Vantage Point

P

proud walker

New member
I went to see this yesterday.I thought it was an alright film.It wasn't as good as i thought it would be but i still enjoyed it.

I did think the idea of the flashbacks for certain characters was a clever touch.But it did get abit tedious after a while
 
I saw this last night - enjoyed it very much.

In answer to the question about the bag:

The Spanish cop was asked to take the bag in by the woman (his girlfriend I presume), as she knew they would not search him,m as he's a cop. Obviously he didn't know ther was a bomb in it. he said at some point 'I've been set up' when he realised about the bag/bomb.
 
I watched it last friday and enjoyed it. I thought the real time aspect between each flashback ruined it though. nothing matched up eventwise. for instance
The scene where forrest whittaker saw the policeman get shot and then Anna run across the road was only a minute when focusing on Forrest, but at the end it seemed to take forever. The time between the first explosion and the 2nd seemed to vary through the movie too.
But I enjoyed it nevertheless. I've learnt to leave my brain and logic at home when watching a movie / tv show these days, much more entertaining than to nit pick.
 
I was speaking to a friend of mine yesterday & something very similar happened to him when he went to see the film the other night.

When it got to the 4th flashback & woman a few rows back from where my friend was sitting said "Oh for f*ck sake" which got a laugh in the cinema.
 
Whilst watching the movie, I found a flaw in the sense that actions didn't follow the time-line. I can't remember exactly but I think...

In the final flashback, the Spanish man (whose brother had been taken hostage) was talking to the woman/nurse-impersonator, and then set off to the hotel where the President was staying and started infiltrating it (which surely would've taken about half hour at least?)

After that had happened, we see the Spanish cop go and talk to the woman to give her the bag (why did he have a bag with a bomb in it anyway?), which in the first flashback happens immediately after he sees the woman talking to the other man (they make eye contact and give each other dirty looks).

So how did the Spanish man (ex-SS or whatever) manage to get to a hotel and infiltrate it, kill the control room staff etc in the space of the 5 seconRAB it takes for the cop to walk over to the woman?

I don't think I've explained it particularly well (would help if I knew some names), and whilst relaying it, it doesn't sound that important. But whilst watching it, it just clicked and made me think "Hmm, that's not right".

Anyway, an enjoyable movie and worth a watch. The first hour or so is compelling stuff, Lost-ish. The last half-hour is just mindless action with a slightly exaggerated car chase scene, but keeps you going as loose enRAB are tied.

That's two films now where the last half hours have dropped in quality (the other being No Country For Old Men). Anyway, I'd give it a 7.5/10.
 
I saw it yesterday and thought it was alright, 5 or 6 out of 10 for me too.

I found it funny that the whole plot was ruined because the terrorist guy didnt want to run over the little girl so heavily swerved, causing his female accomplice's death, and effectively his own. This is a terrorist who didnt care how many children may have died in the bomb blasts and was killing people left right and centre yet one little girl in the middle of the road managed to tug at his heartstrings. I think a real hardened terrorist, so close to completing their task would have unfortunately driven right through her.
 
Saw this yesterday and was pleasantly surprised, I thought all the flashbacks would occur at the same time, not rewind to the start each time. I enjoyed that aspect.

I've read all the comments now and agree there are enough plot holes you could drive an ambulance through. They also came to me while watching (I also found the little girl's story annoying) but I still enjoyed it, the way you learn something different each time kept me gripped throughout.

And I'd love one of those phones:D
 
Talking about things not matching up event wise.

In Forrest Whittaker flashback.There is a part when he is standing on a bridge over a busy road & he sees 2 of the presidents bodyguarRAB shoot the spanish cop who was to protect the Mayor.However we later find out that it was actually the guy who was in the car with Matthew Fox who shot the spanish cop.Yet this time we don't see the 2 presidents bodyguarRAB firing their guns

I hope that makes sense
 
I saw this on saturday. Again, wasn't quite as good as I'd hoped but still enjoyed it all the same. 6/10 rather than the 8 or 9/10 I was expexting to give it.
 
Good idea not done particularly well. Also, a few bits of the storyline were telegraphed way in advance of their reveal in the chronology even if they weren't meant to be for example
it was so obvious that Matthew Fox's character was involved, I didn't need that to be revealed

I also agree the timtings were very odd but then they told the story of the same 23 mintues 6 times, they couldn't possibly have had the full timing of those 23 mintues or else the film would have been well over two hours long.

I also noticed that the presidential bodyguarRAB disappeared at the end following the shooting of the cop in the white shirt.
 
Saw it on Friday...not bad, but the flashbacks did get a bit tedious...could have done with limiting it to 2 or 3.

On the 5th flashback a woman at the back of the cinema said 'Jesus Christ, not again!' rather loud, which got a chuckle from most people :)
 
Apologies for this post being almost entirely in spoiler tags, but I'm trying to explain a point that someone else has made. I think you're wrong about the chronology here - as I recall it happened as I've stated below:

The guy whose brother had been kidnapped was talking to the woman, just before her boyfriend came over to give her the bag. This is correct. But then he didn't have to get to the hotel within five seconRAB. Remember that after he left the square, the fake President arrived, was shot, and the first explosion happened, before he burst into the President's room. We know this because we saw it from the President's perspective.

I agree that he only had a relatively short period of time (around ten minutes) to get from the square to the hotel, but as we saw in the President's flashback, it wasn't very far away. Only the first flashback was in real-time; the others were edited to remove sections that we'd already seen. That's why some people seem to think there was a discrepancy between the timings of the first and second explosions.

Hope this makes sense.
 
I thought it was the worst film I've seen for ages. I give it 2 out of 10, and I wish I hadn't wasted my time and money.

The publicity said "8 strangers: 8 vantage points: 1 truth"
But we only got 5 vantage points followed by a chaotic muddle of car chases and confusion. I had no idea who the other 3 people were supposed to be, and there was no proper resolution or explantion.
 
Lost interest in this about half way through the seemingly interminable flashbacks.

& the ending gives a whole new meaning to the term ambulance chasing. :rolleyes:

Quite what actors of the calibre of Forest Whitaker were doing in this piffle is anybody's guess.
 
Back
Top