|
Forwardcharm |
 |
Latest News 09 / 03 / 2010 08 / 03 / 2010 17 / 02 / 2010 16 / 02 / 2010 31 / 01 / 2010 25 / 10 / 2009 02 / 08 / 2009 18 / 08 / 2005 |
Vantage Point
Vantage Point gives the curious impression of trying something new while simultaneously feeling very familiar.
Vantage Point does reasonably well, and is undeniably entertaining for its deceptively short running time. You won't be bored, but you won't be particularly impressed either. I enjoyed this film: I think the average moviegoer will enjoy it: Testosterone Satisfaction Rating: To enjoy this film you should be: a fan of the TV series 24.
|
||
It must be soul-destroying for a movie-maker to look outside his own industry to the mass market. He pours his heart and
soul into a movie, dedicates six months of his life to perfecting his work of art, only to realise that you and I see it
as just another movie -
a movie that we might see if we have nothing better to do one night, but we aren't really arsed one way or the other.
It'd be like lovingly creating a new cocktail that perfectly blends the aroma of jasmine with the flavour of chocolate,
while still getting you delicately shitfaced, only to have your philistine clientele bolt it, belch, and ask for a packet
of peanuts. It is with this in mind that I carefully describe Vantage Point as being vaguely interesting.
It must be much the same for Dennis Quaid. He's been in loads of movies. He's a millionaire many times over and has
walked more red carpets than I've had blow jobs, but what impression does he leave on the average Joe? "Oh yeah, that guy.
Wasn't he in Innerspace? What's his name again?" Same goes for William Hurt. No, he's not the guy whose exploding stomach
you remember from Alien, he's the other Hurt. Matthew Fox (the shiny one from Lost) must be having second thoughts about
his involvement in the movie, but at least he has the regulation movie good looks to see him through. Forest Whitaker is
painfully underused, only having the opportunity to look lightly bewildered throughout, and Sigourney Weaver is inexplicably
unseen after reel one.
OK, so where does that leave us? Well, seeing the same scene over and over makes the film seem longer than it is -
I couldn't believe the remarkably short claimed running time of 90 minutes, but it's accurate. Presumably to counter this
impression of longevity, not one single second is wasted - everything you see moves the plot forwards - and that helps.
Although there is a car chase to satisfy the action junkies, it falls woefully short of the
