| Author |
Message |
|
Nebs
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 8:01 pm
Posts: 6385
|
 Vantage Point Vantage Point Quote: Vantage Point is a 2008 American political action thriller film directed by Pete Travis. It was adapted from a screenplay written by Barry L. Levy. The story focuses on an assassination attempt on the President of the United States as seen from a different set of vantage points through the eyes of eight strangers. Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, Forest Whitaker, William Hurt, and Sigourney Weaver star in principal roles. The film is often compared, unfavorably, to Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon, which also employed the telling of a story through multiple perspectives, but in order to question the possibility of "truth". Unlike the Rashomon effect, Vantage Point recounts a series of events which are re-enacted from several different perspectives and viewpoints in order to reveal a "truthful" account of what happened. Vantage Point explores kidnapping, assassination and terrorism.
The motion picture was a co-production between the film studios of Relativity Media, Original Film, and Art In Motion. It was commercially distributed by Columbia Pictures theatrically, and by Sony Pictures Home Entertainment in home media format. The film project began principal photography in Mexico City on June 18, 2006. Executive producers for the film comprised, Callum Greene, Tania Landau, and Lynwood Spinks. On February 26, 2008, the Original Motion Picture Soundtrack was released by the Varese Sarabande label. The film score was composed by musician Atli Örvarsson.
Following its premiere on February 22, 2008, Vantage Point grossed $72,266,306 in domestic ticket receipts. The film was screened at 3,163 theaters during its widest release nationwide in the United States. It earned an additional $78,895,185 in business through international release to top out at a combined $151,161,491 in gross revenue. The film was technically considered a strong financial success due to its $40 million budget costs. Preceding its theatrical run though, the film was generally met with negative critical reviews. The widescreen DVD and high-definition Blu-ray Disc editions of the film featuring the director's audio commentary and interviews with the cast and crew, were both released in the United States on July 8, 2008.
_________________
---!!---!!!!!!-11!!---!!---11---11!!!--!!--
|
| Thu Feb 21, 2008 3:49 pm |
 
|
|
|
The Mr Pink
What would Jesus *not* do?
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 12:55 am
Posts: 829
Location: Going Up the Down Escalator
|
Re: Vantage Point Ehhh, from my vantage point this should've and could've been a much better film. There was nothing really bad about the movie its just that there wasn't anything really good about it either. If you can get past the part were the secret service are a bunch of bumbling boobs who have no clue on how to protect the president then you should be able to enjoy this film more than I did. The part that really bugged me was that in a post JFK/911 world the secret service would never in a million years allow the president to speak in that enclosed plaza. Plus the constant fade to blacks and starting the day over again at 11:59:57 am from the perspective of a different participant got old really fast and only served to slow the film way down. I really hated the it turns out his partner is involved in the assassinantion aspect the film took The story is so easy to figure out, the who the why and the how, that you'll be mad when your worst fears are confirmed and they really end it the way you hoped they wouldn't. There are worse ways you could spend your time ( Meet the Spartans or Witless Protection) but there are better ways as well. Grade C-
_________________
Top ten of 2008, Updated!
1. Slumdog Millionaire
2. Wall-E
3. Dark Knight
4. In Bruges
5. Tropic Thunder
6. Young @ Heart
7. Mongol
8. The Band's Visit
9. Visitor
10. Iron Man
|
| Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:33 pm |
|
|
|
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
|
Re: Vantage Point Intriguing premise, mediocre execution. The "rewinding" to the presidential assassination gets really old by about the third time, and the movie threatens to provoke unintentional laughs and dive into the realm of parody by about the fifth rewinding (the audience actually began to laugh). Speaking of unintentional laughs, the movie has plenty courtesy of some truly horrid dialogue near the end and some rather blank performances from a cast who look bored. There is no context and no background to explain why these people want to assassinate the president, which doesn't really help. The film isn't the worst way you could spend your time, but it just feels really repetitive and bland. It will drift from my memory in the next couple of days. C
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 12:42 am |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
Re: Vantage Point This is what happens when you give Crash the picture for an oscar.
