User reviews

I watch movies to be entertained, Sleepless definitely did that. While not at the top of its class when it comes to crime action/drama, it had a lot going for it in my opinion. The fight scenes were well done, the scenery was dark but was still able to show off the glitz and glamour that Vegas is known for, and the story-line wasn't half bad. I was expecting to see a bit of Collateral in this, and I feel like that's what I got only with a bit more action and less Tom Cruise.

Don't go in thinking you're going to be seeing some Oscar worthy film, that isn't what this is. If you are expecting to watch a good crime action flick with Jamie Fox kicking ass then you will be happy with what you see.

Ecclesiastes 1:9 came up with the oft used quote that "there is nothing new under the sun". "Sleepless" proves that in spades.

• Bent copper drama? Check.

• Dodgy casino owner? Check.

• Nasty "Black Rain" style hoodlum? Check.

• Kidnapped teen ("I WILL find you")? Check.

• Misunderstood family man? Check.

All of these standard tropes are lobbed into the movie blender and pulsed well.

Holding it all together are solid performances from Jamie Foxx ("Django Unchained") as Vincent Downs, the cop with a dodgy background, and Michelle Monaghan ("Source Code", "Patriot's Day") as the internal affairs cop doggedly on his trail.

In terms of the storyline it's best to go into the film (as I did) with limited knowledge of the plot (on which more below). As the film opens, and playing out a strong anti-hero role, Downs with his equally dodgy partner are involved in a shootout at a drug deal in the streets of Las Vegas. This allows them to get their hands on a significant quantity of heroine. Naturally they pocket this, but unbeknownst to them the deal was between casino boss Rubino (Dermot Mulrooney, "The Grey") and the vicious mafia son of the local Novak family, Rob (Scoot McNairy, "Argo"). For Downs the pressure is on when his teenage son Thomas ( Octavius J. Johnson) is kidnapped as a trade for the drugs.

The film delivers some good fight scenes and action, but nothing we haven't seen before in countless other movies like Bourne. What drags the film down though through is the scripting and direction. There are such a range of implausibilities on show here that it makes you wonder why anyone involved in the film didn't just stop and say "WAIT A MINUTE HERE GUYS" and demand a rewrite.

For example, Foxx suffers a severe knife wound early in the film, but repeatedly bounces from 'full action hero fighting machine' mode to 'staggering and holding his side' mode without pause. The wound adds nothing but implausibility to the action, so why include it at all??

And a scene in an underground car park involving copious quantities of tear gas brought tears of embarrassment to my eyes: an affliction that didn't seem to affect any of the protagonists in the film!

This is a great shame, and writer Andrea Berloff ("Straight Outta Compton") and Swiss-born director Baran bo Odar should have more respect for their audience's intelligence (that's the third movie in recent weeks I've made that comment on... it must be the time of year!).

It's also extremely irritating that one of the key twists in the movie (although you may guess it) is so blatantly spoiled: both by an audio line in the trailer (at 1:40) and – more appallingly – by one of the two straplines for the film on the posters. Thankfully I never noticed this before I saw the film.

Fox and Monaghan are too good for the material but have screen chemistry that keeps the film watchable. I also thought Scoot McNairy was great as the cold-eyed crazy hoodlum and it's also interesting to see Dermot Mulrooney, so memorable as the male lead in 1997's "My Best Friend's Wedding", back in a mainstream role.

By the way, I have no idea why the film is called "Sleepless", other than it being based on a 2011 French film called "Nuit Blanche" which was perhaps written in a way where it made more sense. Vincent is no Jack Bauer and he gets more than a small opportunity to catnap during the running time!

In summary, the movie is perfectly watchable for its action moments. In fact, as I *think* my wife, who is a great fan of "Die Hard, "Taken", et al would like it I've added a star to my initial rating. And it's done with some style such that it has the *potential* to be a good film – – which is frustrating. But in my view it's not worth the ticket price at the cinema: wait instead for it to arrive on Amazon/Netflix.

The end of the film suggests a set-up for a sequel. I doubt this is a sequel that will ever get made.

(For the graphical version of this review, please visit bob-the-movie- man.com. Thanks).

Here's the thing - if movies never suspended belief, they would be both pointless and incredibly dull. The reasons that the things we see in movies rarely happen in real life is because logic generally takes over and prevents these things from actually happening. Thus it would be incredibly difficult to make an entertaining movie without having quite a few illogical things happen. It just stands to reason. So when people come out of a movie and say they hated it because "x" would never happen or "y" didn't make sense or when a certain character did something they should have done something else, I don't really buy that as a reason to ever hate a movie. I have a feeling that is a lot of what is going on with 'Sleepless' and people's opinions of it. Admittedly throughout the film I kept thinking to myself those kinds of things, like this guy got stabbed a long time ago and has had about 10 fights since and still seems to have superhuman strength. You can notice these things, but I think you are being very tough if you are judging your entire opinion on them.

