With Animals, Ben Affleck returns as both director and leading man in a thriller that, on paper, has all the ingredients needed to make an impression. A strong cast, a kidnapping that turns an apparently perfect family life upside down, and characters forced to make difficult decisions under immense pressure: it sounds like an excellent foundation for a gripping crime thriller. Unfortunately, the execution proves less convincing than these ingredients might suggest.
Animals ultimately turns out to be a fairly standard genre film, with its biggest selling point being the sheer number of familiar faces in its cast. The story offers enough developments to keep things moving, but it struggles to turn those events into genuine suspense, emotional investment, or a distinctive identity. On top of that, the characters repeatedly make decisions that feel so implausible that it becomes difficult to fully immerse yourself in the story.
That does not make Animals a bad film. There are enough moments when the thriller delivers what you would expect from the genre, but the overriding feeling is that there was considerably more potential here.
What Is Animals About?
In Animals, Ben Affleck plays Mark Kimball, a candidate running for mayor of Los Angeles. When his son is kidnapped, Mark and his wife Abigail, played by Kerry Washington, find themselves trapped in a nightmare as they do everything in their power to bring their child home.
The kidnapping threatens not only their family life but also Mark's political ambitions and financial situation. As time begins to run out, more people become involved in the unfolding events. Secrets emerge, and the characters are forced to make decisions that could have far-reaching consequences for their lives.
The premise offers plenty of opportunities for a compelling thriller, one in which moral dilemmas, personal interests, and the limits of human conscience take center stage. That makes it all the more disappointing that Animals does not always make the most of these possibilities.
Ben Affleck Fails to Fully Convince as the Lead
Ben Affleck is generally a capable actor who, in the right role, can deliver a convincing combination of charisma and restrained intensity. In Animals, however, those qualities are less evident. His portrayal of Mark Kimball often feels flat and uninspired, making it harder to connect with the situation his character finds himself in.
This is particularly problematic because the film relies heavily on Mark's reactions and decisions. His son has been kidnapped, and he faces a situation in which every choice could have serious consequences. You would expect the character's desperation, fear, and inner conflicts to remain palpable throughout the film.
Instead, Affleck often comes across as somewhat detached. That is not necessarily a problem in itself, as a restrained performance can work extremely well for a character trying to keep his emotions under control. Here, however, that restraint frequently lacks the intensity needed to make it compelling.
Fortunately, Animals features a cast that includes several recognizable names. Kerry Washington, Gillian Anderson, and Steven Yeun add to the film's appeal, while the various characters seemingly offer plenty of opportunities for interesting interpersonal tension.
Still, a strong cast does not automatically make a strong film. Despite the talent involved, not every character is given enough room to come to life. As a result, the cast sometimes feels more like a collection of familiar faces than a group of characters who collectively form a convincing and engaging drama.
Implausible Decisions Undermine the Story
One of the biggest problems with Animals is the way its characters respond to the events unfolding around them. Throughout the film, they repeatedly make decisions that feel far from believable.
From a thriller perspective, there is sometimes a case to be made for this approach. Characters making poor decisions can create unexpected twists, while impulsive reactions can cause situations to spiral out of control, giving a story additional momentum and urgency.
The problem is that Animals relies on this device too often. The characters frequently seem to make decisions because the screenplay requires them to, rather than because their behavior follows naturally from their personalities, circumstances, or relationships.
This makes it increasingly difficult to take the events seriously. You might understand why a particular decision is necessary to move the story into its next scene, but that does not mean you find the decision convincing.
The result is a thriller in which the plot regularly seems more important than the characters who are supposed to carry it. While this approach helps move the story forward, it comes at the expense of credibility and emotional engagement.
In a story about parents willing to go to extreme lengths to save their child, it is particularly important that the protagonists' decisions feel believable. When that fails, the threatening situation itself loses some of its impact.
Animals Lacks Genuine Suspense
For a film that revolves largely around a kidnapping and the desperate attempts to bring a child home safely, it is surprising how little suspense Animals ultimately manages to generate.
That does not mean nothing happens. The film regularly introduces new developments, complications, and obstacles intended to put even more pressure on the characters. On paper, there are enough ingredients to keep viewers on the edge of their seats.
However, a succession of events does not automatically translate into genuine suspense. A compelling thriller needs more than characters constantly finding themselves in one crisis after another. Viewers must also feel that the outcome is uncertain and that the consequences of every decision carry real weight.
This is precisely where Animals falls short. The film struggles to give its events sufficient emotional impact, meaning that many developments fail to land as effectively as the filmmakers presumably intended.