Its like the dam girl and her cape storyline, only worse much worse.
I can't even begin to get into how utterly stupid the ending is to this movie, let alone all the problems with the movie (including the failure of it to even execute the idea of vantage points properly).
D-
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:18 am |
|
|
|
MGKC
---------
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 10:42 pm
Posts: 11808
Location: Kansas City, Kansas
|
Re: Vantage Point Agreed with what's said so far. I had high hopes for this movie, it just turned out sub-par. They needed to make the transitions between the vantage points much smoother and not like a power point presentation. The audience NEEDS to forget their watching a movie, always. A little more character humor would have helped. Something to make us feel for the characters a bit more.
In the end, it was a bit predictable what was possible to figure out. The rest of the movie was just watching a con play out and the hero winning. Then there's the curiousness of Dennis Quaid's indestructability. Wrecks his car into 3 nonmoving large objects, then gets crushed by a semi, only to climb out with some pleasant scratches and no limping whatsoever.
Grade: C+
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:32 am |
|
|
|
Christian
Team Kris
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:02 pm
Posts: 27584
Location: The Damage Control Table
|
Re: Vantage Point This was an unfunny reinterpretation of Groundhog Day.
_________________A hot man once wrote: Urgh, I have to throw out half my underwear because it's too tight.
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:25 am |
|
|
|
El Maskado
Arrrrrrrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhh!
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 8:17 pm
Posts: 21572
|
Re: Vantage Point The movie seems to suffer from its own gimmack. I do like stuff where points of view are seen from other persons perspective like the cancelled Boomtown, however Vantage Point seems to have suffered from this aspect and would have been much better told if it was a straight story. It gets ridiculous to the point of having it reset to the 7th person's perspective and loses alot of time much better well spent on explaining the real motives of the terrorists. By having the perspectives retold so many times gets extremely redundant because not all portion of the point of view was vital to the story. Its not to say Vantage Point is a bad movie but it did get very messy
C+/B-
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 4:51 am |
|
|
|
makeshift
Teenage Dream
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:20 am
Posts: 9247
|
Re: Vantage Point Ah, my first proper 2008 movie...
Vantage Point is this close to being a sterling example of style-is-substance filmmaking. Too bad it gets caught up in stupid, ultimately pointless details in an attempt to make us care about the characters. The decision to omit any reasoning behind the terrorist attacks is a correct one, so it's all the more puzzling to see the film waist its time on "character development". Do I really care that Forest Whitaker is a separated father of two? When I see a movie like Vantage Point, I want 3 cuts every half second. I want the narrative to shift and escalate every five minutes. I want double-backing, triple-backing, and quadruple-backing in all its Rashomon-like glory. I don't want needless exposition. Director Pete Travis (disturbingly close in name to movie critic uber-hack Peter Travers) gets so many of these things right it makes it all the more frustrating when he drops the ball on something as simple as cutting fat off. The bad acting/dialogue didn't bother me since this is a shiny B-movie in principle and execution anyway, but the cringe inducing final minutes are a bit too heavy on the cheese for even me.
Ultimately, Vantage Point is another artifact in the sordid history of movies that have trailers better than the final product.
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:15 am |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
Re: Vantage Point Christian wrote: This was an unfunny reinterpretation of Groundhog Day. Heh, Seriously though, the writer really wants me to believe after Successfully kidnapping the President, the terrorists are going to basically committ suicide all of because of 50 lb little girl? Gimmie a motherfuckin break, the blew up what 2 bombs, or was it three, they have no idea who they killed there, they are shooting people left and right.
If terrorists were truly that dumb and easily swayed, we wouldn't have a war on terror.
The head guy goes from an uber phone (my boyfriend actually has the same phone, I sure the fuck wish it could do that shit), which controls shit to ruining the whole thing because he'd have to kill one child.
Stupid does not begin to explain this film.