There's rarely a dull moment in 'Sleepless'. The action begins almost immediately and basically never lets up. I loved the fact that almost the entire movie takes place in one setting. It was like a fun house by the end with all the nooks and crannies being explored and visited by different characters. I also enjoyed the fact that you could never be entirely sure about whether or not a character was loyal or not. The characters were actually very well written almost entirely across the board.

As just a straight up entertainment package I really enjoyed 'Sleepless'. It never lost my interest once and it knew its limitations. If you ever find yourself bored watching this movie then I would suggest action movies are certainly not for you. If you can suspend your belief and just sit back and enjoy the ride, I think you will find you'll very much enjoy this film.

First and foremost , this movie is not very fresh. One simply cannot pin point the exact movie with which Sleepless bears uncanny resemblance. Not because there are none , but because that are many.

I shall not divulge any spoilers here but long story short , the movie is directed in the fashion of some 80's and 90's cop movies. Having said that , the director failed to synergize the elements of a good 90's thriller and a 21st century flick.

The result is a fairly confused movie , with strange action scenes, insipid dialogue, textbook movie characters no comic elements , not the slightest trace of wry or even dark humour.

Designed to have the elements of mystery ( the who is who? kind) , the director misuses his actors and and the plot.

However,for some reason the movie keeps the interest alive. One knows that around the corner there lies a very ordinary sequence and typical dialogue but still the straightforward narrative succeeds in holding your attention .

I cannot pan the movie because it is ordinary and unimpressive . So much so, in fact, that one can tolerate it, to pass time.

I think the other reviews forgot to mention the great cinematography, lighting in the scenes and suspensful sound/music, and for the most part good acting, that lifts this action packed thriller story from average and gives it a nice dark edge and some bite. Turn down the lights and turn up the sound and get ready for action.

Jamie Foxx has a lot of enemy's, as established masterfully in the opening scene and the trailer, which means it makes sense when Jamie Foxx clarifies to his friend that "It ain't no easy grab, they got T". An original movie that has lots of super 0r1g1n4l set pieces like a casino fight scene and I'm really annoyed that john wick copied that scene before sleepless even came out. 10/10

So there's an active shooter in a nightclub, an active sports car swirling around in the nightclub, an inactive bystander, the police show up and guess who all 7 police officers focus on? You just got hold of a gun in a life threatening situation and you bravely decide to use your fist against an attacker who is bigger than you.

You're on a manhunt in an underground garage and you shoot smoke canisters without any gadgets to give you an advantage in the scenario you've just created and then you start firing indiscriminately.

I give it a 2 for the established reputation of the cast but this must be the worst movie I ever saw.

Jamie Foxx is always good value, especially when he's wounded. Although the only difference between his wounded and non-wounded state is that he stops every now and again, groans, feels his wound then takes off again as if nothing had happened.

I will refrain from making any jokes about the title - I'm sure there are plenty in the reviews here already - just to say that it bears no relevance to the movie at all.

Anyway, back to the movie. The direction, etc is just fine with a few set pieces, but the story is derivative, predictable and by the numbers. You'll even guess who the 'baddie' is long before the end.

As cop/action flicks go, it's not bad, but the point is, do you really want to spend your life watching so-so movies. There was absolutely no point in making this movie or telling this story, Jamie Foxx fans notwithstanding.

So if you're happy with low-bar movies, go watch it, but maybe you want to raise your expectations and, hope beyond hope, perhaps filmmaker will raise their game. But don't hold your breath.

You may go sleepless while watching this abduction thriller with a couple of stars, Jamie Foxx and Michelle Monaghan. They're Las Vegas PD detectives involved in drug busting with all the kidnap, corruption components in place.

The outstanding element is the awareness that an Oscar winner--Foxx--can be wasted in a hum-drum actioner that surprises not at all. Believe me when I tell you that if you stirred Liam Neeson in with this script, you'd know the difference only by the skin color of the kidnapped children.

Although director Odar does a competent job with the foot races and car chases, they are still boiler-plate staples of the genre. While Foxx spends most of the film improbably finding his son, losing him, finding him again in an almost Groundhog Day motif, the action becomes tedious quickly. His life-threatening-wound is ludicrously not debilitating except for a few high-priced Oscar grunts that end up immobilizing a goon or two who have no similar disabilities.

It was a dismal afternoon when I saw Sleepless because I love cinematic visuals and watching Michelle make something out of nothing. Otherwise, you'll be more careful about the safety of your children. That's the good part.

