By: Erik

Erik — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 04:30:07 +0000

This film deserves at least a B. The thing is, I can’t get it out of my head. I’ve seen it three times. There are moments when I want to bump it up to an A-. Other times, I can poke a few holes in it. Still, my rating never gets lower than a B. Therefore, I think the critics mostly got this one wrong. The plot is mostly solid and the two major flaws I found could have been easily avoided. First, at the very beginning, the scene suggests that the children haven’t been exposed to the idea of a time capsule–otherwise, why would the kid ask what it is–yet Lucinda came up with the idea of drawing pictures about the future. We are lead to believe that the school voted on the best idea among the children–draw the pictures–the previous day and that the capsule will be placed underground the next day, and that the two ideas dovetailed perfectly. Clearly Lucinda could not have come up with the idea of placing the pictures in the time capsule, because for that to happen she would have had to already be exposed to the idea the a capsule was planned. If she had been exposed to the idea of the time capsule, why wouldn’t the other children? Did I miss something or is this completely incoherent? Second, the female lead happens to get an ambulance when all hell is breaking loose. We can even see fires breaking out in the distance. How likely is that? Don’t police and rescue service have something better to do when all hell is breaking loose? Granted, the public announcement was only recently made, but it still seems mundanely implausible. Also, it’s not necessary for advancing the plot. There are also four lines that stick out as weak. First, when he’s first figuring out what the numbers mean, Koestler says, “What’s going on here?” Lame. The preceding “Come on!” is believable, but the subsequent “What’s going on here?” is weak and unnecessary. Second, Koestler yells “Hey!” at a burning man. Lame. Third, Koestler’s MIT colleague says “You were there?” when he gets out of the car. Lame. Fourth, Koestler says the line about seeing the burning faces. You could blame this one on Cage’s acting, but the line itself is not great. These weak lines are not far from each other, makes me wonder if it was the same writer. Three more very minor nitpicks: First, when Koestler is figuring out the numbers, wouldn’t he at least get 9-11 right off the bat, if not 9-11-01? He didn’t need to write those dividing lines completely wrong the first time. Second, the burning moose wasn’t that great of CGI. The several animals that followed were good. Third, did Koestler really need to see his colleague and his wife in midst of chaos? It’s a big city. Granted, this is more cinematic poetry than reality, but I think it was unnecessary. We were already done with him when he was left helpless at Koestler’s desk. Other than the above, I cannot find any major flaws in the film. The editing is rather tight and all scenes are in the service of advancing the plot. There is plenty of foreshadowing and handholding here to carry you through. It’s a good film. It deserves three stars.

Comments on: Philip’s Knowing Movie Review

By: Erik