Don't listen to the negative reviews

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

The real plot of the movie, which most viewers didn't get because they were too busy trying to defend how the racist caucasian cops weren't racist & that they were only seen as racists because it was a couple of black men specifically "experimenting" on them (which isn't at all what they were really doing), is how one man is trying to get his hands on a large sum of money for his daughters' very much needed surgery for what I'm assuming is for an organ that she is too high on the waiting list to receive so he's relying on the black market in Argentina. To do so, the father and his partner, who may be a relative, cut a deal with a money launderer, assuring him they can take $300,000 fake bills and replace them with $300,000 securely from a real bank all under the false deception that they are performing a social experiment for a university, which we find out later in the film, but as we also find out the two also tell the cops that along with returning the stolen money (which is actually the counterfeit money) to the bank they also donate a good amount of money to the sheriff's department to cover any resources, such as the video tape the cops are required to use to record any interrogation on the suspect. The video tape is crucial to the plan which is why the con's are seen consistently making sure it is recording everything. The tape is played back in front of the sheriff and the con's after the "university experiment" lie is explained, so that the cop believes that he has treated the suspect with racist comments and methods such as saying the word "boy".::some reviewers are mad at this because they don't realize that, YES, the con IS pushing racism out of the cop who may not have actually been racist until meeting the somehow intimidating con.. some reviewers say "if this were in front of a black sheriff and a white con then the sheriff would still react racist by accident, which may be true, but THAT IS THE POINT ::if the sheriff act's on emotion, even a little and says something racist, such as "boy" when the con spit in his face (which is noticed after the con accused the sheriff of calling him "boy" even though the sheriff swears he doesn't recall saying that, it's because he might not have but the con needs him to), then the sheriff would be too cautious about his actions to let the tape be shown to anyone, so as needed by the cons -the sheriff will destroy the tape and the check made out to the department by the university for any trouble during the experiment (claiming in anger or embarrassment "we don't need your money"), which is good for the cons who don't actually want to be seen, via tape, in the town or actually have permission from any university to write a check out in their name. As we find out at the last scene of the movie, the bank robbery was actually Plan B. Plan A, as we can piece together after the key words earlier in the movie "if I can't accomplish this then what is my point in living", is to have the father die so that the family and daughter receive a very large life insurance.::if you're one of the people saying this movie wasn't realistic, because you may be an actual officer of the law, then "congratulations" you just pointed out that it's a freaking movie, not everyone who watches it is going to be a cop -- including the writer.::This movie is NOT (completely or maybe at all) about showing how racist cops can be towards African-Americans (therefore there's no point in complaining that If the roles were performed vice versa on different races, then the opposite race would be racist too). It's about pulling off a con. Though if you hadn't realized it was the latter, and only assumed the movie was pulling the race card too much and unjustifiably, then the writer may have actually pointed out a little racism hidden in you, because that was another point, that it MIGHT not have been justified, seeing as how these suspects were pulling a con. << Big TWIST again, yes the movie is full of them, on and off screen apparently.

Sorry, but if this type/style/genre of movie is going to be the new standard then let's bring back the crosses and burn them on the front lawns and record the socio-traumatic effects on the Certain Ethnic communities. Let's get the full impact as we diagnose what happens when we tell the law that I can walk the streets after a shocking event as a "White Man" with no ID covered in gasoline and tell the authorities to go F@@@ themselves in their line of duty no less. Let's develop a new concept for getting needed monies by stealing professionally and tell them how to do it. Remember one very important fact NOT made. You steal from a FDIC secured bank here in the states and the FBI is called first! Why wasn't it done here and why didn't the locals contact the State Police to confirm the so-called collegiate study and its potential outcome? Because it would NEVER happen for if it did you would be doing hard time. Better yet how about a movie where 2 Non-Black individuals go to the hood and pretend to shoot a known drug dealer and study the effects of all parties involved. Only they use blanks and return the coke back to the dealer?

"The Suspect" has all the polish and professionalism of some grad-school student's final project for a PhD in Cinema.The premise of the movie is so improbable and loopy that it requires a complete suspension of disbelief even to get through it. However, I won't reveal what that premise is, for to do so would be to engage in the biggest plot spoiler since "The Crying Game." All I can tell you is that it involves two African-American men who may have robbed a bank in a rural Midwest community. "May" is indeed the operative word here, for it turns out there is far more to the story than what appears on the surface.If all that sounds somehow intriguing, then I'm doing more justice to the movie than it actually deserves. I don't question the good intentions of those who made the film, but it so ineptly directed and so badly acted, so filled with screeds and bromides about racism and justice, and so bogged down by over-earnest plotting and a confusing time-shifting narrative, that even the best of intentions can't make a silk purse out of this particular sow's ear.I've deliberately avoided identifying the individuals responsible for "The Suspect," both those in front of the camera and those behind it, and I wish them nothing but the best in their future careers in movie-making. But I doubt anyone will be rushing to claim credit for this underwhelming, if well-intentioned, cinematic misfire.

