User Reviews

10x10 is a by the numbers (pun intended) mystery thriller starring Luke Evans and Kelly Reilly in principle roles as a kidnapper (Lewis) and his victim (Cathy). The movie starts of interestingly if unrealistically enough when Cathy is kidnapped in broad daylight in front of a shopping mall. From there onwards what ensues is supposed to be a cat and mouse game between the two with the kidnappers motive becoming explained as well as the fact that Cathy is not an innocent victim in the story.

The relatively good aspects of the film are the acting by the two main characters and the nice house in which most of the movie takes place. The poor aspects of the movie are the increasingly weak story and the fact that Cathy has 3-4 excellent chances to overpower Lewis and subdue him and yet she gets recaptured every time. When the explanation is finally offered for the whole mess, the movie becomes even less believable as Cathy is actually a murderer who killed Lewis's wife and other patients in a hospital where she worked as a nurse. So this supposed Angel Of Death who had numerous chances to escape and/or kill her kidnapper allowed herself to be captured a number of times. It just doesn't add up.

Overall a poor thriller that could have been better if care was taken to develop the characters and make their actions more believable.

The movie desperately wants us to believe that the kidnapper took months to prepare his rapture. Yet, he comes up with a plan that makes ZERO sense. Why the hell would he try to kidnap her in broad daylight in the middle of a public place?? Why not at night, when she closes her flower shop?? This idiot almost got caught, by the way. This... brillant mastermind plan could have been trashed within seconds. Then, the girl takes over stupidity. On one occasion, she knocks out the guy. She could easily have locked him inside the room, but doesn't. She knocks him a second time (God, who is she? Captain America?), then she DOESN'T take the gun that lies near the unconscious kidnapper. What the hell, girl??? The "secret" between them is not interesting at all. The movie makes us root for the girl, then the guy, then the girl again, then the guy again... It's fine, but the plot is so stupid and boring that I just couldn't care. This movie looks like a cinema semester final project, filmed by amateur students with no budget. How the hell did Luke Evans get here?

We slowly learn why Robert Lewis (Luke Evans) has abducted a woman Cathy Noland (Kelly Reilly) from a LA Fitness parking lot, in broad daylight, and taken her to his home, only to be imprisoned in a sound proof 10x10 hidden room. As the movie progresses, many of the plot elements here are head shakingly ridiculous, which destroys much of the film's credibility, as I see it. It will all spiral down into a most wild, violent, and absurd finale.

Honestly it was so hard to get through this movie... One poor scene after another., where nothing made sense.

The woman kept beating his ass to the ground, yet she always left him in a fine state ready to overtake her again, until the end where she turns into some kind of monster.

I have no idea how this movie keeps a score above 3, which would still be a kindness.

Escape one time, hit the guy hard and doesn't finish him. Escape twice and she has the time to lock him into the 10x10 room and she doesn't. Last thing this 160 lbs woman is stronger than a 200+ man... shame.

Please do not watch this. This was so dumb. A man kidnaps a woman. He closes in a cell. He asks her all the time What is your name?? What is your real name? Anyway , we come to find out that this woman was a deranged angel of death who took the place of her dead sister and as a nurse she kept killing all the patients who had commited sins. But this could be interesting if we actually watched a movie of her actual action before. Not to see her incarcerated and being asked the same question all the time. The man knows that she was responsible for his wife death. He KNOWS that she is deranged and what does he do?? He allows her to move around his house wielding a knife at him. He feels safe because he has a gun but she actually cuts his with the knife all the time. I mean , in the end he kills her, after she has become a maniac with a gun. WHY DID NOT HE JUST SHOOT HER IN THE FACE AFTER SHE CONFESSED? This is not a story of someone who wanted to learn the truth and just let her go. He wanted all along to kill her. Why didn't he do it? Why did his risk his life and his daughter's life? And of course the poor nanny-cleaning lady who died because he was unable to kill the psycho. This movie was terrible. This is not a plot for even a tv series. NO .NEVER. They just put luke evans in the film so that they could project this movie in theatres

10x 10 is an unrated, tersely compact thriller. As something about a man who confines a woman to a soundproof cell only to find out that she killed his wife, "10" has a torture porn setting without the actual torture porn. Granted, the film could've stretched its running time past a mere 87 minutes for added absorption. Plus, there's a cliched clip of the authorities showing up conveniently after the final confrontation goes down. Nevertheless, 10x 10 leaves you torn and nomadic on which gender to root for. It serves up its transient premise in creepy and effective fashion.

"10" stars Luke Evans as the wealthy kidnapper and Kelly Reilly as the one being kidnapped. Evans is a tad wooden as Lewis when he is mourning his dead spouse through past home videos and random news footage. Reilly outmatches him as Cathy. She channels a sense of raw fear and raw distress as a would-be, bible-thumping criminal. Cathy and Lewis go at each other mano-a-mano and bloodied cat and mouse. They give 10x 10 the feel of being a violent, ungovernable, and unsettling affair.

