Pros: Consistent story telling, acting by several of the principles
Cons: Only a so-so plot and every frame that has Dennis Quaid in it
The Bottom Line: If you like Forrest Whittaker, Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt, then watch it. Otherwise, it is an ok film that is at best not a waste of time.
Plot Details: This opinion reveals minor details about the movie''s plot. Vantage Point is an easy to follow nonlinear story.
The US president arrives in Salamanca, Spain to kick off an international conference on terrorism. Just as he makes it to the podium to speak, he is shot. Chaos follows. There is a distant explosion. Then the podium and stage explode onto what is left of the crowd.
The central plot is that simple.
What makes Vantage Point worth the time is how it tells, not what it tells. If you are not a fan of nonlinear films (Pulp Fiction, Mystery Train, Go, and Rules of Attraction to name the first 4 to come to mind) then you will likely skip it. Still, Vantage Point is the easiest version of that narrative style I’ve seen, so it might be a small challenge rather than a bore.
In no particular order, the entire plotline is created by these subplots: television network filming the arrival of the president, secret service agent protecting the president, the president’s point of view, an American tourist with a video camera, a local reporter, a local mother and her daughter and at least 2 stories from different members of the terrorist cell.
The central plot appears in all of these sub-narratives. Each tells just a little bit more of the story beyond the central one. So at the end you have a finished product whose pieces pretty much fit together.
With Vantage Point director Pete Travis makes a simple thriller. We get decent action—a top notch car chase—and some mature plot twists. You can invest a minimum of attention and get your time’s worth, or you can invest some more and get a bit more out of it without wasting time.
The simplicity is one reason I consider the film to rate 3 stars. Except for Go, the nonlinear films I listed are not neat packages that telegraph their structure. Mr. Travis uses the trope of running action backwards in fast motion then a black screen to indicate when the point of view will change. This is fine for a lazy and thought free Sunday, but I tend to want fewer training wheels on my films, even when I’m having a thought free Sunday. So the tool used to indicate a change in perspective is just a bit condescending to me.
The other aspect making the film average is the acting. Three of the principles turn in reliable performances, such that, if you are a fan of Forrest Whittaker, Sigourney Weaver, or William Hurt, then you shouldn’t skip this film. Mr. Whittaker plays the video-camera laden American Tourist. He becomes this role as easily as he did Gen. Amin; Mr. Hurt (the president) and Ms. Weaver (location director for the network) each turn in the ensemble version of their talents. The rest of the actors are unnoticeable at best or, in the case of Dennis Quaid remarkably bad.
He spends all of his camera time looking like a petulant seven-year-old girl. Whether guarding the president, running around on foot, being a principle in the car chase, his face has the pursed lips and squinty eyes of a girl with her best “I am sooooooo mad at mommy” look. It is distracting enough to warrant this many words.
Vantage Point is not going to impress, disappoint, or likely offend anyone. There are better films for your 100 minutes but there are way more that shouldn’t get even half that much.
Recommended:
Yes