The first 3/4 of the movie were interesting, and I could have given it a 6 or 7 out of 10, but several things didn't sit well that made the film a far stretch even for a movie..The premise is basic. Two college professors perform a "sociological experiment" in several midwest towns, seeing just how prevalent an undercurrent of racism is. The context of this is staging a bank robbery in very small towns where there are no other African-Americans and one guy rob the bank, then leave the other guy on the side of the road to be found by the police. Then comes an interrogation where the potential prejudice/racism can come out. It becomes justified as an "experiment" and they get pardoned from jail to go on their merry way because 1) the money gets returned and 2) the "experiment" context (ie potential for the scenario being published) leaves the sheriff embarrassed enough to let the suspect go.The first big problem I was bugged by, throughout the entire film, was that if you rob a bank, it's a crime. Even if you give the money back. Even ATTEMPTED robbery is a crime. Obviously, there's no specific evidence of who robbed the bank (wearing masks, long clothing, etc), but the moment your partner shows up at the sheriff with a bunch of money that comes up to the amount stolen from the bank, you'll get arrested. Embarrassment aside, you've committed a crime. Secondly, the theme of racism comes up many times but I fail to see how the behavior is racist. If you happen to show a bit of dark colored skin while robbing a bank and there are no dark skinned people in the town, then a dark skinned fellow is on the side of the road outside of town under ambiguous circumstances, it's a logic conclusion, not racism. Racism would be looking for an African-American suspect and stopping every African-American in town when there is a certain percentage of such. Using overgeneralized identifiable information on a selection of the population. But if a midget robs a bank and there are no midgets who live in town and then you see a midget on the side of the road who can't come up with a clear alibi, then you're going to conclude that the midget did it. That's just logic. It's almost like this movie was trying to overdo the race theme for some cheezy after-school feel-good purpose.Third, in a town where people are genuinely racist, they don't talk as politely as these sheriffs do. They throw out the N-word like it's nothing. These people's behaviors was not racist, it may have been prejudiced to an outsider, but his skin color was not a factor except that it shared identifiable information to the bank robber which no other citizen in the town could identify with. But that's a minor issue.The ending had a double twist. First, the partner never made it to the sheriff station, with the money. So enough of the situation is explained to the sheriff so they end up going on a search for the missing guy and his car. Turns out it ends up over a cliff (are there even cliffs in the midwest?), and the partner is dead. The money is in a bag, and the sheriff insists on the money first, pulled up via winch. They're apparently going to keep the money and say they let this fellow go (surprise!)The problem I have here is that this supposed college professor of psychology never gave question to giving the money (his leverage) to the police. Granted, the money in the bag was counterfeit. But with the winch gone, how would the guy ever get back to safety? It seemed like a long ways down. This somewhat reveals the second twist. Or perhaps there are three twists. The money they return to the bank is counterfeit. Did nobody care enough to check the serial numbers? OK, maybe that doesn't matter. Apparently they are "fake" robbing banks under the pretext of a university sociological experiment so as to acquire enough money for - surprise - the guy's dying daughter (ie black market organs from Argentina). They switch the real money for some counterfeit, and keep the real money.Except this is where the final - and perhaps sappy - twist comes into play. The cops take the supposed bag of money and then douse the guy stuck down a cliff with gasoline, then set everything on fire. Except the guy never bothers to get up. He just sits there, screaming, in the fire. He doesn't seem to care. He doesn't bother moving, or trying to survive. Seems really stupid. And this is where the final sappy twist comes into play. He dies, and he has this life insurance policy, that pays out $8 million that can then pay for his dying daughter's black market organ/surgery! Sappy ending.Maybe I'm the only one who caught it, but I don't see how the ending is plausible AT ALL. First off, the guy was telling the sheriff his FRIEND'S name, ie "Freeman Finch". Yes, they both died, but seems that they got burned. How can anyone be identified? Who would bother informing the insurance company? These fellows manipulated and conned the cops, so it's in their interest to pretend they don't exist. I guess maybe to close the case on the robbery they had to explain that these guys died in a car crash. How the tire popped and lose control made no sense either. What's ironic is that part of the movie's appeal is the race card played against the sheriffs, except it really was played against the movie watchers, because they really were keeping the money.