Explore
 Lists  Reviews  Images  Update feed
Categories
MoviesTV ShowsMusicBooksGamesDVDs/Blu-RayPeopleArt & DesignPlacesWeb TV & PodcastsToys & CollectiblesComic Book SeriesBeautyAnimals   View more categories »
Listal logo

Vantage Point review

Posted : 11 years, 4 months ago on 18 December 2012 11:26

Taking action movies to a new level, Quaid stars in this suspenseful and complex journey of a presidential abduction and assassination. Follow this story as told from the perspective of seven different strangers and how they are all linked. Can you unravel the mystery before the end is revealed?


0 comments, Reply to this entry

many loose ends-one truth----stinker

Posted : 11 years, 5 months ago on 24 November 2012 05:12

How do we begin?The President is shot, Secret Service agents chase down a "shooter", unconnected characters intersect in increasingly meaningless ways. Oh and did I mention the GROUNDHOG DAY-esqe time rewind? Audible audience laughter is not what you expect to hear in a thriller. When a film with such a reasonable premise is butchered and ultimately ends up dying an ignoble death, my first question was where was the strong hand of the director? Or the screenwriter? This film stinks of heavy handed hacking after test audience screening. It must hurt to lose control of your film.

I was teased by what appears on paper to be a stellar cast-William Hurt, Dennis Quaid, Sigourney Weaver, Forest Whitaker, Hollywood's favourite LOST boy-Matthew Fox. I can only hint at the angry disappointment I felt after the credits rolled. All of these actors have performed admirably in similar roles--here they are groundless, and the prestige they could have brought to the film is squandered.

Sigourney Weaver brings some pathos, only to be cast aside when her story plot is terminated. Dennis Quaid tries his best as the Secret Service agent trying to quell his demons, but he's not Clint Eastwood, and this is not IN THE LINE OF FIRE. William Hurt can be Presidential in his sleep, give him some depth please. Matthew Fox has no reason speaking bad Spanish when his co-pilot is speaking perfect English, Forest Whitaker does his best mumbly, stumbly, heavy faced bit, but his part in the story is simply meaningless, I'm happy he gets to reconcile with his wife and son, but please people, The President has been shot, blown up, kidnapped, drugged and tossed around an ambulance in a multi-car pile up....so is it ESSENTIAL to waste a final shot on Forest talking on a cell phone to his unseen son??...Someone must have some minutes to use up.

Ultimately VANTAGE POINT is half the film it could have been, it lacks sufficient character motivation or back story, the characters are caricatures, the script is diluted to the point of meaningless and while it sports a great climatic car chase, the final scene is as implausible as they come-----a highly trained band of ruthless conspirators, toting the latest in high tech gadgetry, killing co-conspirators as they see fit, assisted by an inside man, successfully pull off TWO intricate operations and on the road to getting away scot-free, only to be undone because an irrelevant character JAYWALKS!

Come on, we are smarter than that and as film makers you should be smart enough to know that.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

An average movie

Posted : 11 years, 9 months ago on 8 July 2012 09:29

Honestly, beforehand, I didn't heard much about this flick so I didn't know what to expect but since I was given the DVD, I thought I should give it a try. Basically, if you expect a masterpiece, you will be disappointed but if you expect a decent thriller/action flick, you will probably enjoy it. Basically, it is one of those movies which keeps rewinding the action over and over again, showing it again but from the different point of view. Of course, it is a known gimmick and it is not really original. It has been done before and better than this but I still think that there were many things to enjoy. First of all, there were a pretty good cast (Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, Forest Whitaker, Édgar Ramírez, Saïd Taghmaoui, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt) and they all gave some decent performances. Furthermore, I thought that the directing was really dynamic, kynetic and just pretty convincing. Unfortunately, like most of the American thrillers, at some point, to tie the whole thing up, they keep throwing some annoying and unbelievable twist(s) at you and it kind of ruined the movie for me. Still, it remains a well made and entertaining thriller and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

All Gimmick, No Substance

Posted : 14 years, 11 months ago on 24 May 2009 05:21

The film would have been better if it answered why to any question that could be asked about the characters and their motivations.

It just seemed kind of empty to me.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Intense political actioner

Posted : 15 years, 8 months ago on 13 August 2008 05:06

''The beauty of American arrogance is that they cannot imagine a world in which they are not a step ahead.''


At its core, Vantage Point is a hybrid creation: an amalgamation of Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon and the hit television series 24. In fact the film could effortlessly be perceived as a sibling of 24 as it contains intense political drama, terrorism, the President of the United States in peril, and a fairly convoluted conspiracy to uncover. Mind you, what's missing is Jack Bauer (although, to be fair, it does star Matthew Fox who plays a Jack on TV's Lost).

Vantage Point is an imaginative, frantic, nail-biting, gripping political actioner that spends its 90-minute duration illuminating one series of events from different perspectives. Personally, I found the film extremely flawed but underrated. I was dubious to approach the film due to the largely mixed reviews. However, this is an above average attempt at a killer concept. While the film feels incomplete and occasionally thoroughly preposterous, it achieves its goal of providing entertainment. The opening few scenes will successfully reel in a viewer due to the intriguing and compelling nature of the story unfolding. The filmmakers cleverly adopt an effective approach to lensing the action that resembles such modern action films as The Bourne Ultimatum. While this exercising of quick cuts and shaky cam has grown tiring over the years, here it's actually fruitful in its engagement of the audience.

