Vantage Point (Single-Disc Edition) Reviews

• Vantage Point - Gets Better Towards the End, Worth Watching!

  
  By A17BUUBOU0598B on 2008-03-08
  "Vantage Point" is a good action drama that you can predict pretty well from the trailer. It is based on a concept that has been done many times before, that of telling the same story from multiple points of view. Fans of "24" will get a strong sense of déjà vu 24 - Season 1 (Slim - Pack). Yet the core story is interesting. The action sequences and great camera work make this a movie worth watching. Good acting and a strong finish help to overcome some loose ends and production errors.
  
  The President of the United States (William Hurt), or POTUS as referred to by the secret service, is the target of a group of terrorists whose objectives are never revealed to us. While overseas to attend an anti-terrorism summit in Spain, he is shot. Or is he?
  
  Dennis Quaid and Mathew Fox (of "Lost" fame Lost - The Complete First Season) play secret service agents there to protect the President. After multiple attacks occur after the president is shot, they scramble to try to respond and find the shooter. It is very difficult to tell which attacks are meant to kill and which are meant to divert attention away from the villains.
  
  Quaid takes advantage of Forest Whitaker's camcorder film and the media's tapes to piece together the story. As each of the characters is swung into action, we get to see their individual struggles to cope with chaos and how their stories are interconnected.
  
  Perhaps in an homage to "24," after each character's scene finishes it 'rewinds' to the beginning to give us the next character's 'vantage point.' This gets old fast. After a while, these vantage points seem to disintegrate into one another and overlap more and more. In fact, this is one story where the effect seems to have taken away from the story.
  
  The action sequences are very strong, and even though there's a lot of hand held camera work they get enough steady shots to make the chase scenes watchable. Most notable is a car chase scene that is bound to draw comparisons to Ronin Ronin, The Bourne Identity The Bourne Identity (Widescreen Extended Edition), The Italian Job The Italian Job (Special Collector's Edition) and other recent car chase movies. Putting together a sequence like that is very difficult, and I can't wait for the DVD to see how they did it. What can I say, I'm a sucker for a good car chase.
  
  The pacing of the movie is good and especially improves once we get to the last few vantage points. The score is excellent and blends well with the action sequences. We are purposely left without reasons why this group is after the president.
  
  There are some technical things that are off in the movie. Anybody who has ever been to Spain will get that uneasy feeling. Once you see the Mexican extras and hear them speak a very Central American Spanish it becomes clear they are in Mexico, not Spain. They try to use a few Spanish actors, but it's not enough to feel like Spain.
  
  Some parts of the dialogue seem overly preachy. Still, this movie does effectively portray how difficult security planning is in a world where government security tactics are public knowledge. The story probably would have been more profound and meaningful with a traditional plot-line, which it turns into at the end anyway.
  
  This movie is worth watching and improves a lot towards the end. You just have to get past several very annoying rewind sequences and plenty of early repetition.
  
  Enjoy!
  
  
  

• "Do you see what I see?"

  
  By A3AVJCB1ZD6ZY5 on 2008-03-01
  US President Ashton (Hurt) is set to attend an anti-terrorist conference in Salmanca, Spain. Agent Thomas Barnes (Quaid) is back on duty after being shot defending the President from an attempted assassination.
  
  Howard Lewis (Whitaker) is on vacation in Spain and filming the conference for his family back home. He sees movement in a window behind the President and catches the assassin on tape.
  
  The rest of the film is from 8 separate vantage points and tells the tale of the attempted assassination and kidnapping of the US President by terrorists. The action's fast and the scene 'rewinds' each time for a new 'vantage point.'
  
  Yes, the concept's been done before, but I have to get a nod to a stellar cast. Hurt, Quaid, Whitaker all had me lost in their personal stories and rooting for the 'good guys.'
  
  WARNING: Rewinds may be a problem for folks with vertigo, migraines or seizures. I have vertigo and offer this warning to others. Note--for some reason, this film panned out well enough that I wasn't dizzy or nauseated afterwards. IMHO, that's a job well done for the cinematographer.
  
  

• 3 Stars and I am being kind.