Director Suzi Ewing (she helms mostly shorts) makes "10" atmospheric and woodsy in a Hostel/Human Centipede sort of way. She even uses a few long shots when the main damsel in distress is letting out shrill screams. Don't be fooled though. Ewing's narrative is wholly original and not really in the realm of horror fare. 10x 10 in totality, is more psychologically intentioned as opposed to psychotically intentioned. With a minuscule cast, minimal locations, and personas that have a high threshold for pain (and appetite for that matter), it's a low budget character study that's almost "ten"fold. My rating: 3 stars.

First of all, I'm not a fan of people who say the actions of characters in movies are stupid or illogical, or that no one would actually behave in that way, because usually they are talking about a situation that they have never personally been in, and more importantly, all people react differently to situations so who are we to say how the characters should react.

That said, these characters' actions are too absurd to be believed, and the only reason for such behavior is to further a silly plot. For example, the women held captive is going to bop the captor on the head (who is holding her hostage with a gun) and knock him out several times throughout the first 30 minutes of the movie, at which point she could easily grab the gun and be in control, but for some reason she repeatedly tries to run, at which point the captor magically awakens and catches her again, only to be hit and knocked out again, and so on and so forth.

Furthermore, it becomes clear right away that the captor knows she is concealing her identity by repeatedly asking her name and getting angry when she answers, "Cathy." So everyone knows she is not actually Cathy... but Cathy fails to realize this and is flabbergasted that he keeps asking who she is. She was arguably the most frustrating and annoying character to listen to, but one also has to wonder why Luke Evans does not just stop asking her name and reveal that he knows exactly who she is. It's stupidity of both characters in order to try to build suspense/mystery that really ends up being irritating.

On top of all that, the ending is quite unsatisfying. If you thought all this nonsense was building up to some awesome twist or revelation, you'd be wrong.

I think that had the screenplay for "10 X 10" had been given to several random people before filming started to get their opinions of it, those people would have most likely pointed out most (if not all) of the plot holes and illogical character actions. Then after a few rewrites to patch up those script weaknesses, we might very well have had a decent low budget thriller. As you have probably guessed by the first two sentences of this user review, this movie has more than its share of problems. I admit it's well produced on what had to be a very low budget, it's decently acted, and I was never bored at any minute of the movie. And the movie does start off well (if in a little familiar sense), getting you wondering what's going on and why. Unfortunately, after a time those aforementioned problems start coming up one by one. The two lead characters make some really stupid and unbelievable decisions on the fly (such as not beating their opponent to a pulp when they have the chance, or hastily picking up weapons when they have a chance), and the lead male character clearly didn't properly plan his big scheme very well. (He somehow forgot his daughter would come home later in the day while he was executing his plan?!?!) Despite a few good things to be found in the movie, more likely than not you'll be unsatisfied and frustrated before the end credits start rolling.

This film had extreme potential after watching the trailer, but failed due to unrealistic (very unrealistic) aspects of the film. This is a film that keeps you questioning the characters behaviors, but that's all it does. There is no deep connection with any of the characters simply because the lack of backstory. Also, 80% of the movie is filmed in a house, which makes it extremely frustrating to watch. SPOILERS: First, the good. The characters were played well, the filming and lighting was strong, and there was a good (poorly developed) story.

Really? In broad daylight at an LA Fitness? Next to a guy who is backing out? No.

Really? The guy is terrible at his job, allowing the girl to escape multiple times. Also, the girl gets good hits but never finishes him. These type of kidnapping films make me cringe. The ones where they attack their kidnapper but never knock him down hard enough.

There is hardly any character development and no depth behind the characters lives. The film seems to drag on and on, but finally comes to an end after multiple escape attempts.

SPOILER: Really, the title says it all. 10x10 is 0x0. I watched it until just after the housekeeper arrives and I switched it off in favour of watching a MARRIED WITH CHILDREN re-run. MWC was far more realistic and far more entertaining. I switched it back on just in time to see the ending, from the part where Lewis is stopped by the cops. Sigh. What a crapfest.

Imagine a film that uses the side-alley scrap from They Live as the template for its structure. Now take out all the humour. And all the suspense. And all the fun. And all the will to carry on. Congratulations, you have 10x10. Woeful, truly.

I should really thank the reviewers for lowering my expectations, and then myself for not caring about reviews or rather, for reading between their lines.

I am very content with this movie: story is good, atmosphere and music are used effectively. Few things are overdone.

Here is why this movie is realistic:

• Yes, there are vigilante religious nuts who take it upon themselves to punish people.
• Yes, "survivors" are made of selfishness and apathy. Kudos for that observation, that was fantastic. To survive, you have to adapt. To adapt, you have to accept the rules as they are. To accept is to maintain status quo, regardless of what it means for the masses.

It was a Darwinistic world eaons ago and still is, only because humans who draw a thick line between animals and themselves have failed to even want to better it. Surviving in a Darwinistic society tells a lot about you, or the Macchiavelli in you. Not talking about breathing here, obviously.

And just like a survivor does, a beast disguised in feigned innocence slowly unravels its ugly face. You get your hints though: The acting, the manipulation, the utter strength that comes from having no reservations.