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 2:59 pm |
|
|
|
Libs
Sbil
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 48626
Location: Arlington, VA
|
Re: Vantage Point I also really did not enjoy how... They never explained why Matthew Fox was involved in the conspiracy or for what reasons. I mean, I didn't really care that much, but it made no goddamn sense.
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:07 pm |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
Re: Vantage Point Libs wrote: I also really did not enjoy how... They never explained why Matthew Fox was involved in the conspiracy or for what reasons. I mean, I didn't really care that much, but it made no goddamn sense. The more I think about this movie, the more none of it makes sense, had it not sucked I might not care. I mean the last two vantages points were totally inconsistent, whose point of view was the last from? The one from the cell phone dude showed his stuff he could not have seen/heard.
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 3:27 pm |
|
|
|
Thegun
On autopilot for the summer
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:14 pm
Posts: 21641
Location: Walking around somewhere
|
Re: Vantage Point I really liked it, it didnt need to rewind, it could have just cut to the different perspectives, so other than that ametuerish feel to it, I thought the cinematography, and perspectives were top notch. Its another one of those thrillers you've seen before, yet its still effective in its style and different characters. It helps that it has a very strong cast. I knew the villain from looking at the trailers, but it still unfolded great. I dont get whats so confusing about the film. It's not going to be the most plausable thing from the getgo. And, they didnt want to assassinate the president, that was there intention to get away with the kidnapping, which was untold. And with Fox, the story was never told from his perspective, so we arent given his intentions. Finally, the main terrorist saw the girl throughout the movie, and often smiled, so he had a particular conscience that that girl. I liked that parts of the plot werent explained due to a Perspective not being told. Was it a great thriller, absolutely not, but its short and copies a style from a great German film, and is effective most of the time. Dennis Quaid needs a new barber and perhaps some laxative as he looked old and constipated most of the film. The cast is fun though, especially Weaver and Hurt, and they should have had more to do. I liked that there was really no main character of the film. B+/A- _________________ Chippy wrote: As always, fuck Thegun. Chippy wrote: I want to live vicariously through you, Thegun!
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:01 pm |
|
|
|
Grill
Forum General
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 11:01 am
Posts: 8684
|
Re: Vantage Point Libs wrote: I also really did not enjoy how... They never explained why Matthew Fox was involved in the conspiracy or for what reasons. I mean, I didn't really care that much, but it made no goddamn sense. Overall pretty much a give or take movie. Just can't get too excitied when you know where the movie is going. On Fox, he did make one throw-away comment in the car about not having to live a double-life anymore. Guess: Probably would be something in his family background. And maybe it will be discussed in the extended edition?
|
| Sun Feb 24, 2008 5:05 pm |
|
|
|
Mr. Inc
Veteran
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:50 am
Posts: 3350
|
Re: Vantage Point Caught it yesterday before the Oscars, it's so meh. Defintion of meh. It could have gone way but went another. I prefered the first 10 minutes in the editing room more than anything. C
|
| Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:20 pm |
|
|
|
Shack
Devil's Advocate
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 2:30 am
Posts: 38011
|
Re: Vantage Point Yeah, no desire to see this movie. I was pretty shocked when the trailer came out and everyone had excellent and awesome on their lips, I think one person even said it was one of the best trailers for a thriller they'd ever seen. Always looked generic and likely very hole-filled and dumb to be. *shrug*
_________________Shack’s top 50 tv shows - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=90227
|
| Mon Feb 25, 2008 7:39 pm |
|
|
|
thompsoncory
Rachel McAdams Fan
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 11:13 am
Posts: 14544
Location: LA / NYC
|
Re: Vantage Point What a disappointment. This looked great from the trailers, but it ends up being just another underwhelming thriller. Granted, quite a few scenes are good - and the action sequences are great. But the execution of the plot itself is just awful. The "rewinding" technique does not work in the slightest and by the end it becomes groan-inducing. The ending also makes absolutely no sense and relies way too heavily on coincidence for my taste. The cast does the best they can, but none of the actors really make much of an impression. I was somewhat entertained, but it's just too flawed of a project to fully enjoy. C+
|
| Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:09 pm |
|
|
|
Jim Halpert
Stanley Cup
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:52 pm
Posts: 6981
Location: Hockey Town
|
Re: Vantage Point first 40 minutes were B material, last 45 minutes were F material.