  
  By A2SXGU7L6VLJ5P on 2008-04-08
  This film just follows on with the trend of every other post 9/11 terrorist movie. This one going for a slight twist when a terrorist attack is committed against the president of the United States in Spain is seen through various angles and peoples perspectives.
  
  Problem with this film is as I have pointed out its been done a million times before and is just frankly getting boring now (Imagine watching 24 with even less interest and you get the idea) We have the disgruntled secret serviceman who has previously "took a bullet" for the president but never quite recovered, family man American on holiday who when not filming the whole event gets on with the locals and even saves a few of them, hard sell camera crew (Changed CNN to GNN)they even seemed to pick the darkest Spanish people to be as support actors (Was that just to emphasise to the American audience that this was Spain?)
  
  So we have unknown terrorist group whose goal is never quite explained (Though they do appear to have an Arabic name and a base in "friendly" Morocco. I guess just giving us that was enough to convince us of their "badness") Plan an elaborate terrorist attack (If these people do have this kind of planning then God help us all!) with a multi national group with an end aim that is just as unexplained as the actual goals of the organisation itself. Running chase, so called twist to the tale, not so subtle hints as to who the bad guys are and you pretty much have the plot (Not that there is much of one) We are even given a moving speech from the president who refuses to retaliate to the bomb attack with a military strike because that would be "Just what these people want" and encourages his advisers to stick with the conference (Was this supposed to be some kind of "What could have been" Post 9/11) Either way it becomes a mute point when his advisers get gunned down 2 seconds later.
  
  Difficult to have anything positive to say about this film. Instantly forgettable.
  
  

• What Was That Pill?

  
  By AOS1WNOWZ4NRO on 2008-07-02
  Is there somewhere I can apply to get the time I spent watching this movie refunded to me? It started out merely predictable, but quickly became unbelievable, and eventually escalated into eye-popping nonsense. If you enjoy this, you should stick with TV movies. In terms of redeeming factors, there are some truly hilarious moments, such as the car chase where Dennis Quaid succeeds in driving one-handed through miles of narrow streets at high speeds while making non-stop cell phone calls and surviving, unscathed, some nasty crashes. Apparently, driving and talking on a cell phone is safer than we've been led to believe. We can only hope our actual Secret Service agents are one tenth as competent (and lucky!) as Quaid. And, we can only hope that someday, our actual President is as worthy of the effort as the mythical one in this story. By the end, I was slack-jawed in amazement at what passes for entertainment these days. I wish this movie had been made by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez, or anyone else, with at least one foot in the real world. No such luck... but in the end, one dollop of entertainment was discovered, as I howled my way through the apparently sincere comments by the cast and filmmakers in the special features. If you finish this dog with a straight face, you must be on some of that stuff that Quaid took to steady his nerves... what was it? Maybe I needed some to sit through this movie.
  
  

• A Story So Preposterous and Campy I Started Laughing!

  
  By A3DGVB3T5QJNRE on 2008-03-06
  Vantage Point is a camp delight! By the film's end I was waiting for our shaky-handed, Secret Service hero to rip-off his shirt to expose a big Superman letter "S" on his chest! Terrorists who blithely slaughter innocent people left and right will throw everything out the window over a single child! You know a bomb has just been planted but you keep standing around talking. A bomb goes off right under your nose with loads of people lying dead and wounded but our various heroes barely have a scratch except for their tattered clothes! The Secret Service is totally inept except for one guy with shaky hands! I think you get the picture! But the best scene is one of the last. Its when the President snaps awake at just the right moment, after just being drugged, and kloncks the bad guy over the heads with a piece of metal all because the villains conveniently failed to strap him down properly! But just moments earlier taking out a score of Secret Service agents was a walk in the park!
  
  I did find the 'Groundhog Day' technique of repeating the same day over, and over again, but from different perspectives, to be a very interesting approach to story telling. Too bad it was wasted on such a unbelievably ridiculous story! It's as if Hollywood's main concern is satisfying it's teenage market segment over all others. I'm not a teenager and I go to the movies virtually every week! What about the adult segment of your market? Don't we count for anything?
  
