Vantage Point, the latest film in the hey-we're-just-gonna-fuck-you- around-for-90-minutes-instead-of-worrying-about-trivial-stuff-like-story genre, is a movie so inept, it's unable to even deliver on its very straightforward gimmick: to show its events from varying vantage points (in this case, an assassination attempt on the President). It's an admittedly cool device to progress a story, or at least it would be were it serving any actual purpose to the plot. The reality though, is that there's hardly any difference in what each of the characters witness, and thus, the film essentially repeats itself for no other reason than to play with the audience and drag out the running time.
If that weren't enough, the gimmick is broken. We're supposed to be seeing the film from different character's vantage points, and yet almost every segment ends with a character witnessing something that we're literally prevented from viewing ourselves, followed by them muttering in shock, "Oh my god..." and then running off while the movie rewinds itself and then starts over from another character's vantage point. It's not just moronic, it's frustrating. A movie like this should function like a puzzle. It should present and reveal facts when necessary, and each varying vantage point (man, I'm already getting sick of calling it that) should offer a unique view on the events that help the audience get one step closer to figuring out the mystery behind what's going on. In a way, Vantage Point accomplishes this. It does indeed bring you one step closer to figuring out the mystery as it goes on, but it does so by abandoning its gimmick about 2/3's into the film. That's its biggest clue, and it's not even an intentional one. Once the film stops showing the event from specific character's vantage points, it becomes clear that a certain famous actor must really be a bad guy, since he was never given one. That's how the ending reveals itself: not by offering up pieces of a puzzle for the audience to put together, but by poor filmmaking.
As for the rest of the film, it can barely constitute its resolution as a twist. Aside from what I've already discussed, there's nothing about the ending that you could've figured out logically based on the hints given from scenes prior. So basically, Vantage Point is like waiting through 90 minutes of tedium and useless clues for an explanation of something that happened in 10 minutes, and it's not even an interesting "something." Further propelling Vantage Point to the depths of laughable badness is the acting, with the uber-talented Forest Whitaker embarrassing himself to an unthinkable degree. Observing the way he goofily bumbles around with his video camera, you'd be forgiven for assuming his character was mentally challenged.
Dennis Quaid fares only slightly better, overacting to heights better suited for soap operas. "Medic! We need a medic!" he screams in anguish while holding an injured individual in his arms. The over-the-top melodrama gives me a good laugh. Then the movie rewinds, and shows the scene again. I laugh again. Then, rewinds, shows scene again. By this point though, I'm not laughing anymore; I'm praying for the movie to hurry the hell up and end. 1.5 out of 5
Adam Quigley Posted: February 28, 2008 
