I liked the movie. Consider it very psychological. And I don't think that the serial killer does matter. It is just the way of Emmett to express his desire to live and give a trace in the world. He is struggling so hard to solve a murder, knowing that it will be the last thing that he will do. The twist in assassin's head to kill or not to kill is that he himself does not think that he is capable of doing it. He wanted to be a good cop all his life, but he was just an ordinary guy who could not do anything of his life. And when Steven Bracket insults him and tells him those things, he knows that it is true. At the same time he is jealous at young detective, because he is everything that assassin had ever wanted to be. The end is really surprising. We are going back, like in the circle. The normal life continues, and somehow we know what will happen no matter that it is not shown.

It was made in Philly, my hometown, and having Gabriel Byrne plus Tim Roth probably assured some decent acting, but as luck had it, Pam figured out the mistaken diagnosis before the film was 15 minutes old. Thus as I watched the rest of the film develop, I kept thinking in the back of my mind, 'does the Police Health & Welfare Plan rule out second opinions?' Man is told he is going to die soon from an illness, and he doesn't see if the doctor could be mistaken.I read the other reviews where some praise and some damn the film's open end style. In this case I think the writer(s) may simply have run out of inspiration or ideas. Do we want Emmett to go back to his girlfriend, or get involved with his co-worker? Who knows? We will let the viewers decide. What does it mean when Roth can't pull the trigger? Is this some sort of comment on his whole sexual life, or is he granting life in place of the one he took previously? The pose seems almost out of Michaelangelo's Creation on the ceiling at the Sistine. Is failed detective Roth giving the spark of life to the man he just wounded? The questions keep piling up. The serial rapist drives an SUV; so does Emmett? Coincidence? I have played solve the crime board games that were more enlightened than this series of questions.Pam, and another reviewer, commented on the phone conversation between Emmett and Roth. I'd driven past this intersection on April 4th of this year. The camera actually dresses up the area, and while there is a union hiring hall nearby, and the area is less than a mile from police headquarters, the site of two white men standing on that corner meant that it was either just after daylight or an optical illusion. In fact, I found the views of neighborhoods during foot chases eliminated any of the demographics of Philadelphia. The only Black people we see seem to be policemen.

Scott Wolf has the unique problem of looking like he's twenty when he's nearing forty. In Emmett's Mark (the better name of this movie because it can refer to more things, such as his signature, his legacy and his end), Wolf is a believable living character despite his unchanging looks. He plays Emmett Young well. The terminally ill Philly Homicide Detective is a real person with understandable doubts and fears. A character that is lived in, not just faked.The seamless acting, direction and editing is a highlight of this poorly received film. As is Tim Roth (Cunningham in Rob Roy), as the soft-spoken first-timer hit man. A character trying to dig himself out of the hole of a failed life. His casting convinced me to hold off flipping the channel. If you can see it for free (or a nominal fee) it is not likely to inspire your wrath against the production.Gabriel Byrne, comfortably becoming a terrific character actor, plays a Mafioso type, who arranges the 'mercy killing' and adds to the quiet, morose atmosphere of a dark story about the lives we fight for and those that we abandon when times get too tough. There are many interesting themes and strange developing emotions laden in the film.Not a masterpiece, due to the musical score, though it had allusions to other films that have made more wake in the cinematic world that in retrospect were borderline copyright infringement. The final scene is taken, as far as I know, directly from the airport scene from HEAT, which is taken from Bullitt. This is the movie business, not church. No one wants a new idea when they can have a good idea.Emmett's Mark is an Interesting, unique, non-threatening film, although the main character pays someone to kill him before the cancer does. Things sort of just work out for Emmett and against Tim Roth, but it is still a bit of a downer.

I bet on paper this movie is way better. The story is somehow intelligent and has a lot of clever twists and turns but, on screen, it has some failures and basically in the overall acting zone. I think maybe it's because the main role doesn't reflect the hard conflicts he's living in and with the exception of Byrne and Roth -both giving strong performances-, the rest of the cast is halfway through the intensity I assume was really needed to make us live the plot. On the other hand, I think the camera does a fine job trying to capture the best angles in order to show the deep core in the story and the settings helps a lot to the looks and mood, full of dark nights, gray skies and very cold buildings. Nevertheless, if on script this idea sounds pretty interesting, the way it is developed by the characters leaves a sensation of underplaying which is something sad due to the somehow edgy material written. You realize how clever the screenplay was once the film is finish, when you reconstruct all the matters and personal motivations in your head. Emmett's mark it's not a despicable thriller but is not a go-see-it-now either. I give it 6/10