  This film is trying terribly hard to be a frantic 'French Connection' type movie without worrying much about the story. If all you want is dumbed-down, murder and mayhem, a sort of terrorist war-porn flick, then Vantage Point is for you! But if a decent story is an important ingredient in your recipe for time well spent, then I humbly suggest renting something that has stood the test of time, like the French Connection, instead!
  
  
  
  
• Confusion and Terror from Multiple Vantages
  By A328S9RN3U5M68 on 2008-07-02
  The story line of VANTAGE POINT is a brief one: a summit meeting on terrorism aimed at addressing the differences between the Arab world and the Western world is taking place in Salamanca, Spain and the arrival of the President of the United States is greeted with assassination attempts, terrorist explosions, and car chases. The difference in this thriller from the many others of the same genre is the use of telling the story from at least five different vantage points - the news reporters (Sigourney Weaver, Zoë Saldana and Staff), the CIA (Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, et al with William Hurt as the President), a group of terrorists, an American bystander with camera (Forest Whitaker), and the viewing public. Things are not as they initially seem and the more times the story is rerun through repetition of the incident, the more information is added.
  
  Based on a story by Barry Levy and directed by Pete Travis the film could become tiresome in its use of repeated reruns, but given the quality of the cast and the twists and turns as the 'plot' is further elucidated makes the story more of an investigation of Intelligence forces from all involved countries and drives home the reason 'terrorism' is so terrifying. Some of the peripheral cast members are particularly fine - Bruce McGill, Edgar Ramirez, Saïd Taghmaoui, Ayelet Zurer, and Eduardo Noriega among others. It is a film that takes patience on the part of the viewer, but staying with it until the end results in some very fine entertainment. Grady Harp, July 08
  
  
• Ugh Vantage Point no.
  By A36AH31X84FIC8 on 2008-07-08
  this film is a complete mess of great chance to make an excellent movie. Vantage Point is about as exciting as watching a real bad reality show and as dull as dirty dish water . i was so bored i was about to scream most of the time and flashbacks they were overkill, maybe they could've been done in a way that wasn't so annoying. personally all i wanted was a story not a rewind all the way through whole entire film and the acting was wooden and not believable ugh--. so i'd say save your money and don't rent or buy this clunker, maybe rent but don't buy it. it's not worth any viewing time of yours.
  
  
• Missing a Couple of "Points" of View
  By A3M2WW0PO34B94 on 2008-02-21
  President Ashton (William Hurt) is scheduled to make an appearance in Spain, with a number of other world leaders, to show their support of a recent Anti-Terrorism bill they have all worked on. The Secret Service is out in force to protect POTUS (The President of the United States) from the massive crowds that have assembled. One of those agents, Barnes (Dennis Quaid) is back on the job after a lengthy recovery after taking a bullet for the President a year ago. As this is his first assignment back, he is, naturally, a little shell shocked. His partner, Taylor (Matthew Fox) is confident the veteran can handle the action. An American tourist, Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker) stumbles upon the ceremony, and, eager to share the memories with the folks at home, videotapes everything. A Spanish Policeman, Javier (Edgar Ramirez) tries to reconcile with his girlfriend, but she is cold to him, and only wants the bag she asked him to bring. Dejected, he begins to put two and two together and rushes to the stage as... The GNN is also on hand, to cover the press conference and the harried director, Rex (Sigourney Weaver) is shocked when her cameras capture the assassination of the President. But Barnes begins to suspect there is more going on and is determined to find out the truth.
  
  "Vantage Point", the new film directed by Pete Travis (who comes from British Television) and written by Barry Levy, uses an interesting narrative device to frame an overworked story. But they don't seem to fully embrace the idea and the results are a mixed bag.
  
