Animals Review: Ben Affleck's Netflix Thriller Isn't Very Thrilling

In a recent interview, Ben Affleck revealed that while making his new Netflix movie "Animals," he used AI "for lots of things," adding: "we did use it. And in fact, I thought it was a good example because it's a very human movie. It's not in space, it doesn't have visual effects, but it allowed us to move in some cases more quickly, really mostly in post-production, to do things that otherwise we wouldn't have been able to do."

This shouldn't be surprising, since Netflix recently bought Affleck's AI startup company InterPositive for $587 Million, but it doesn't make things any less depressing. Even though there's a reasonable pushback against the use of AI, rich and powerful people are hellbent on forcing it on us, consequences be damned.

But knowing this immediately casts a pall over "Animals," not just because it's a bummer that Affleck used AI, but also because as I watched the movie I found myself constantly wondering how many shots were created with the tech (there are several establishing shots of LA locations that I'm 99.9% sure were created via AI, but I have no confirmation on that).

Even if you can overlook the AI detail (and to be fair, I'm sure most people half-watching this on Netflix as they use the Fanduel Casino app on their phone won't even notice), "Animals" is still a disappointment. It's a thriller that fails to thrill, and makes you wonder what happened to Affleck as a filmmaker. I'm a fan of several of Affleck's directorial efforts: his adaptation of "Gone Baby Gone" is excellent, and while "The Town" is derivative of several other better crime films, it's still pretty darn good. His Oscar-winning "Argo" is fairly entertaining as well, as is his Air Jordan origin pic "Air."

But his crime thriller "Live By Night" was a bit of a bust, and now so is "Animals," which plays out like a loose remake of Akira Kurosawa's "High and Low" — which was just recently remade by Spike Lee in the form of "Highest 2 Lowest." Affleck has assembled a talented cast (with himself in the lead), and "Animals" is never offensively bad. It's just woefully average, maybe even a bit below-average. Anyway, I'm sure it'll be the number one movie on Netflix by the time you're reading this.

In "Animals," Affleck plays Mark Kimball, a wealthy lawyer running (as an independent!) to become Mayor of Los Angeles. Mark lives with his wife Abigail (Kerry Washington) and their son Danny (Christopher Woodley) in a sprawling mansion overseen by friendly housekeeper Cecilia (Adriana Paz). Cecilia is hoping the Kimballs will give some work to her boyfriend Ramon (Luis Gerardo Méndez), but since Ramon is an undocumented immigrant, Mark thinks giving the handyman a gig will be bad for his political career.

Speaking of that political career, Mark has spent seemingly all of his family's money to help with the campaign. His trusty campaign manager Sam (Steven Yeun) assures him they can pay back the debt if and when Mark wins, but those money problems become much more dire when the Kimballs get a phone call on Halloween telling them their son has been kidnapped. Frantic and desperate, the Kimballs need help. Luckily, or perhaps unluckily, Sam knows someone: the mysterious, potentially sinister Dale (Gillian Anderson), a broker who handles these sorts of things. Dale is willing to front the Kimballs the ransom money — provided they agree to pay her back with interest.

As is standard procedure in these sorts of stories, nothing goes according to plan, and "Animals" follows the characters through one long desperate evening as they attempt to pay the ransom, rescue the kidnapped kid, and get away clean. In theory, this should all be pretty harrowing, but Affleck never manages to convey any real sense of danger. His approach is to simply have all the characters scream at each other as the camera wooshes around the room and the soundtrack hits a few ominous notes.

While never boring and consistently fast-paced, "Animals" is rote and unimaginative. I won't delve into spoilers, but the film ends on an extremely cynical beat that seems to be played as a kind of uplifting moment, and it left a bad taste in my mouth. Still, the cast is putting in the effort, or at least trying to. Anderson is the best of the bunch, fully embracing ice queen status to play Dayle as an enigma we just can't quite figure out. I'd honestly prefer an entire movie about her character instead of what we got here.

Affleck has done good work behind the camera before, and I hope he will again some day. But "Animals" feels like the ultimate Netflix movie, and I don't mean that as a compliment. Is this really the type of project you're passionate about, Ben Affleck? Ah well, at least you got that huge AI check.

/Film Rating: 4 out of 10

"Animals" is streaming on Netflix October 9, 2026.