Surprise Introduction by the Director
Prior to the press screening of Locked, director David Yarovesky, best known for his work on Brightburn and Nightbooks, unexpectedly appear to thank the audience. More specifically, he expressed his special gratitude to both the press and the guests, and then stated that this was the first time he would be watching the already finished movie together with the public who he could not regard as his friends or colleagues. In addition, he said that a lot of folks initially assumed that Locked would simply be one of those movies that would be released exclusively on a streaming platform.
He recalled being told, “Oh cool, that’s totally a streaming movie,” which made it surreal for him to see the film presented at an AMC theater. He pointed out that the movie is actually a small-scale, independent production, and having it shown on the big screen was a significant moment in his life. Yarovesky’s words underline a certain point: Locked is actually one of the scarce, low-budgeted suspenseful movies that in the past were the certain hit in theaters. There were also the success stories of a few of them. For instance, projects like Kurt Russell’s Breakdown or Jeff Bridges and Tommy Lee Jones’s action film Blown Away were box office hits, bringing high returns with small budgets.
These days, these kinds of lower-cost, yet still potentially lucrative, films often end up barely noticeable on streaming platforms, because they are overshadowed by the massive marketing campaigns of mega-franchises. This change in the film industry, as it favors larger budgets and the brand names, has left much of the audience feeling the lack of the experiences previously available on the theater marquees.
Long-Lost Theatrical Experience
The industry’s ongoing reliance on massive franchises comes with risks, especially when out-of-control production costs undermine profits. Studios often bet heavily on these major blockbusters, which has inadvertently pushed smaller thrillers out of theaters. Because of this change, it is frequently remarked that mainstream cinema rarely produces movies like Locked anymore—films that are not part of a grand cinematic universe or a reboot, but rather original stories that rely on inventive premises and strong performances to captivate viewers. Thankfully, Locked offers both a nostalgic throwback and a modern-day testament to what simpler, self-contained thrillers can still accomplish.
Fortunately, Locked functions as a double-edged reminder of a different time, evoking positive feelings of nostalgia while also highlighting elements that might feel outdated. It belongs to what has been playfully described by Nirupam Dhakal (also known online as HugeAsMammoth) as the “White People Did What? They Got Stuck Where?” subgenre. That description, while humorous, is surprisingly fitting for the movie’s premise, which sees actor Bill Skarsgård, ditching his vampiric Count Orlok-style mustache in favor of a look reminiscent of Pete Davidson, assume the role of Eddie. Eddie’s petty criminal activities lead him to break into the wrong high-end automobile. In mere moments, he discovers that he’s locked inside a trap-rigged vehicle owned by William, a mysterious man portrayed by the legendary Sir Anthony Hopkins.
The car’s elaborate security system seems borderline absurd, although it makes a twisted kind of sense once you realize William is a wealthy, individual with a significant grudge, a preference for vigilante-style justice, and far too much free time.
Unconventional Setup
Because this car-based trap relies on contraptions only a rich octogenarian could afford, the stakes are unique, and the claustrophobic setting challenges Eddie’s survival instincts. This plot is based on many cliches known to everyone, but it unveils another psychological out of Eddie where he has to go through the hardest part of his life realizing that there is a person who can do everything and if they are ready they can maintain total control over his destiny. The unusual stage emphasizes the extreme benefits of independent movie production, where filmmakers are not afraid to explore inventive ideas and make bold decisions.
Adding to the label of the featured producer, Sam Raimi, a bigwig in the horror film industry, who regardless of the fact that he is not encroaching on the innovation mantra will still be tagged as genre iconic. Interestingly, this film is a reinterpretation of Argentinian movie 4×4. Like the rest of the remakes, the audience may or may not like Locked, but it sets out to remain connected to a more private origin by assembling a small cast, creating stillness, and a story about individuals’ struggle for preservation. Even though the characters’ dedication and the film’s relatable themes are on display, some might feel the overall suspense is not fully realized.
Ultimately, Locked can feel like a refreshing throwback for those who enjoy classic thrillers that test the wits of their main characters in a tightly contained environment. At the same time, viewers looking for a massive spectacle may find it lacking the kind of big, explosive punches more common in modern studio pictures. Nonetheless, its nostalgic appeal, its committed performances, and its clever premise present an opportunity to remember a bygone cinematic era when independent thrillers had a better shot at theatrical success.
Captivating But Disruptive
“Locked” goes through forced settings becoming increasingly more serious and heightened, creating a distinctive mixture of down to earth character drama and excessive dramatic flair. From the beginning of the movie, the main thing that draws attention is its direct intention of creating a suffocating tension that never reaches a climax, even so, it ends up entering into theatrical extremes. This paradox is shocking but at the same time, it comfortably defines the film, which tries to combine the everyday terror of confinement with surprising elements that push the boundaries of plausibility. In this way, the movie stakes out an unusual middle ground between the gritty realism often found in indie thrillers and the outrageous spectacle reminiscent of bigger-budget genre pieces. It is simultaneously too controlled in its thematic ambitions and far too wild in its gory, over-the-top sequences—walking a delicate line that sometimes wobbles in several directions.
Once Eddie, portrayed by Bill Skarsgård, finds himself stuck inside the luxurious, one-of-a-kind Dolus (a customized Land Rover), the film is faced with the challenge of making “one man trapped in a car” an exciting scenario. Generally, “Locked” succeeds, as Skarsgård commands attention with his intense portrayal of a petty criminal caught in an increasingly dangerous predicament. However, the introduction of security camera footage, showing Eddie from the perspective of William (played by Sir Anthony Hopkins), repeatedly interrupts the claustrophobic atmosphere. The film does not mainly rely on Skarsgård’s stunning portrayal, it sometimes also cuts to William’s monitoring angle, thus reminding the audience that someone outside the house is controlling everything. These parts can be very annoying, most of all when Skarsgård’s acting is so fascinating that every cut in the act seems to be an empty excess.