D+
|
| Fri Feb 29, 2008 12:46 am |
|
|
|
zingy
College Boy Z
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
|
Re: Vantage Point I thought it was solid, but could have been a lot better. Definitely enjoyed the style of the film (although the audience disagreed; they laughed every time the clock was set back to 12:00). A lot of things weren't really explained, and without the context of why the assassination is taking place, why certain people were involved, and other things, it didn't feel complete. It was just entertaining and that's all.
B
|
| Sun Mar 02, 2008 12:36 am |
|
|
|
matatonio
Teh Mexican
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 11:56 pm
Posts: 26066
Location: In good ol' Mexico
|
Re: Vantage Point It was good enough. The whole rewinding thing bugged me a whole lot. After the 3rd one i was done with it but like zing said, It was entertaining specially the last 30 minutes.
B-
|
| Fri Mar 07, 2008 1:43 am |
|
|
|
Mr. Reynolds
Confessing on a Dance Floor
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2004 12:46 am
Posts: 5567
Location: Celebratin' in Chitown
|
Re: Vantage Point D+
|
| Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:29 pm |
|
|
|
insomniacdude
I just lost the game
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:00 pm
Posts: 5868
|
Re: Vantage Point I guess we saw different movies. I really really liked the movie. It was a bit illogical, but I don't mind. I loved how each new perspective kept adding more to the story, little by little. The story starts with almost a complete bystander's perspective with the news station (which was awesome) and by the end we got the whole story.
B+
_________________
|
| Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:01 am |
|
|
|
Mannyisthebest
Forum General
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 3:53 pm
Posts: 8636
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
Re: Vantage Point Forrest Whitaker was overacting man.
It looks like he was taking a dump while he was talking...
Every time me and my friends saw his facial expression, we started laughing!!
_________________The Dark Prince 
|
| Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:40 am |
|
|
|
Riggs
We had our time together
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 4:36 am
Posts: 13270
Location: Vienna
|
Re: Vantage Point Like someone said, this is the definition of a 'meh' movie. The very ending sucked so much with the little girl. I wish they would have had the balls to kill her. C+
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:45 am |
|
|
|
MadGez
Dont Mess with the Gez
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 9:54 am
Posts: 22680
Location: Melbourne Australia
|
Re: Vantage Point Im with pretty much what most people here have said - it had so much potential but the execution sucked. The rewind gimmick got old quick and the audience was laughing at each rewind. I heard one guy say "If they rewind it once more im leaving". They did but he wasnt true to his word.
Everything about the film was implausable. The Secret Service shooting into the crowd to catch one guy was laughable, the fact that Whittiker and his camera happened to capture every major happening was too cooincidental, and the fact that the blackmailed assassin would do so many killings for his beloved brother was pretty corny too.
Still I cant say I hated the film. The film "looked" good and atleast tried to be entertaining.
Grade : C
_________________
What's your favourite movie summer? Let us know @
http://worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=85934
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 11:18 am |
|
|
|
DKev
Angels & Demons
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 7:34 pm
Posts: 242
|
Re: Vantage Point The story was just too damn good for the execution to completely ruin it. Did they honestly think that rewinding the movie 8 or 9? times would actually keep people interest? From the 4th time or so onward, people just began groaning and/or laughing including myself. The first 10 min were the best with the whole set up. I mean they could have made it a nice, flowing movie because it's not like every scene was happening at the same time. And then when the bomb does go off they could have split the screen in the different vantage points and showed that for like a minute and then just show quick shots of the different people and what they did right after. And after that they could have returned to the nice, coherent, flowing movie. All they would need would be some nice, quick editing. The last chase was laughable, overlong, and I just loved how the Quaid just wouldn't die! I'm probably being too generous but it was intriguing at points. B
|
| Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:48 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 253 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
