I watched this film at the weekend and was very impressed. Some spoilers ahead.
Ben Affleck’s Animals arrives as the kind of crime thriller that refuses to treat a crisis as a simple puzzle to be solved. Directed and co-written by Affleck, and starring him as Los Angeles mayoral candidate Mark Kimball, the film begins with the alleged kidnapping of Mark and Abigail Kimball’s son and the demand for a $7 million ransom. From there, it steadily tightens its grip, turning a family emergency into a volatile examination of what happens when private fear collides with public ambition. One of the more interesting aspects is that the wrong boy has been kidnapped, but they follow a similar course of action in any event, this time for political reasons.
The premise is immediately effective because the ransom is more than a financial obstacle. It becomes a pressure point that exposes the fragile arrangements holding the Kimballs’ world together: family loyalty, political calculation, money, reputation, and privilege. Mark has built his public life around confidence and control, while Abigail, played by Kerry Washington, brings an equally compelling intelligence and force to the marriage. Yet, one of them has been playing away. As the crisis deepens, the couple are pushed into choices that make it increasingly difficult to separate what they feel from what they need the public to believe.
What makes Animals so tense is its atmosphere of sustained uncertainty. The film understands that suspense does not depend only on sudden shocks; it can also grow from the uneasy spaces between decisions, revelations, and competing versions of the truth. The pacing is controlled and suspenseful, allowing dread to accumulate while the ransom demand and the kidnapping keep every conversation charged. Even when the immediate danger seems clear, the larger question remains unsettlingly open: what else will be sacrificed to preserve the family, the campaign, or the image of respectability?
Affleck gives Mark a committed performance that makes his contradictions difficult to dismiss. He is a man accustomed to presenting certainty, yet the kidnapping forces him into a landscape where certainty is impossible. Washington is just as compelling as Abigail, giving the character emotional depth, strategic force, and an unmistakable sense of someone who understands the costs of every public gesture. Their chemistry is one of the film’s central strengths: the relationship feels intimate and pressured, shaped by affection but also by fear, mistrust, and the brutal practical demands of the situation.
The supporting performances add further weight to the film’s moral unease. Gillian Anderson and Steven Yeun make strong impressions, bringing the same level of commitment to a story in which no one can remain untouched by the Kimballs’ crisis. Their work helps widen the film beyond a single household, suggesting a surrounding world of influence, scrutiny, and competing interests. The result is a thriller populated not by easy heroes and villains, but by people whose positions and choices become harder to interpret as the pressure rises.
At its most effective, Animals is about the collapse of power and public image under pressure. Mark’s political identity cannot remain separate from the frightened father beneath it, and Abigail’s role within the family and campaign becomes increasingly complicated by the demands of survival. The film’s treatment of privilege is especially sharp: wealth and access may create options, but they do not guarantee safety, honesty, or emotional control. The $7 million ransom becomes a stark symbol of that contradiction, turning abundance into another source of suspicion and conflict.
Affleck also gives the film a polished visual style that suits its subject. The presentation feels deliberate and controlled, reinforcing the contrast between the Kimballs’ carefully maintained public world and the disorder threatening to break through it. That polish never softens the material. Instead, it makes the unraveling more striking, as composure, status, and political confidence are placed under an increasingly unforgiving light.
This is deliberately dark and emotionally demanding filmmaking, and Animals does not offer an easy release from the consequences of its premise. Some viewers may find its intensity difficult, but that difficulty is part of its strength. The film takes its themes seriously, asking how far people will go when love, money, power, and reputation become impossible to keep apart. Its darkness feels purposeful rather than decorative, giving the suspense a lasting emotional charge.
For me, Animals succeeds because it understands that the most frightening collapse is not necessarily the loss of control in public, but the discovery that control may have been an illusion all along. With its tense atmosphere, moral complexity, polished craft, and excellent central performances, it is a gripping crime thriller with something substantial on its mind. Affleck and Washington anchor the film with a powerful, uneasy chemistry, while the supporting cast strengthens its sense of a world watching—and waiting—for the Kimballs to fail. The result is a dark, intelligent, deeply engaging film that lingers well after the immediate suspense has passed.
Five stars out of five from me.