  "Vantage" sets up its narrative device very quickly, and efficiently, giving us a jam packed opening segment. Basically, Rex and her team are covering the President's speech. As his arrival is imminent, Rex is trying to coordinate all of the different cameras, her liberal reporter (Zoe Saldana) and the network in New York. As soon as the President arrives, Rex is confident she has worked out the kinks, but she is shocked, as is everyone else, when the President is captured on camera receiving two bullets. Shortly thereafter, Barnes bursts into her control room and wants to see video. When he scans through the video, something catches his eye. Then, the film literally rewinds, showing us a few key images, presumably clues to what is going on, and a clock shows us we have rewound the last twenty minutes to just before Noon. Now, we see the same events, but through Barnes' eyes, seeing the different things he sees, learning different information.
  
  As the story unfolds again, we move a little further in the narrative before the film rewinds and we are back to Noon. This time, we are watching the same events unfold through President Ashton's eyes. Then, we rewind again and watch the events through Javier's eyes. This happens a number of times, each story showing us slightly different information, ending slightly later, giving us a larger view of the same picture. As we watch the events unfold again and again, we learn more and more and realize maybe Barnes is right.
  
  The audience at the screening I attended seemed to get a little annoyed by the rewinding narrative. Ever heard of Kurosawa's "Rashomon" folks? "Vantage Point" isn't as good as Kurosawa's masterpiece, but it is an interesting technique to use in this day and age. It also keeps the film moving at a fast clip. As each of these segments runs about fifteen minutes, all of the various story elements within are presented at hyper speed, to make sure we always arrive at the same point. This isn't to say they feel forced, they just move, and this makes the film seem fast paced. So, for these reasons, I appreciated the narrative device.
  
  But towards the end of the film, when Barnes is chasing the bad people through the streets of Salamanca, it occurred to me that we missed a couple of vantage points. These segments allow each of the characters to become established in our eyes, as the segments present their point of view of the proceedings. The characters who are given full segments are more interesting and viable, even if they are a bit formulaic. One segment is devoted to three or four people, all of whom are behind the plot, only showing us their actions in the plot. This is problematic because we never learn, beyond some overused jingoistic slogans, why these people are interested in assassinating our President.
  
  There is a `big surprise' towards the end of the film which is more or less telegraphed very early on. Anyone who has seen more than a few thrillers or similar suspense films will likely be able to figure this out much earlier than the filmmakers want you to. This is a bit of a let down because when they reveal this big surprise, you have already figured it out and it seems more commonplace than anything else.
  
  Because each of the stars has basically one segment to call their own, they have to develop their character at a rapid pace. This shortened focus on their individual characters helps to make them seem more interesting than they are; many of them are little more than clichés, but since we only spend ten to fifteen minutes focusing on them, these problems aren't as apparent. Naturally, as these characters interact, they make `guest appearances' in each of the stories, and the filmmakers have smartly held back key moments, for instance, we don't see what Barnes sees in the videotape until much later in the film, of some of these characters until the attention shifts to their character or until the film is about the come to a close, building the suspense nicely.
  
  Quaid, one of the most underrated actors working today, fares well. His back story is established during the first segment, concentrating on the GNN coverage of the event. Rex catches a glimpse of him in one of the cameras and commands one of her editors to pull up the story, rehashing Barnes previous attempts at thwarting an assassin's bullet. So, when the attention shifts to Barnes, all we need to see is his shaky hand to know he is feeling a little trepidation about his return to duty. Because he is nervous, he naturally sees assassins every where.
  
  William Hurt also does a very good job as President Ashton. Ashton seems more self-aware, more conscious of his image and his actions on the rest of the world than we are perhaps used to. This is why he is so determined to see this agreement he has forged, an agreement to fight terrorism, become a reality. When he is presented with a plan to retaliate against the people suspected of the attack, he downplays the need to act immediately, aware that this is what they want and also aware of the consequences of attacking a friendly country. As he enters the ceremony, among signs labeling him a murderer and a terrorist, he also seems to disregard these as the necessary evils of his job.
  
  Sigourney Weaver's role as Rex, the director of the news network feed, is a bit short, and reactionary. She has a brief fight with her reporter (Saldana) and then simply reacts to the rest of the events. The person I saw this film with wondered if part of her role had been edited, left on the cutting room floor, because it seems unnaturally abrupt.
  