The characters do not always help matters, either. When their behavior feels implausible and their relationships remain underdeveloped, it becomes harder to genuinely worry about what happens to them.
As a result, the suspense remains fairly limited throughout much of the film. There are moments when the story moves quickly enough to hold your attention, but a truly gripping thriller experience remains largely out of reach.
Too Many Distractions, Not Enough Character Development
Another problem is that Animals regularly takes detours that do not always contribute much to the central story. The film attempts to connect several narrative elements, but it does not consistently manage to bring these developments together in a natural or meaningful way.
Some of these detours could have been interesting if they had received more depth. They offer opportunities to explore the characters, develop their relationships, and provide a clearer understanding of why they make certain decisions.
Unfortunately, that rarely happens to a satisfying degree. The film spends time on developments that distract from the main storyline without providing enough character development or emotional depth in return.
This is particularly frustrating because Animals remains relatively simplistic in the way it tells its story. Despite its various plot elements and complications, the overall narrative never develops the layers you might expect.
The film especially misses opportunities when it comes to personal growth. The extreme circumstances in which the characters find themselves could have provided an excellent opportunity to explore their personalities, relationships, and moral boundaries in greater detail.
What happens when people are placed under enormous pressure? Which beliefs survive when their own interests are at stake? And how much are they willing to sacrifice to get what they want?
These are interesting questions that fit the story well. Animals touches on such themes but fails to explore them deeply enough to make them genuinely meaningful.
Ultimately, the film feels like it has plenty of possibilities at its disposal but only makes use of a limited portion of them.
The Villains Remain Too Much in the Background
One of the most noticeable missed opportunities in Animals is the limited attention given to the villains' perspective. Although the events surrounding the kidnapping form the central premise, the antagonists are not given enough room to develop into fully realized characters.
This is a shame, because their perspective could have added another dimension to the story. By providing greater insight into their motives, relationships, and personal circumstances, the film could have explored the situation from multiple angles.
That would not only have added depth but could also have helped build tension. When viewers better understand who the antagonists are and what drives them, confrontations and unexpected developments can carry considerably more weight.
In Animals, however, this side of the story remains relatively underdeveloped. The focus is primarily on the protagonists and the problems they face. This creates a one-sided perspective that eventually begins to feel somewhat monotonous.
As a result, the antagonists too often function as plot devices rather than interesting characters capable of taking the story in more meaningful directions.
It is another example of how Animals misses opportunities to rise above the genre's average offerings. Giving the different perspectives more attention could have resulted in a richer and potentially more suspenseful experience.
A Standard Thriller Without a Distinct Identity
Ultimately, this may be the biggest problem with Animals: too often, it feels like a thriller that simply checks off all the familiar boxes without adding enough of its own identity.
The recognizable cast, kidnapping, moral dilemmas, and increasingly dangerous situation combine to create a familiar collection of genre elements. There is nothing inherently wrong with that. A film does not always have to be innovative to succeed, provided the execution is convincing.
With Animals, however, that extra spark of inspiration needed to elevate a standard story is frequently missing.
The film manages to hold your attention at times, but it rarely surprises. Events unfold, characters encounter new problems, and the story moves toward its conclusion. Yet the overall experience feels too calculated and detached to leave a lasting impression.
The combination of a strong cast and an interesting premise also proves insufficient to compensate for the screenplay's shortcomings. There is a better film hidden within the foundations of Animals, but the finished product fails to make enough of that potential.
What remains is a thriller that does not entirely fail but does little to distinguish itself from similar films in the genre. It relies heavily on familiar ingredients without developing enough personality, suspense, or emotional depth to rise above them.
Final Verdict: Animals Is Entertaining Enough, but Easily Forgotten
Animals is not a bad thriller, but it is a film that struggles to live up to its potential. Ben Affleck and his recognizable cast provide plenty of initial appeal, while the premise offers enough possibilities for a tense and layered story.
Unfortunately, that potential is never fully realized. Affleck's somewhat flat performance, the characters' frequently implausible decisions, and the lack of genuine suspense make the film less engaging than it should be. These problems are compounded by distracting subplots, limited character development, and a lack of perspective from the antagonists.
The result is a film that contains enough of the right ingredients to qualify as a decent thriller but too often feels as though it is running on autopilot. Animals comes across as cold, conventional, and detached, as if it is more concerned with meeting the expectations of its genre than delivering a genuinely compelling cinematic experience.
That does not mean the film has nothing to offer. If you are simply in the mood for a crime thriller featuring a recognizable cast and an accessible story, there is enough here to make it worth considering. Just do not expect anything particularly suspenseful, original, or emotionally gripping.
Rating: 6/10
