|
Movie Review - Vantage Point (2008)
|
|
|
|
|
(What this rating means)
|
|
| |
|
| Director: |
Pete Travis |
| Starring: |
Dennis Quaid, Forest Whitaker, and Matthew Fox |
| Rated: |
PG-13 (for sequences of intense violence and action, some disturbing images and brief strong language) |
| Length: |
90 minutes |
| Genre: |
Drama/Thriller |
| Tagline: |
8 Strangers. 8 Points of View. 1 Truth. |
| Studio: |
Columbia Pictures |
| Website: |
Vantage Point |
| Release: |
February 22, 2008 |
|
PLOT
|
Spain is hosting a summit on the global war on terror. The U.S. President is there. Also in attendance are some folks, particularly those of
the global terrorist variety, who don't much care for America or her leader. So what happens? The president gets shot, several people witness
it, and the audience watches as clues are dropped and the truth behind the assassination attempt is gradually revealed. Non-linearity ensues.
|
|
JOHNNY'S TAKE
|
Fast. Slightly awkward. Intense. At times tedious. All words that have been used to describe kissing Johnny Betts. But they're also adjectives that
can be accurately attributed to Sony Pictures' latest release - Vantage Point. The film, much like a Michael Moore "documentary" being classified as non-fiction,
is a paradox. Its atypical, nonlinear story structure isn't exactly fodder for mass consumption. Those viewers who merely want to see "lots of junk explodin'" might
be turned off. Yet, elements such as a pinch-faced Dennis Quaid orchestrating a high-octane car chase aren't exactly the stuff of Academy legend.
A collection of near misses and coincidences, cliffhangers and resolutions, Vantage Point's biggest flaw is its forced effort and desire to be a thinking man's popcorn
movie. The plan's execution isn't flawless, but the important thing is it never strays from its original purpose - to entertain. Let's give it a gold star - it dares to
be different. Is it seamless? No, but at the least the seams aren't of the "Garth Brooks' Bright Orange Rustler" variety, know what I'm saying? No? Oh.
My point is the film's desire to veer from the norm increased my willingness to excuse its somewhat awkward delivery. Keep in mind that the story is as basic
as first grade math. The president gets shot, and everybody wants to know who did it. That's it. There are a few details thrown in later once we find out who the
perpetrators are, but backstory and character development are virtually non-existent. It's no small burden to take such a minimal plot and create an entertaining
theatrical experience.
So what we're left with is a presentation that is simplistically complex - we watch a 15-minute increment (approximately) of the events leading up to and proceeding
the assassination attempt, and then the movie rewinds and shows us those same events from a different perspective. This happens five or six times. Feel free to count and
give me an accurate number if you like; the lack of specifics don't dampen my amazingly accurate insight. This method isn't straightforward, but if you have the mental
capacity to finish a jigsaw puzzle then you can handle it.
The problem, as I mentioned above, is that the "rewind effect" becomes clumsier with each new perspective. Some of the audience became annoyed and would giggle and scoff
every time the rewind began and the clock restarted at noon. There's no denying that it's a gimmick, and at times it is tedious and just feels a little too much like a
trick, but I appreciated how each perspective managed to introduce new clues while also offering revelations from a previous perspective. I wasn't expecting perfection;
I just wanted efficiency, and the style is effective enough to keep the tension and guessing game at a near-maximum.
Another problem I had is the big "twist" isn't exactly revolutionary. Possessing what I like to call the "GOTCHA Effect," it obviously strove for shock value but
delivered a resolution of the "been there, done that" variety. But hey, when you walk into a film of this nature without hopes of Memento-esque proportions
then you can more easily roll with the familiarity.
Vantage Point is a perfect example of a movie that must be met with the appropriate expectations. It's fast, it's relentless, and it doesn't take an extended
amount of time to reach its closing credits. It also thankfully doesn't bog us down with bloated social commentary. The car chase at the end, though as
improbable as D.J. Qualls winning People Magazine's Sexiest Man of the Year, is a blast and has one intention - send audiences home with a burst of adrenaline.
I'll take that over a divisive political agenda any day.
If you know what you're getting then you'll be entertained. But if the structure confuses you, and you're the type to get a headache when forced to actually pay
attention to what's happening on screen, then stay at home and start doing crossword puzzles every now and then. Give that brain a little exercise, my friend!
|
|
ODDS & ENDS
|
- Sigourney Weaver's appearance in the film is fairly pointless and amounts to little more than a glorified cameo. Her character's picture currently resides on the back of a
mythical milk carton.
- Dennis Quaid was in The Alamo with Jason Patric who was in In the Valley of Elah with Josh Brolin who was in Hollow Man with Kevin Bacon.
|
|
MAMA'S APPROVAL
|
Not too bad in comparison to some of the filth that's out there, but it isn't exactly an animated Disney flick either. One "f" bomb, a handful
of G-d**ns, and a few "s" missiles are the worst offending profanities. We do see the president shot (via multiple angles), and the explosion
of the building is somewhat loud and could be frightening to small children, but violence is fairly minimal. There's no nudity, unless you count
a bare arm or two.
|
|
TRAILER COMPARISON
|
The trailer does a good job at introducing the film's premise, but it really gives the viewer an expectation of its nonlinear storytelling.
|
|
THE GIST
|
If you demand movies that go from point A to point B without any deviation then it might be best if you skip Vantage Point. Otherwise, I recommend
it as a matinee or future rental.
|
|