  Forest Whitaker plays the American tourist, Howard Lewis, traveling through Europe for the first time. We learn he and his wife are taking a break, to clear their heads, so Howard decides to travel and assiduously videotape everything he sees. Howard isn't a bad character, he is interesting, but his purpose is just too treacly to do the film any good. A Spanish girl, walking with her mom, accidently bumps into Howard, dropping her ice cream. Howard is apologetic, he has kids of his own, kids he misses dearly, and offers to buy her a replacement cone. Her mother declines. No, I'm not kidding, this is actually what happens to his character. Later, they are brought together in a moment that is just too farfetched to believe.
  
  Matthew Fox is good, but he seems designed to give Barnes the requisite encouragement he needs to get past his demons. As such, his character isn't exactly well-formed.
  
  "Vantage Point" has problems, but it also has some benefits. It benefits from a fast-pace, interesting narrative device and some good work by well-respected character actors. These benefits almost outweigh the problems in the film. Almost.
  
  
  
• Do You See What I See?
  By A18G7GG53G2X8A on 2008-02-23
  I never once believed that the events of "Vantage Point" were possible, but the clever structure and interweaving narratives made for one hell of a fun movie. This is a story that constructs itself out of multiple viewpoints, with characters that witness and/or participate in terrorist activity. To show these viewpoints, the film consistently rewinds itself and then replays, each time focusing on different characters while gradually revealing pieces of the puzzle. I agree that this isn't very realistic, but that doesn't matter since it's more about entertainment. It's a good thing I caught on to that early on, because at a certain point, the convenient twists and implausible action sequences become too numerous to count. The ad campaign claims that eight strangers bear witness, but it's actually hard to know for sure since the segments are very intermingled. You shouldn't be counting, anyway--you'll miss out on everything.
  
  The film takes place in Spain in the city of Salamanca, where the President of the United States plans to take part in an anti-terror summit. A public statement will be given at the Plaza Mayor, where thousands of people have gathered both in support and in protest. Capturing the action for American television is camera director Rex Brooks (Sigourney Weaver), who demands the best footage from both crew and the reporters. Everything goes smoothly until the arrival of the President, who's immediately shot. Complete chaos ensues, which only gets worse with the sound of a distant explosion. It all comes to a grinding halt when the Plaza Mayor explodes in a gigantic fireball, killing dozens if not hundreds.
  
  At this point, the story rewinds twenty-three minutes earlier, just as it turns noon. We now focus on Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid), a member of the President's Secret Service. Because he took a bullet for the President a year earlier, he's completely unsure of himself, so much so that he relies on an anti-anxiety medication to stay under control. The other guards seem to be just as unsure, especially since he overreacts to people who reach for things in their pockets. His partner, Kent Taylor (Matthew Fox), seems to be the only one that still respects him. As they stand on the stage, Barnes notices a fluttering curtain in a building that was supposed to be cleared. Even after it turns out to be nothing, he's clearly troubled by what he's seen. He then kicks into high gear when the shot is fired; after tackling and losing a man claiming to be a Spanish police officer, and after the explosion, Barnes runs into Brooks' news van and demands to see every moment of footage. He ends up seeing something that shocks him to the core.
  
  The story rewinds again, and this time we focus on Enrique (Eduardo Noriega), a Spanish cop assigned to protect the Mayor of Salamanca. He's also set to meet his lover, Veronica (Ayelet Zurer), although he feels threatened when he sees another man holding her. This is bad because he already feels strange about what Veronica wants him to do. After a quick exchange, Enrique moves into the crowd and witnesses the President being shot. He runs on stage, only to be tackled by Barnes and arrested on the spot. After the explosion, Enrique leads the Secret Service on a chase through the streets, one that ends at an underpass spanning a busy highway. It also ends with him saying "Surprised to see me alive?" to an as yet unrevealed person.
  
