Quote of the Week:

"He is no fool, who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." (Jim Elliot)



Drop me a line if you want to be notified of new posts to SiTG:


My site was nominated for Best Parenting Blog!
My site was nominated for Hottest Daddy Blogger!




www.flickr.com
This is a Flickr badge showing public photos from Woodlief. Make your own badge here.

The Best of Sand:

The Blog
About
Greatest Hits
Comedy
DVD Reviews
Faith and Life
Irritations
Judo Chops
The Literate Life
News by Osmosis
The Problem with Libertarians
Snapshots of Life
The Sermons


Creative Commons License
All work on this site and its subdirectories is licensed under a Creative Commons License.



Search the Site:




Me Out There:

Non-Fiction
Free Christmas
Don't Suffer the Little Children
Boys to Men
A Father's Dream
WORLD webzine posts

Not Non-Fiction
Name
The Grace I Know
Coming Apart
My Christmas Story
Theopneustos



The Craft:

CCM Magazine
Charis Connection
Faith in Fiction
Grassroots Music



Favorite Journals:

Atlantic Monthly
Doorknobs & Bodypaint
Image Journal
Infuze Magazine
Orchid
Missouri Review
New Pantagruel
Relief
Ruminate
Southern Review



Blogs I Dig:




Education & Edification:

Arts & Letters Daily
Bill of Rights Institute
Junk Science
U.S. Constitution



Give:

Home School Legal Defense
Institute for Justice
Local Pregnancy Crisis
Mission Aviation
Prison Ministries
Russian Seminary
Unmet Needs



Chuckles:

Cox & Forkum
Dilbert







Donors Hall of Fame

Alice
Susanna Cornett
Joe Drbohlav
Anthony Farella
Amanda Frazier
Michael Heaney
Don Howard
Mama
Laurence Simon
The Timekeeper
Rob Long
Paul Seyferth



My Amazon.com Wish List

Add to Technorati Favorites






July 18, 2008
Redbox Review: Disadvantaged

The mistake people make about modernism is thinking it's old-fashioned. Thus a movie like Vantage Point comes along, built around the premise that it will be clever to show the same events through several characters' eyes, and people call it "postmodern" because it's, well, so very different. We are accustomed to being omniscient observers, or to staying at the protagonist's side.

Vantage Point instead does a remarkable job of carrying us through the same short sequence of events five times, without growing tiresome. In part this is because the events — an assassination attempt on the U.S. president, combined with a terrorist attack — first catch our attention, and then become a mystery we want to solve. What, exactly, just happened? Who is responsible? As the scene repeatedly unfolds through different viewpoints, the viewer is transformed from onlooker to sleuth.

Anyone who thinks playing about with point of view qualifies a work of art as postmodern, however, ought to read Faulkner, or consider Hitchcock's films. Vantage Point certainly has a clever idea here, but it's not all that original.

The real question is: Does it work? The answer: Yes, until the last twenty minutes. The problem its writers work themselves into is that eventually they have to reveal their hand — they have to show us who the bad guys really are (the answer is predictable), and they have to bring the film to resolution. And this is where their cleverness seems to abandon them, leaving us with a weak ending that attempts to manipulate us with the cheapest of child-in-peril images. Viewers familiar with the far superior Crash will find how poorly Vantage Point performs in comparison.

A better tack might have been to suck us into the omniscient point-of-view in those final scenes, only to interpose some final individual viewpoint that reveals something important to the film's resolution. Instead the film ends with a tidy whimper.

Vantage Point features several well-knowns: Dennis Quaid, Forest Whitaker, Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt, and the currently popular Matthew Fox, of television's Lost. Only Whitaker shines, however, and his performance is proof that the best actors can overcome mediocre scripting and direction. Even though the film degenerates into an unexceptional vehicle chase, you will find yourself anxious for Whitaker's character, an estranged father trying to do the right thing in perilous circumstances.

Were you to hire a babysitter in order to take in dinner and catch Vantage Point at your local theater, this film would be a disappointment, unless you are one of those people who enjoys Hollywood's recent displacement of plot with dizzying camera zooms. For a $1 rental from your local McDonald's Redbox, however, the film is probably worth a view, especially if you have a well-salted bowl of popcorn and the kids don't get up half a dozen times while you're trying to watch it. So on a McDonald's six-piece scale, I give Vantage Point three and a half nuggets. But the dipping sauce runs out before you get to the end.

Posted by Woodlief on July 18, 2008 at 08:48 AM


Comments

Tony,
You've gone from nuggets to apples and now back to nuggets. I'm getting confused. Amused(!) but confused.

(p.s. you read that book yet?)

Posted by: Rob at July 18, 2008 10:19 AM

Maybe the film makers need to re-view Akira Kurosawa's "Rashomon", from 1950. We really haven't come very far in film-making. More glitz, less heft.

It is filmed from differing viewpoints and points-of-view (literally).

It does not have a disappointing, cheap, or whimpering ending. It can be done.

Posted by: Mike at July 28, 2008 3:58 PM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)