Vantage Point

Vantage Point

8 out of 10

Running time: 1:30

MPAA rating: PG-13 for sequences of intense violence and action, some disturbing images and brief strong language.

Peruvian rating: Mayores de 14

Cast: Dennis Quaid, William Hurt, Matthew Fox, Forest Whitaker, Eduardo Noriega, Edgar Ramirez, Said Taghmaoui, Ayelet Zurer, Sigourney Weaver.
Director: Pete Travis
Script: Barry L. Levy

Photography: Amir Mokri
Score: Atli Övarsson
Distributor: Columbia Pictures

Gimmick films can be really entertain and fun when done well. Such is the case with Vantage Point. Given the surprising amount of negative reviews the movie has received - reminds me of last week's Jumper - I was expecting something much dumber and more insulting. Fortunately that wasn't the case. Lots of talent was involved in the making of this picture - we have the likes of Dennis Quaid, William Hurt, Sigourney Weaver or Forest Whitaker -, and although some of these thespians are underused or wasted in small roles, they nevertheless provide with some class. In short, Vantage Point is a good film; the fact that it provides with different perspectives to a same event doesn't bore as much as I thought it would, and the flick is pretty tense and exciting. Just what a movie of this kind should be.

The film tells the story of the assassination of United States President Ashton (William Hurt) at an anti-terrorism summit in Spain. The film first presents this event from the perspective of a news crew, led by producer Rex Brooks (Sigourney Weaver). Something bad happens: there's a distant explosion followed by a closer, more devastating one that kills the reporter (Zoe Saldana in a surprising cameo) on the scene. The movie then goes on to present the scene from the perspectives of other witnesses to the murder: secret service agent Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid), police officer Enrique (Eduardo Noriega), tourist Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker), and the President. Each part of the film provides with further development of the plot and unfolds, bit by bit, the way the events occurred and, most importantly, why and who did them. The last "episode" provides with many points of view and provides with a conclusion to the events of the film.

So, what is there to say about the movie? The different-perspectives-gimmick works because it doesn't feel as a cheat. It makes the viewer want to know more about the assassins and the events that occurred before, during and after the summit, and makes the film feel more tense than it would've if it had been shot in a more conventional manner. The best thing about this approach is that it manages to develop the plot and the motives behind the assassination little by little, creating interest in the viewer and making the plot feel more mysterious. Granted, the final revelation is nothing out of the ordinary and the final scene even requires an amazing coincidence for it to work - as well as a child character acting really stupidly and annoyingly -, but the overall story nevertheless works and never feels convulted.

Performances are pretty good, and the presence of so many well-known actors is welcome. Dennis Quaid is credible as the Secret Service Agent who would commit any sacrifice to protect the President, and William Hurt acts distinguished and decisive - I've always liked the man in every movie he has acted in. Forest Whitaker and Sigourney Weaver are wasted in small roles - Weaver's part is more of a glorified cameo than anything else - but nevertheless manage to make their characters interesting and believable enough. Matthew Fox is underused as Quaid's partner - although an eventual revelation about his character is kinda surprising - and Eduardo Noriega is effective as the Spanish cop. It's good the filmmakers at least managed to use real Spanish actors instead of using any Latino actor they could find, not caring about his or her nationality.

I don't have much to say about Vantage Point. It's an effective political, police-and-action movie shot in an unconventional manner that works because it boasts credible performances and tense action sequences. Surprisingly enough, the car chase during the movie's last 30 minutes is not boring - it's adequately shot and generates some tension - although it's sometimes a little obvious that the cars were sped up for the scene. Ultimately, I liked Vantage Point for the same I reason I loved Cloverfield: because it's different. I'm aware of the fact that not everyone likes films that are present in unusual manners; I heard many members of the audience complain during the film about the movie's constant turning back in time, with some of the them even making fun of the movie. Well, not everyone has the same tastes. For my money, Vantage Point is an effective, entertaining and tense flick, and it should please most of the members of the audience, especially those looking for something light and, more importantly, fun.