  Once again, the story rewinds. We now meet Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker), an American tourist visiting Europe for the first time. Capturing every moment on a digital camcorder, he walks around Plaza Mayor with awe in his eyes. As the summit gets underway, he notices an odd interaction with a Spanish couple, the kind that says they have something to hide from the rest of the world. He then notices strange activity in the upper floors of a building, which then leads to the President being shot. As panic takes hold, Barnes approaches Lewis and demands to see the footage he shot. Then comes the explosion, which both Lewis and his camera miraculously survive. Even more miraculous is his willingness to chase Enrique and continue recording the events--he seems awfully curious for someone who barely escaped with his life.
  
  I can't describe the remaining viewpoints simply because too much would be given away. I'm sorry to say that one of the biggest plot points was already given away in the trailers, and it relates directly to the President (William Hurt). To those of you who have seen them: you'll know exactly what I'm talking about. To those of you who haven't seen them: believe me, you're better off. Be that as it may, I was greatly entertained by this film, from its enticing start to its frenetic finish. The final ten minutes of "Vantage Point" are fast-paced and satisfying, and they feature a lengthy car chase that's anything but realistic, a subplot about a man's missing brother, and more than a few characters running across busy streets. Best of all, it features that climactic moment when all the major viewpoints converge into a single narrative. I can't say that the story is unpredictable--that would depend on your ability to detect elaborate plot twists. What I can say is that, even if you do figure everything out too soon, you'll probably still have fun watching it.
  
  
• "DisadVantage; no Point" is more like it
  By A30A5I8FG82M2E on 2008-04-24
  My friends and I agree: this movie is one of the biggest wastes of time ever released to general audiences. I normally like studmiesters like Dennis Quaid, but why oh why did he take the money for this laughable Tuesday morning? Sigourney Weaver fans take note, her performance in this film (I have to swallow hard to even call it that) amounts to precious little more than an extended cameo. Forest Whitaker, after seeing him in such tremendous roles as "Last King of Scotland" and his recurring character on the magnificent television series "The Shield", is a crushing disappointment as a man with a video camera who catches the preposterous proceedings on a video camera.
  
  The gimmick of showing a political assassination from multiple characters' perspectives is intriguing, to say the least (and I am, in fact, fond enough of both red and white wine). But the tricky part, as evidenced in this outrageous mistake of a movie, is in the execution. Everytime the movie 'rewinds' to the beginning of the story to show another characters' perspective, ripples of unintentional laughter rang out loud and clear throughout the cinema. One fellow viewer even threw a bag of popcorn at the screen (for which he received a hearty ovation from yours truly).
  
  
• i am glad i rented this first
  By A2VNLBMJK7DH5T on 2008-07-08
  another great cast with a terrible story
  i am so glad i rented this movie and didnt buy it
  i dit not like this film and had such high hopes
  very dissapointed
  this may have been the worst action movie that i have seen
  i will def be not getting this movie on blu ray
  its def not any of the bourne movies
  or even shooter
  those are action movies
  again loved the cast
  hated the movie
  
  
• Groundhog Day on Steroids!!!!
  By A1S3IEVZI29T7H on 2008-07-23
  Vantage Point is an ingenious action thriller surrounding the attempted assasination of the U.S. President attending an international conference in Spain. The movie is actually 'about" 15 minutes but is seen from the "vantage point' (sorry) of about six different people. Each perspective presents a tad more about the swirling espionage associated with the conference until you realize that nothing is what you thought it was (AT ALL) in the beginning.
  
  Perhaps I am not sophisticated enough to dwell on the supposed GLARING shortcomings of the film. I suspect some "critics" are conditioned/programmed to be oh so discerning that they can't see the forest for the trees - this was a thrilling, action-packed, and rather clever way of looking at an intense incident and is an excellent example of the age-old adage that truth is relative. Six people can look at exactly the same thing and see six different things.
  
  Fun movie. Great action flick. I indeed recommend.
  
  
• From My Vantage Point It is one of the Worst
  By A11B61QBGHLQDN on 2008-08-31
  This movie sports an all-star cast, but that is about all it has going for it. Firstly, it is too short for all the action in it yet it still tries to develop characters and that just falls flat. We get about 30 seconds of a character's background. Secondly, the events are completely unreasonable. The details of the terrorist attack are just non-sensical considering the amount of the security that occurs in any function involving the President. A few terrorists kill a troop of secret service men as if those guarding the President were henchman working for Dr. Evil in an Austin Power's movie. Thirdly, no reason is ever given for why a group of hodge-podge Moroccans would kill dozens of innocent people and the President of the USA. The characters in on the plot could or would never pull it off either.
  