The man's getting beaten a couple of times, was, to the contrary very realistic. How so? Well someone who is not accustomed to using violence on a daily basis is inclined to think others aren't, too. In other words, they are not cautious. Especially when they think they have the upper hand. It has nothing to do with your physical strength when you're taken down by surprise.

And because the man in question thinks he can reason with a survivor in some twisted, perceptibly life-threatening environment he put this survivor in, he is actually hoping for a change.

As stated in the movie, he didn't put her there to kill her. He put her there to judge her, force a confrontation, an admission of guilt. He put her there to see why she did what she did, and most of all, if she regrets it.

The captor was fooled into thinking the abductee had her own lines she couldn't cross. She had something human in her.

And in the end of the movie, where the real physical fight starts, we hear her letting the man know of this big mistake: "Did you think I would give it all up for you?"

Actors were in fact good. Scenes of realizations were shot well enough to feel immersive.

Predictability is of little value here. This is not a movie that challenges you to guess who will do what and who will win in the end. This is a psychological thriller movie where the biggest twist is the abrupt change in the transparency of personalities. Denial until the end, and then dropping the act to display one's true colors only when one thinks there is nothing more to be redeemed... is the true nature of a narcissistic suvivor that we all have in us to varying degrees. The build up of tension in the environment towards such breakdown was the perfect setting to render this transformation visible and in a striking manner.

The man carries a gun, but even during his knee-jerk reactions, he doesn't have in himself the selfish recklessness of this survivor of an inexorable woman who knows no bounds. That is why the fights were so realistic. The disbelief with which the man improvises was acted out perfectly by the actor. And same could be said of the actress as she transforms into a monster.

Both characters' actions and choices are wrong to different extents and you still can find yourself rooting for one over the other. That is because evolution made sure we have an inbuilt justice system which we call "conscience". It all sits well in this movie of a fight of altruism vs selfishnessness/sympathy vs apathy.

All this carried out without the torture porn, and still effectively to the point. There's some blood, and a violent scene of fight but I could cite countless movies held in high regard having much more violence in them than this one.

In short this movie is the portrayal of a sociopath versus a normal person going vigilante upon losing it when they yearn for actions to have consequences. Nowhere along the movie was I duped into thinking the movie was about something else. No feeling of being shortchanged.

And for those wondering why such movies are on the rise.My take is: Because we are in an era where we have seen laws selectively working for too long and we have pent up, toxic anger that we try to slowly get rid of our system by seeing a similar story told by someone else. It confirms our sense of justice and helps explain our anger, and draw lessons from what is actually a "simulation".

I've given this a 10 just to help outweigh all the low scores. Ok so it's clearly a low budget, there are a few scenes where you're screaming at the screen, why didn't she finish him off when she could? But hey, it's movie land, that's what happens, always. You want realism that why on earth do you watch movies?

So why did I like it? Was it worth a 10? Hell yes! Unexpected twist that makes you find yourself switching sides and being thankfull that all the things you wanted to happen didn't. So few movies around any more that dare to be different. When was the last time the victim was actually the crazy serial killer? 10 out of 10 for originality.

In my opinion, of course!

The strengths of "10 X 10" were in the two well developed characters, the ebb-and-flow of the action, the psychodrama, and the excellent performances.

The film begins with Lewis out for revenge on the woman he believes was responsible for the death of his beloved wife, Alana. Cathy-Natalie begins as the victim, but the film shifts into high gear when the crucial plot twist reveals her to be a liar and every bit as lawless and amoral as Lewis.

The essential developments in the narrative are the background on the Charleston Three, who perished in a Charleston hospital. But the court ruled that the medical staff was not responsible for the deaths. Thus, Lewis is not taking the high road when he kidnaps and tortures Cathy-Natalia in the 10 X 10 room.

The background on Natalie-Ann Stevens was interesting with her dysfunctional family in Green Bay, the infidelity of her father, and the tragic death of her sister, who strung herself up. Yet she clearly crosses the line when she takes on the role of vigilante in using her medical knowledge and position as a nurse at a hospital to "execute" what she deems as three miscreants.

The background on Lewis is equally intriguing. Was he so gullible that he never recognized that Alana was running around behind his back? Why was he absolutely certain that Natalie-Cathy had killed his wife. Was his goal in kidnapping Natalie-Cathy only to extract the truth? Or was he seeking a pound of flesh?

The film's ending left a great deal to be desired, as the filmmakers failed to provide a clear resolution about the fate of Lewis. At the very least, the physical evidence will point to Lewis as Natalie-Cathy's kidnapper. He should be facing years in prison where he will have the opportunity to contemplate the true nature of his marriage and the decision he made to toss Natalie-Cathy in his trunk.

Cathy Nolan (Kelly Reilly) a friendly woman who works at a flower shop, is abducted in an Atlanta parking lot and held captive in a padded room in a suburban home. We are given clues as to why Lewis (Luke Evans) kidnapped a woman who appears to be a stranger before it is explained.

Kelly Reilly gives us a gritty performance as the victim who just won't give up. Somewhat cliche but I liked the fight scenes.

Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity