What makes it different from others?

This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

Blistering performances.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

make that 7.5... frustrating that half points aren't allowed!!! CONTROL was on the budget section in my rental store. I didn't expect much! I was very pleasantly surprised.Sure, I have seen better thrillers... ... but I have seen much worse! Ray Liotta gives his best performance to date, IMHO, and Willem Dafoe is also excellent and believable as his character.I am not going to talk much about the film, save to say... WATCH IT... and make your own mind up! Me? I thought the ending was absolutely fine, and fitting for what preceded! I also have my wife's permission to say so... and she is never wrong!!!

Thought the story of Tim Hunter's Controle, about the reprogramming of a psychopath, is intriguing, this film displays one of the major Hollywood cliché problems. What I am referring to is the fact that the first part of Controle is, without any doubt, the best part. This half is well-written, sometimes visually attractive (f.i. the flashback of Liotta's character shooting an innocent man, followed by a cgi blood drop that falls down on his shoulder) and by far the best acted 'phase' of the movie. This is also the slowest part of the film. The characters and their problems are set and displayed. I was impressed with Liotta's depiction of murderer Lee Ray, who changes, through the experimental drug Anagress, from a killer to a nice, relaxed and friendly person.In a way Dafoe is a miscast. Every scene seems like he's not acting his best and in the most fascinating scenes Liotta simply 'outguns' Dafoe's performance. He makes it look too much like a routine job. I remember he did the same thing in Paul Auster's Lulu on the Bridge (1998). Though he was splendid in Cronenberg's eXistenZ (1999).And now for the second part... The second half of Controle is what I referred to before as a Hollywood problem. The first half can be called a 'psychological drama/thriller', the second part though tries to become a fast-paced 'action flick'. Which could have been great, if the first part hadn't been so fascinating. It almost seems as though Hunter suddenly screams in the middle: "Ok, guys, let's take it to the bank!"The idea of a medicine that would alter our behaviour isn't that refreshing, but the way it is acted and depicted in the first part of the movie is fine. I must admit that I was moved by Liotta apologizing to his victim. That is the power of Liotta's acting in Controle: he actually succeeds in making you feel sorry for him, while you feel detested by the psycho he in the first few scenes.One thing the movie touches nicely, though very Hollywood-esquire, is the philosophy of 'second chance'. Lee Ray is handed a second chance after his death sentence and faked lethal injection. While dieing near the end of the film the flashbacks of his life are different from the ones he experiences in the beginning of the film, during the lethal injection. He dies with guilt, but also with a few (new) good memories of things he DID handle right.Overall Controle is (because of the lacking second part) a mediocre movie. A typical dime-store Hollywood production. But I cannot admit there are some very interesting ideas and performances in it.

Genre: Psychological thrillerThe Tale: criminal comes back to live after execution, surrounded by some unknown people who offer him a second change....Why do you want to see this move ? because its a nice movie with a good storyline and excellent performance of Mr. Ray Liotta did also played in Turbulence /Copland / etc.).The story Keeps you in suspense, but can be sometimes a little bit confusing for the average or young viewer. Conclussion: I liked the movie , but it wont be in my top10 list, although I will definitely recommend the movie to all my friends and people who like thrillers with a twist

I agree with most of the comments on this movie, the opening scene was definitely the best part of the movie. After that movie goes downhill. The real problem with this movie is that it's not believable. I'll explain. *********Spoilers ahead**********spoilers ahead************* First of all, why would a state government allow a death row homicidal murderer to participate in this experiment? There are plenty of anger management patients out there that have not killed several people. Second, why would they trust the patient to take the pills himself? Especially a convicted murderer. Wouldn't they make sure the medicine was injected into the patient or something? And third, why would they put the reformed murderer back on the streets IN OR NEAR THE TOWN HE COMMITTED HIS CRIMES IN!? That doesn't make any sense. Wouldn't they treat it similar to a witness protection program and put the guy somewhere in the middle of nowhere Kansas? I see why this movie never made it to the screens. The critics would have destroyed it and it probably would have made under $1,000