Not sure why this movie is averaging so low. Its not the greatest crime movie but it is decent enough. Acting is solid and pacing keeps things interesting. Action is well executee. Granted some things were quite obvious but its hard to not be in a genre like this. I enjoyed it.

6 Apr 2017 in an small room with even smaller number of people I start watching this movie that I "vouched" for my girlfriend because I quote " Jamie Foxx plays in good movies." Half-way through the movie I already asked her more than 3 times if she want's to go home and watch Star Wars ep-2 (we started watching it because she never saw it). Few people already left the cinema and we only stayed because we payed.

Every main or supporting actor is angry for no good reason. The soundtrack is angry. Most scenes are predictable and all intentions are extremely easy to reveal.

I thing is for sure. Jamie Foxx can also play in bad movies.

"Sleepless" gets away with a lot, mainly because of its proficient cast. The plot twists are completely implausible, but these actors are able to )mostly) sell it. Nearly everyone here is working for someone else, and Jamie Foxx almost typifies this; is he a dirty cop or really deep undercover? The movie never puts that matter to rest.

But it does maintain its forward momentum and has a distinctly heated flair for violence; case in point (again) Foxx, who engages in merciless fight scenes with just about everybody. One thing that really surprised me about this movie was its look; take away a couple of neon signs and you can't tell it's Las Vegas. How often do you see that city filmed without sleaze?

6/10

Based on the coming attractions, I wasn't expecting much, and I got even less. This is another good cop/bad cop, is he or isn't he, kind of flick, set in Las Vegas with lots of glitz and glamour to hide what is a very shaky plot. If the glitz and glamour aren't enough to dazzle you, the music tracks will deafen you, and your visual delights will be satisfied with death by knife, death by pistol, death by automatic weapon, death by shotgun, death by truck, death by wine bottle - just to name a few.

The acting is pretty good, all things considered, but the direction is appalling and the action-every-minute film has low spots.

Generally I like films about internal affairs. "Internal Affairs" (1990), "The Departed" (2006) and "Q&A" (1990) are my favorites.

The camera shakes for every second that it is focused 10/10

Jamie Foxx is Vincent, a cop in las vegas. involved in a drug deal gone wrong, with two dead bodies and lots of cop casings all over the scene. good thing Vince and his partner are chosen to investigate it. but here comes Bryant (Michelle Minaghan), internal affairs to check it out. and vegas bigshot Rubino (Dermot Mulroney) wants his cocaine back. so Rubino grabs Vincent's son. now it's on! oh, and it turns out Bryant likes to take short cuts. probably not good for an internal affairs officer. you'd think they would know better. This one has so much violence. and some silliness. there's no way someone with all those injuries (stab wound!) would be able to fight that hard. so many times! we finally figure out who the good guys and the bad guys are , but now we've lost track of the drugs. more fights. so many fights. it's okay. this one must hold the record for the most fistfights and gunfights in 95 minutes. directed by Swiss Baran bo Odar.

This is I what I call "a comedy of errors" Ridiculous, hilarious effort from Hollywood on a remake of "Nuit Blanche" (Sleepless Night), (2011). The original was truthful to its name. but this? if it hasn't been so loud I would have caught a nap.

What can I say? predictable, terrible directing acting, editing, and so on and so forth.

Repetitive but definitely not boring, because it is more of comedy than an action thriller,... what? anyone here was acting, my bad I thought they were joking!

"Saddest part"Jamie Foxx will never catch up with Denzel Washington!

Maybe if you haven't seen the original, you will enjoy it, particularly if you like a thrilling clash between the cops and gangsters. For me this is the third version from the last three consecutive years. After the original French film based on the same name of the book, followed by the Kollywood remake 'Thoongavanam'. The second film was not bad, considering the way it was made to the Indian standards. They did not change much, but in this one the initial parts were almost the same and the following developments were too much. I mean literally they turned it into twice thriller with tight action sequences. Their main idea was to leave the open conclusion for a possible sequel. Which was really too intentional that not everybody would be happy with, for like those who liked the previous versions.

The actors were good, but Michelle Monaghan was the best among. Unlike the same characters from other versions, I don't know how they turned Monaghan's role so powerful. That's the negative, as the film Jamie Foxx in the lead. Otherwise, as a neutral, this is not a bad remake. The Immigrant joke was trimmed off, since today's US is not in favour of such comedies in films. And many events, especially film scenes were accelerated. So the camera moves one place to another in a quick succession unlike other versions. Yeah, these changes were needed, since the film was not a fresh piece of work or even first remake. But like I said too muchness spoiled the party. Even though one time watchable film.

6/10