• 2:22 (2008) - A movie filled with missed occasion and wrong expectations - 6/10 (14/05/11)

    2:22 (2008)

     

    I bought this movie at a low price because I thought that the plot idea was intriguing and because Val Kilmer was starring in this flick.

    In the end, many great ideas and a lot of potential wasn't well used. The title seems to underline the importance of a certain time that was finally completely redundant. The connection between several events in the hotel like the suicide of an old man and, the strange sex scenes between a television star and his bodyguard and the meeting between one of the gangsters and the ex-wife of the investigating police officer. Many scenes are rather redundant, especially in the first thirty minutes or so when the thieves are introduced, sometimes is a completely boring way and sometimes in a crazy and exaggerated way. When the thieves get out of the hotel you expect an intriguing investigation story or some fatal encounters or coincidences but instead of continuing on a high level after the intriguing hotel sequences, the movies slows down and goes nowhere before a dramatic and tragical conclusion kicks off.

    Sometimes, I think that the movie wants to be too many things at the same time. For a thriller, there is not enough tension in it and not enough surprises as we quickly now what will happen in the next one and a half hour. For a tragic drama, the characters are not profound and touching enough, even in the fatal ending. For an action movie, there are not enough special effects a part of the shooting scenes. For a comedy movie, there are only a few entertaining slapstick scenes that happen in the hotel. The problem is that the movie has many ups and downs and all the mentioned elements are used in a rather incoherent way without any dominating genre. The mixture doesn't create an original melting pot but rather a strange and mixed up potpourri that fails to work. Let's also mention that the great Val Kilmer has only two little scenes and a redundant role of a paranoid diamond dealer and is one of many unnecessary sidekicks that add nothing to the main plot even if you exactly expect that in the beginning and his role could have rated up this movie by much.

    In the end, we have a diversified and entertaining movie here that has some good ideas but a bad executions and too many ups and downs. The good elements are the entertaining hotel sequences and the diversified soundtrack. One could have done a movie of three hours with all the different characters but chose to concentrate on only a couple of elements that are randomly chosen.

    The ending is disappointing and too simple. The acting is too wooden and the characters itself not profound enough. The plot scratches on an interesting surface but doesn't go deep enough. Many sidekicks turn out to be completely unnecessary. There are too many missed occasions and wrong expectations in this movie. The movie is worth being watched once because of its interesting story basis but that's more than enough.

     

    « Insidious (2010) - Are you ready for a dark ride? - 9/10 (13/05/11)Mysterious Island (2005) - We should take this movie as it is - an entertaining television production for the whole family - 7/10 (15/05/11) »
    Partager via Gmail Delicious Technorati Yahoo! Google Bookmarks Blogmarks