Dead Man’s Wire 2026 Movie Review
Dead Man’s Wire is a dramatic adaptation of a hostage situation, directed by Gus Van Sant. Taking place in February 1977, the film follows a furious Tony Kiritsis holding a mortgage broker’s son at gunpoint. Kiritsis is played by Bill Skarsgård, and his frighteningly unpredictable performance is the glue to this extremely tense thriller. Also complementing the film is its attention to its period-detail, with the camerawork and sets reflecting the 1970s setting almost perfectly. With its no-nonsense premise and surprisingly suffocating suspense, Dead Man’s Wire would be an expertly designed film, if not for its quiet nature. Though its frequent silence fits the vibe of 1970s Indianapolis, it combined with its uninspired ending keeps the movie from being deeply etched in the mind.
Though some may note that Al Pacino is in the film, this movie’s real stars are Bill Skarsgård and Dacre Montgomery. Skarsgård makes Tony’s limited, expletive-heavy vocabulary feel remarkably expressive. His evil glances, rail-thin body, and disturbed demeanor make his character so commanding, that the first thing you would wonder is how he became both highly irrational and undoubtedly cunning. Montgomery enhances Skarsgård’s scary presence, as his equally great performance is so convincing, that it would not be hard to believe there really was a loaded shotgun pointed at him during shoots. Colman Domingo’s role as Fred Temple also impresses, as he tries to handle being lassoed in an incredibly dire situation. Domingo’s face subtly shows Temple’s often frightened and surprised feelings, but he also uses his voice to demonstrate his ability to calmly approach this perilous scenario. Domingo really shines and is easily the strongest supporting role in the film. Other talented actors include Cary Elwes and Myha’la, but the script limits their screentime greatly, leaving no lasting impression. Al Pacino especially has a considerably small presence. Fans might be disappointed to hear that he appears in the film for five minutes at most.
The laid-back 1970s atmosphere is also a highlight. With much of the film being behind the lens of journalists’ retro cameras, plus the noticeable film grain, as well as the characters’ appearances being accurate to the time frame, Dead Man’s Wire has no struggle immersing the audience. It is easy to forget that most of the actors on screen were born after the 1980s, thanks to the vintage, 35mm camerawork and inflections from the people witnessing the crime. Its cozy, green fluorescent presentation stands in great contrast with the script’s staunch intensity, giving the picture an even more disturbed veneer. Even so, the austere approach, combined with its almost non-existent score, leaves Dead Man’s Wire with little cinematic flavor. In its lack of evocative elements, the movie favors consistency over monumental scenes. It may fit the film well, but as I type this, I struggle to recall any standout moments, despite being gripped the entire time. Even worse is that its ending feels hollow and halts the great momentum the picture had prior, largely due to it being in a hurry once the tautness is relieved.
The line between declaring Kiritsis as a nut or a hero is pretty blurry in Van Sant’s film. It suffers from being seemingly unsure whether to lionize Kiritsis as a folk hero or study him as a sociopath. His motivation is there, and it seems enough to push this emotionally-charged person to pursue his crime. Unfortunately, Dead Man’s Wire suffers from embracing second-screen viewing practices, which adjust the film to audiences who shift their attention to their phones out of boredom. To keep the inattentive up to speed, Kiritsis explains his motive several times throughout the movie, with little to no variation each time he does so. If he answers the phone, expect to hear him recount his misfortune again. It is very repetitive, and it distracts from the masterful tension it mostly maintains. Even with his grievances clearly known, the film makes a weak argument in favor of this man’s “bravery.” Though his consequences lead to arguably favorable outcomes, his cold, bloodthirsty methods are not to be glamourized. In the film’s attempt to also highlight his maddened state, it is executed practically perfectly. With his inconsistent mood, obviously troubled upbringing, and clever evasions, Dead Man’s Wire successfully turns this largely forgotten story into a truly (and rightfully) scary event in American history.
This film, aside from the few traps it falls in, is an entertaining, somewhat educational adaptation that is worth checking out. It is aided greatly by dedicated performances and a clear vision. While that vision comes at the expense of something more impactful, it results in a very immersive, claustrophobic experience. It is at its best when hysteria is prominent, highlighting how a dry, uninteresting day could turn into a scarring nightmare. Despite its impact on those who lived through it, its unceremonious style might leave many to forget about it within a year or so, which is a shame given how well made it is. But do not let the film’s fading presence fool you, this movie is a haunting piece of history that deserves to be seen.
