews and more from Scene Before, follow the blog either with an email or WordPress account! Also, check out the official Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Locked?” What did you think about it? Or, have you ever been trapped somewhere? If you dare, let me know your crazy stories down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!

Brightburn (2019): Superman: The Quest for Rest In Peace

mv5bmjc0yzm2zjitnze3os00ntrhltkyntutmjy5y2y5ntu3owi0xkeyxkfqcgdeqxvynju2nti4mje40._v1_sy1000_cr006741000_al_

“Brightburn” is directed by David Yarovesky (Guardians of the Galaxy, The Hive) and stars Jackson A. Dunn (Shameless, Legendary Dudas), Elizabeth Banks (The LEGO Movie, The Hunger Games), David Denman (The Office, Traffic Light), Matt Jones (Mom, Breaking Bad), and Meredith Hagner (Men at Work, Search Party). This film revolves around a family and its child, Brandon Breyer. Brandon is growing up fast, and at times seems to be a relatively normal child. But we soon discover that he has powers, he sometimes behaves poorly, and he has various elements of a psychopath. Basically, take Superman, but make him malevolent, wicked, and some sort of equivalent to a devil worshiper.

I originally saw the first trailer for “Brightburn” last year, and I was somewhat excited for this film upon seeing that trailer. It looked beautiful, bold, and a tad scary too. In a way, this film is a mix of horror and a traditional comic book style story. The movie is not based on any preexisting property by name, even though it does contain similarities to “Superman.” To add even more comic book and superhero elements into the mix, let me just point out that James Gunn, director of the two recent “Guardians of the Galaxy” films, has a producer credit on this movie. This film is also kind of a family project, because the two writers are related to Gunn. You’ve got Mark Gunn, a cousin of James. And Brian Gunn, who happens to one of James’ brothers. It’s clear that this movie was partially done with combined passion, and it’s nice to see a family come together to entertain audiences. Granted, I don’t like everything they’ve done. I think “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2” may be one of the most overrated movies of the past few years. And both Brian and Mark wrote “Journey 2: The Mysterious Island,” which may be my least favorite movie with The Rock in it.

But with all of the creative forces combining together for “Brightburn,” how did they all add up? O-K? I guess? This was not my most anticipated film of 2019, but it was up there in terms of films I was looking forward to. In fact, of all the films that came out during its particular opening weekend, it was probably the one I wanted to see the most. Granted, I ended up seeing “Booksmart,” which ended up being good. I still have no interest in seeing “Aladdin,” but I finally got around to seeing “Brightburn” only to have numerous less than positive things to say about it. I mean, it’s not all bad. But it seriously could have been a lot better.

As a concept, it is certainly intriguing, and there are a lot of ideas that go into the concept that are executed fairly well. That being said however, this almost seems like a pitch movie.

“It’s gonna be Superman, but evil! Comic book movies are the thing right now! Let’s see what we can do with one of the most iconic comic stories of all time, but with a sinister twist! It’s gonna be great!”

This movie ultimately reminds me of a movie like “Lucy.” Remember “Lucy” from 2014? If you haven’t seen “Lucy,” Scarlett Johansson plays this girl who gets drugged by some less than friendly people, all the while discovering how to use more than 10% of her brain. It seems like a good movie to write with a couple of people around you, discussing ideas of how to use one’s brain at a greater level than what mankind is traditionally capable of. But it doesn’t mean anything for the movie in terms of how watchable or compelling it will turn out in the end, it’s just a collection of seemingly rad ideas.

If there were an evil Superman per se, this movie would be a good example of how such a character would work. In fact, I literally do mean evil Superman because the movie starts off with a crash on a farm, and the crash involves a baby boy. This baby grows up, we see him seemingly hitting puberty, and he becomes a stalker, an aggressive talker, and a violent maniac.

I also gotta give props to everybody acting in this movie, and this even includes our lead kid actor, Jackson A. Dunn. He owns the part as Brandon. He’s almost a perfect embodiment for a child of his age in terms of how he presents himself (despite being more aggressive than the average person). When he would cover up truths or lie, I felt like that would usually be how a kid of his age would do such a thing. And he, thankfully, did not overplay his character in any scenes involving dark violence, gore, etc. I guess in that sense, I might as well give props to the director for properly handling this film’s scenes.

But sticking to acting, the two standout performances in the movie have to be from the parents played by Elizabeth Banks and David Denman. The best part about their characters to me really sticks out like a sore thumb during the halfway point, specifically how they view the main situation of the whole movie. And it just goes to show how far Elizabeth Banks’ character would go to unconditionally love her kid. Granted, there are slight hints of wanting what’s best for him. But at the same time, she comes off as one of those mothers who will put her kid before anyone else regardless of how they behave or what they tend to do in their daily life. This sort of reminds me of those situations where a parent will endlessly defend their child or deny any of their faults. Her character’s thoughts and actions are completely different compared to those of David Denman’s character, who thinks the kid is up to no good, he’s violent, and he’s showing no signs of being a sane person.

My last compliment I can really give to this movie is that it does look really nice. The cinematography kind of made me feel like taking several deep breaths of fresh air. Granted, I did watch the movie through a 4K Blu-ray, but still. I also dig the farm location, I think overall, it suits the movie very well.

In the end, “Brightburn” is a movie with an interesting twist on a well-known concept, but I don’t know if I’d ever watch it again. Comic book movies are currently more popular than they’ve ever been. This is not based on a comic book, but if you told me it was, I wouldn’t be surprised. One trend I’m seeing now is the rise of comic book villain stories on film. We just saw it in “Venom” last year, which sucked hard. And we’re seeing it again this October with “Joker.” Thankfully, this is not anywhere near as unwatchable as “Venom.” But this movie doesn’t add anything big or bold to the type of genre with which it is trying to associate. “Brightburn” is a tad scary, it is somewhat entertaining, it is well-acted, but it doesn’t have an enormous “oomph” factor to it. I’m going to give “Brightburn” a 6/10. Thanks for reading this review! This weekend is the release of Brad Pitt’s “Ad Astra,” which I hear is getting great reviews so far, and I cannot wait to check it out whenever I can! I’m hoping to go see it Friday, because I do have Fridays off from school, so it would be good timing on my part. Plus, I am busy Sunday evening, so I can’t go see it then. Also, while not completely official, I wanted to touch upon another recent trend in the movie world, specifically “alternate programming at the movies.” If you have been following the news lately, sporting events and TV shows are making their way to cinema screens, and I want to talk about that! Be sure to follow Scene Before if you want hear me talk about this, or other movie-related topics! Also, check out my Facebook page! I want to know, did you see “Brightburn?” What did you think about it? Or, what is your favorite “Superman” movie? Let me know down below! Scene Before is your click to the flicks!