griz1-199-491493 . . . this would be one cut by an amateur not realizing the stone's true potential. It's hardly polished at all; and is mounted in a setting wrought from an old tin cup. Between poor writing, dropped plot-lines (the sunglasses), 2-dimensional "cardboard cut-out" support characters and unnecessary sub-plots (the nerd and his faulty fuel gauge) . . . critics will find ample fodder to shoot this production down. But I rated it a 5 because it dared to tackle the uber mega taboo topic of the toxic femme. In a post-feministic culture where men are pigs and women are the saintly victims with excuses, this is a topic that needs more brave production crews tackling it. It is an "accepted factoid" that only 1/3 of convicted child sex offenders are female. But this doesn't consider aspects of the young male ego that would refuse to see such an assault by a woman as "abuse" to be reported . . . but rather as a boasting point of the boy's precocious sexual prowess (as the lead character notes, or as seen in the mostly forgotten Letourneau case where to this day the then-12-yr-old boy refuses to see himself as a victim). Only a fraction of actual assaults against boys by women go reported, and only a fraction of these go on to prosecution. And even then it takes considerable grooming and coaching to have a boy present himself in court as "the victim".The main theme of this movie is the kidnapping and alleged sexual assault of a boy by a "troubled" woman. Both of the lead roles are performed skillfully enough to carry the story. The sub- story of the antagonist's being the result of her own toxic mother "spewing her venom" all over the home so the father quietly leaves, is adequately integrated. But the part about the "educational abuse" of boys by feministic teachers (while a prevalent social problem) is dropped on us with all the tact of a turd in the punch bowl. As in "Whoa! Where did that come from??". These are all issues that while very prevalent in our society, are taboo to discuss -- let alone make a movie about. But they are issues we need to stop sweeping under the rug. This movie has value. But it is a value that has been squandered on poor writing/production. Here's hoping more effective productions bringing light to these themes are in the wings.

gradyharp Now and then along comes a new film by a young director who co-wrote a story and brings it to life with a degree of freshness that makes us look forward to further works from his hands. Such is the case for Rick Lancaster whose little film THE ABDUCTION OF ZACK BUTTERFIELD deserves attention. Rick comes to this project well prepared: he attended Harvard, Yale, NYU (Drama) and Cornell University where he graduated with honors with two Bachelors Degrees, and went on to earn a Masters Degree. Rick then attended Film Editors school in New York City, learned the craft and became a member of the Film Editors Union. Catching the bug for directing he found a friendly mentor (and producer) in Stephen Ryder, the CEO of Metropolis Films, whose skills in writing are well known (the highly honored and populate L.I.E.) and together these two men wrote the screenplay and gathered a young cast of very fine talent and out came THE ABDUCTION OF ZACK BUTTERFIELD. The story takes chances and that is why it works so well. A polished high school 14-year-old athlete (martial arts) and fine student – Zach (beautifully underplayed by TJ Plunkett) is not one to go along with his in-crowd macho classmates but has a fine and healthy relationship with his parents (Lisa Gunn and Aaron Letrick) and girlfriend Emily (Celine du Tertre). Out on a jog Zack is abducted by the beautiful April (Brett Helsham) who happens to be an Iraq and Afghanistan war veteran with a creepy dysfunctional family history. April cuffs Zack, tacks him to a hidden cottage in the back country, and places a necklace loaded with malleable explosive beads, and begins what appears to be a BDSM relationship. Gradually both April and Zack find aspects of their own needs fulfilled by the other and have a deepening if bizarre relationship. At home Zack's parents continue to watch for Zack's return and the local sheriff (played with unusual skill by Stephen Ryder) and FBI agents try to find him. An incident changes the plot after three months have passed - a young lad finds the cabin when seeking for assistance with his stalled car, sees Zack through the window, April notices and ends the lad's interference. Zack now realizes the full extent of April's war and childhood damaged psyche and the film ends with a surprise.The story is told with restraint, due no doubt to Rick Lancaster's sensitive direction, and there are many subtle inferences about the manner in which we are living at present that give the story significant substance. This is a strong film from a committed company and crew top to bottom and deserves a wider theatrical release.

Bill Davis I waited a long time for this to become available on DVD. It's an interesting idea for a movie and the trailer made it look like it could be a credible film, but it is close to bottom-of-the-barrel film making. Barely a notch above homemade YouTube video productions. For such a prurient plot line there is nothing in this movie that would make a nun blush. The most memorable sex scene involves them jumping on the bed as the camera moves away and points to the floor as the couple's articles of clothing are thrown there into a pile while music from Swan Lake is played. Swan Lake! It was like a parody of a bad lovemaking scene! The boy is appealing enough in the lead but every other performance in the movie seems amateurish. The young woman is nowhere near credible as a skilled and dangerous war veteran. And it ends abruptly with several captions to explain what happened after, which were both inane and unsatisfying. Somebody had an provocative idea for a movie, but no ability to deliver one.

JustinJKanter I have never felt so compelled to tell people to stay away from a film, a filmmaker and actors more than this film, this filmmaker and these actors. (so much so that I actually signed up for an IMDb account!) Not only are they wasting any audience's time. But you can feel the absolute waste of time they all must have experienced. After all, I only lost about an hour and a half of my time. A loss I deeply regret, but I can only imagine that the writers, producers, director and actors have lost much more time and have done irreparable damage to their reputations. The only good thing I can say is that actor playing Agent Quincannon reminds me of 70's porn actor Scott Noll, unfortunately he seems to come from the same deer in the headlights school of acting porn actors do. The sad thing is that the set up, the idea behind the film is not half bad. It's a little like Hard Candy meets L.I.E. (which this "screenwriter/producer" also created. He seems to be plagiarizing himself and doing some self-therapy all at once.)The execution however is so laughably amateurish that at every aspect from beginning to end you are slack-jawed at how anyone involved in the production didn't just walk away. That the actors had to deliver such leaden lines is one thing, but if you are gonna have such a terrible script then at least the producers should have insisted in casting better actors. Or perhaps this was a case of producers scraping the bottom of the barrel as no self-respecting actor would ever take on a role if they actually bothered to read the script.Did I watch the entire thing? Yes,I unfortunately did. Did I feel my time was wasted, no doubt. So why didn't I walk away? Because I expected at least something to happen to elevate it to camp status. That moment unfortunately never came, which leads me to believe everyone involved actually thought they were making something good.