Shying From Politics
A central source of frustration lies in how “Locked” grapples with serious social issues without delivering a meaningful or bold stance. Eddie and William argue back and forth about systemic neglect, the flaws in the criminal justice system, the realities of poverty, and the differences between generations, yet the film stops short of making a powerful statement. Even though “Locked” is a remake of the Argentinian film “4×4,” it does not take the broader approach of the original, which expands its conflict onto the public streets and weaves in the societal fallout more extensively. By keeping the conflict primarily between Eddie and William, the film limits its perspective, thereby missing a chance to explore the complexities of how these same problems affect entire communities.
The car serve as a microcosm of society, but in opting for a more sanitized take on controversial themes, it fails to capture the variety of experiences and viewpoints that shape these debates in real life.
Given the intensity of today’s political climate, the film’s reluctance to go deeper can feel like a missed opportunity—or worse, a careless handling of weighty material. Strangely enough, while referring to its downright wild side, “Locked” “savvily” manages to convey the point that it is a Sam Raimi film. Its frequent and intense physical violence, in addition to the occasional moment of a graphic scene, lead to unexpected territories that can be both thrilling and appalling. One of the bright spots of the moving pictures depicts William handling the Dolus remotely to keep Eddie’s unawares daughter on her way back from school, thus in a way, he makes an already tense situation a wild ride to the heart.
A Missed Chance
Looking back, “Locked” was something that could have soared higher if it had thrown itself wholeheartedly into its gonzo style and attacked social satire. Besides, the newly committed movie would have struck us as a rather unexpected sleep hit since it was consisting of an audacious commentary and nerve-wracking thrills. Sadly, the final output seems to be similar to the sort of the unsung film that gradually gathers a small cult following, which is then fated to be discovered on the web platforms some years later under such headers as “This Forgotten 2025 Thriller is Finding a New Life on Netflix.”
Despite the problems, the film is a really good ride in terms of thrilling set pieces and the personal charisma of the cast. A movie of this ilk is sure to impress those who love a nail-biting and at times, hilarious thriller; “Locked” offers a theater experience rich in taut suspense—although it does not fully accomplish the idea it hints at cranking up the off-the-wall capableness it possessed.
From the very first moments of Locked, it becomes clear that much of the film’s success rests on the shoulders of Bill Skarsgård, who spends the bulk of the runtime trapped inside a high-tech vehicle, and Anthony Hopkins, whose taunting voice echoes mercilessly over the car’s internal speakers. From Skarsgård’s initial panic to Hopkins’ obvious glee in tormenting him, their performances crackle with energy. In fact, it’s hard not to notice just how much fun both actors seem to be having. Whenever Skarsgård’s Eddie slips up and drops an f-bomb, Hopkins’ William promptly delivers a tasing shock with casual delight, underscoring how unbalanced their power dynamic truly is. As the film progresses, the constant threat lurking behind Hopkins’ voice ratchets up the tension, but it’s also oddly entertaining.
Tension Versus Empathy
However, in the midst of this cat-and-mouse game, the film’s overall tension suffers because viewers may find it challenging to sympathize with William. Certainly, Eddie is in the wrong from a legal perspective, since he initially commits a crime by breaking into the vehicle. Yet, given today’s American climate, it’s next to impossible to see him as anything but the victim once William’s twisted intentions become clear. With his wealth and advanced age, William embodies the stereotype of privileged individuals who complain about neighborhood changes on forums like NextDoor. This portrayal becomes even more complicated when the film reveals William has, in fact, experienced a tragic loss at the hands of criminals who were never punished. Despite the obvious sorrow, it’s difficult to view William in a sympathetic light, especially when he channels his trauma into a personal vendetta, transforming his luxury car into something akin to a Saw trap.
Moreover, William’s approach to justice feels notably different from Jigsaw’s in the Saw franchise. While Jigsaw’s twisted experiments are often depicted as a desperate, horrific, response to personal desperation, William’s methods come across as a frightening form of sociopathy rooted in unresolved pain. Rather than dealing with his trauma through introspection or professional help, he lashes out randomly. The moment he catches Eddie, he makes him the sacrificial lamb for all his pent-up anger, aiming it squarely at someone who merely crossed the wrong threshold at the wrong time. Although William’s underlying reasoning stems from the systemic failures of society and an unresponsive judicial system, his rage ends up distorting that focus and landing squarely on Eddie’s shoulders. In many ways, this dynamic is where Locked finds its real emotional weight, exposing what happens when genuine grievances are twisted into cruelty that lacks any proportional sense of justice.
A Potent Undercurrent
Ultimately, the true strength of Locked lies in its ability to highlight how grief and rage can derail into disturbing territory if left untreated and unexamined. The film’s central conflict reveals how people who fail to find healthy ways to cope sometimes take out their frustrations on random targets, ignoring the larger forces that are actually responsible for their suffering. Eddie’s harrowing ordeal underscores this point by showing how one misguided individual’s vendetta can lead to horrifying extremes.
While the film delivers plenty of intense moments, it never forgets to remind the audience that William’s vendetta is personal only because he chooses to make it so. The world around him may have contributed to his bitterness, but his decision to punish a small-time crook in such a torturous manner epitomizes misplaced vengeance. Thus, the story goes beyond superficial shocks and enters a realm of deeper resonance that stands out against other revenge-based thrillers.
