While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

The writer part of the writer-director (Ron Morales) must have decided to shoot the first draft of 'Graceland' because if he had read it a second or third time he would have seen the glaring story problems that unfortunately infect the movie released to the general public. Spoilers. We learn near the end of the story that the gunman/kidnapper did the crime to avenge the underage daughter who the bad congressman hired to have sex with and who he unwittingly gave alcohol to, such alcohol causing the child to die because of a low tolerance for it. Problem here? The movie early on established that the congressman went to a bordello that specialized in underage girls. Well folks, didn't her amoral, stupid and psychotic father know where she earned her cash? Why didn't he stop her from being a whore? Oh... that's because she died after being forced to drink booze. Bad man doesn't care about the prostitution but doesn't want his daughter to drink. Yikes. 2. If dad was so sensitized to all of the young girls predicament, forcing the bad man to give them the initial ransom payment, why did he arbitrarily kill the equally young girl who was initially kidnapped. (Oh, that's right, he actually knew he was killing the bad man's daughter because Marlon was one of the architects of the kidnapping.) But why then was Marlon so surprised when the murder took place. As a co-conspirator he also must have known where his daughter was from the very beginning. Why then was he so bent out of shape since he knew his daughter was going to be released once the ransom was paid. (He also played dumb to the camera even when no one was around to observe his 'act'. Why? Well actually that's because director Morales didn't think it through.) We never see the cop affect an arrest and free the daughter after he hears a gun shot near the end. Kind of an important scene to show, don't you think? Finally, though there's plenty more, we have to assume that the bad guy, after finding his by now putrid dead child in the back of the car (in the Phillipines; sub tropic temperatures and very humid), will notify the police of this and an autopsy will show that she died days before. Remember, he confessed to his crimes, for which I'm sure he'll be arrested and imprisoned, gave up his career and lost his wife and fortune. Wouldn't he at least insist, since he has nothing left to lose, on finding out the truth? Remember that for all his depravity he deeply loved her. But finding out that she had been killed days earlier would lead to Marlon being arrested and hopefully for this viewer, sent to prison for 30 years. The autopsy would show that Marlon had to be lying about everything. (What a gutless creep he turned out to be.) Then there's the money Marlon gives to some black market organ seller. Where in god's name did he get the money from? I'll grant you this: Morales knows how to compose a scene, get fine performances from the actors and knows how to add music and edit. But the story itself? Not thought out and sub-amateurish.

The story is very strong and the visuals accompany the whole thing very nicely. Unfortunately the script is not as strong. I guess you could also blame the actors a little bit for not being totally convincing (though the "father" himself and a few other characters are really good too) through the whole movie.It's more than gritty and people will either like it for the fact (and award more points than me) or dislike it, because of its nature. The camera does suggest and gives a documentary feeling. If only they had concentrated on the things that make this movie strong, it would have a greater impact (it already has, but there could be more).

This is an outstanding first effort by director Ron Morales. As of this writing, I don't see him attached to directing another film. Please tell me he's in the middle of a negotiation, and that others are smart enough to recognize this guy's talent.The plot is extremely interesting if a bit contrived at times. Very stylishly done, with a number of provocative twists that most won't see coming, which is why I don't want to discuss the film in very much detail, as knowing some of the twists may ruin it for you. As a bonus, the film is short and sweet...about an hour and 20 minutes long.Although this is listed as a 2012 release, I consider it a 2013 movie, as it wasn't really available in America until then. So for me, I consider it one of the better 2013 releases I've seen this year, and has a chance to make my Best 10 at the end of the year. It's that good. So if you like the thriller genre, this one is definitely worth the look.

Kidnapping has been on the rise and much more organised in the last two decades, especially in Latin America and the Caribbean. I personally have stories of close people being kidnapped in Haiti and Venezuela. Now we are hearing more of India and South Africa, but in 2010, according to the available statistics, the six countries in the world ranked highest for kidnapping for ransom were Colombia, Italy, Lebanon, Peru, the Philippines, and, perhaps surprisingly, the United States! Certainly slightly skewed by Phoenix, AZ, which has become the second kidnapping capital in the world after Mexico City, DF, the concern remains a global one nonetheless.The topic is not new, but make for potential griping dramatic storyline. We had the effective "Ransom (1996)", the delectable "Gone Baby Gone (2007)" and the steadfast "Taken (2008)" which is set for a sequel this year. "Graceland (2012)" is a marvellous addition to the genre and is surely the best film yet on the topic. It is twisted and almost tedious, until a Usual Suspect-like quality is revealed in the script and sustained by the uncompromising direction.The beginning and build-up is superb and shocking and the ending puts everything in equally appalling perspective. The middle part lags at times, with less action and suspense than its American counterparts, but instead explores themes of family, class, corruption, extortion, sexual behaviour, suspicion, sickness, trafficking, revenge, redemption, etc. with great wit and repartee.The acting shines for the victims and the dutiful detective, although the kidnappers' casting may have been on purpose to portray less cunning and calculating individuals. The 84 minutes running time keeps it relatively short and definitely not sweet, leaving you with an awkward after-taste and after-thought as you leave the theatre.Philippines 2012 | 84 min | HD Tagalog & English language (English subtitles)