The fundamental story concerns an attempted assassination on the President of the United States, Henry Ashton (Hurt). This basic premise is enlightened with a series of differing perspectives, mirroring recent films like Crash with a slight drop of Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon moulded into the story.
At a landmark summit on the global war on terror in Spain, President Ashton is gunned down. The film then concerns the chaotic ensuing events as the manhunt commences for the shooter. The film primarily involves the proceedings that initiate at midday and conclude 23 minutes later. Bits are replayed from various perspectives: this includes viewpoints of Secret Service agents (Fox, Quaid), President Ashton, an American tourist (Whitaker), journalists and even the terrorists themselves.

Vantage Point is approached with a high level of technical aptitude. Running at a brisk running time of about 90 minutes, the director keeps events taut and engaging. Most commendably, the director is skilled at keeping constant visual continuity. We witness events from multiple angles...sometimes up to even 10 viewpoints courtesy of the media, surrounding buildings, and the various civilians on the ground mixed in the chaos. The intensity and turmoil following bomb detonations and bullets fired is enough to echo the collapse of the World Trade Center on that fateful day in 2001. The final 20 minutes shift the film's tone from drama to action. There's a terrifically filmed car chase blended with various other action-packed happenings.

However, the film's primary faults are in its script. At times the dialogue sounds natural, but at other times contrived. At several times you'll be tempted to laugh at the dialogue. For example, Quaid's Agent Barnes finds the President heavily bleeding. Barnes inquires "Are you injured?" The multiple story-line approach does work to an extent, but only selected characters are delved into in any degree of depth. We're supposed to care about the various characters as we watch their stories; however it's impossible with insignificant time allocated for character development. As typical betrayals happen, we never understand why. Then there are the loose ends. We become so involved in all the excess supporting characters without a pay-off. Some characters appear to be established in the opening scenes...only to disappear entirely. Because these characters are slightly developed, we become curious about them. There are too many questions without answers.

I also briefly mentioned the stupidity of the film. Towards the final confrontation, things become extremely silly as characters are quick to draw guns on each other, and the stunt driving for the final car chase is too unbelievable. Another thing is the failure to give the story any level of credibility. We never believe the story for a single minute simply because the concept could never happen. And then of course the clichés are also in place, like the never-ending clips in firearms and a customary character betrayal. Yes, the film is entertaining...it's just too silly to live up to its full potential.

Dennis Quaid is no Kiefer Sutherland. Where Sutherland in TV's 24 has a deep voice and instils incredible intensity to a situation, Quaid usually falls flat. Matthew Fox found fame in the television series Lost. I never liked his acting in that show, and I still don't like his acting here. He simply takes himself too seriously and his eagerness always shines through in all of his acting. Forest Whitaker is an Oscar-winning actor who never appears to do much in the film. He has a video camera, yes, but the rest of the film he's endlessly pursuing people and trying to help. The screenwriter never grants him a moment to shine. Whitaker's relationship with a young girl also feels out of place and superfluous. Also in the supporting cast there's William Hurt, Edgar Ramirez and a cameo appearance of Sigourney Weaver. Many of these actors are underused.

Overall, Vantage Point has its flaws but it's an extremely entertaining movie. The competency behind the camera is palpable with solid direction and an ear-shattering sound mix. The action is frequent and exciting, even if there isn't much point to it. Maybe with more depth and a heightened intelligence level the film could have achieved its potential.
Vantage Point, which was initially dosed in realism, enigmatically shifts its mood in the concluding 15 minutes; staggering into clichéd action-thriller territory with a car chase that, while exhilarating, does not seem appropriate. Likewise, you'll undeniably snigger as Quaid belies the realism, becomes indestructible and, once the action has receded, conveys some of the cheesiest lines this on side of Top Gun. Sadly the film loses its grip and abandons the brutal tone. This film merely reminds us how fantastic the Jason Bourne franchise is for its virtually unequalled ability to have never crossed the line.

7.1/10



0 comments, Reply to this entry

Could have been better

Posted : 16 years ago on 14 April 2008 10:04

The trailers billed Vantage Point as a fast paced action/thriller but what you get is more of a slow burn as each viewpoint brings in additional pieces of the puzzle.

The first few re-tells get a bit repetitive but the once more information is given things start to pick up. Plus there are some great action sequences (the car chase with Dennis Quaid will get your adrenaline pumping).

However my main fault with the movie is the twist near the end. It totally spoils the film because it comes out of left field. There is no explanation or logical reasoning for why this particular character would do such a thing.


0 comments, Reply to this entry

Fast paced action

Posted : 16 years, 2 months ago on 27 February 2008 06:43

The previews made this film out to be a fast paced action movie and it was. This was an "A" ticket action ride. From the opening scene to the ending you will enjoy yourself.

Another reason that I liked the film was from the way that the story was told. It was kind of like a Tarantino film from the way that the story was told from different characters points of view. Each "vantage point" gave you new pieces of the puzzle until they were all put together towards the end of the movie.

The acting was top notch, the action was well done, and the story worked. I think you will enjoy a night out at the movies watching this movie. It was very entertaining and worth the ticket price. Enjoy!

Flash


0 comments, Reply to this entry