  The worst aspect of the movie is the attempt to create suspense by continually rewinding the events and showing the same time period from about 6-7 different characters' "vantage points." The result is that it completely disrupts any flow the movie would have and prevents viewers from connecting with any of the characters. All-in-all it leads to only about 15 mins. worth of actual time passing in the movie's events.
  
  The ending also is illogical, not to mention the impossibility of a secret service agent in a high speed chase through unfamilar narrow streets filled with cars and pedstrians, on the sidewalk, down stairs, shifting, sliding, turning, etc and of course making cell phone calls, then getting completely smashed by a big truck and a wall, and surprise..getting out and chasing down the bad guys.
  
  
• Come on people!!
  By A6AGN1U1BDB0V on 2008-09-08
  I can't believe there aren't many more 1 star reviews on this horrible movie.
  
  Wow, where do we start. Well, how about with the cell phone. It is fortunate for the free world that the bad guy hadn't completely read the owners manual because it would have meant some serious trouble for the rest of us. I'm sure the phone also has the ability to remotely fly Air Force 1, make the lights go and off in every office building in Spain, and order a pizza at the same time. Controlling a sniper rifle is child's play for that thing.
  
  Do we really believe that the Secret Service is that inept? I've actually known Secret Service guys - that one lone bad guy dude at the end, THAT is the way THEY are. Talking about that super bad dude. Can anyone please explain to me why he put a mask over his face? He kills a squad of highly trained agents, then puts on his mask, kills a dozen more agents to the point where there is NO ONE LEFT (save one) and then he takes off his mask??!!! Why put it on in the first place???!!!
  
  Then there is the ridiculous child in the movie. As someone else pointed out, these guys kill scores of innocent people but the guy has a case of consciousness at the end and rolls over his vehicle? What?? NO NO NO - a true bad guy (and this guy was) was not going to stop. Terrorists do not brake for Raccoons, squirrels, or little girls.
  
  Why was Weaver in this movie?
  
  I had no idea it was so so easy to place and transport bombs from place to place where the President was going to be. This movie has let out all of its secrets - who knew?
  
  The plot was absolutely ridiculous. These movie makers know NOTHING about security. It is true that most people don't either, but you know watching this movie that even though you may not know much about it, there is common sense. Common sense would tell you that this movie was total crap.
  
  Oh - another thing. Since when would you ever see a Russian, Chinese, or French secret service agent equivalent running through OUR streets, car jacking by simply flashing their Chinese/Russian/French badge, and firing shots into the air after a "suspect", who just so happens to be a policeman of OUR country. Heck not only shooting into the air but AT the suspect in a street full of innocent people. "Our" innocent people. Would any of us stand for that? Would any country stand for our secret service agents driving down their streets and shooting at people indiscriminately? Secondly, if one of them fires his gun half a dozen times (or was it a dozen, in all of the excitement I lost track myself) you would think they would be good enough to HIT their target. Of course the super bad dude NEVER missed. That is why I call him the "super" bad dude.
  
  Do not waste your time with this movie. The trailer showed great promise and I am sure that this "could" have been a great movie. What an utter disappointment. Even more so that people actually like this movie. I know people are entitled to their opinion, but shees.
  
  
• This movie is a comedy, right?
  By A20NLM8AZZ4UJO on 2008-09-11
  Right? This movie is supposed to make us laugh, right? Well, either that or this is one of the worst movies made in Hollywood in the last few years. I'm not going to mention any details about that Salamanca where people speak (and sometimes even look) like Mexicans, American trucks drive in American highways, a Mexican train makes a nice contrast against a view of the city and so on. Let's focus on that stupid summit with one guy who looks like from the Middle East, another one like an African dictator and an American president raising his arms in a sign of victory in front of a crowd gathered in the same way they would be for the Sunday market (so easy to get in and out of the Plaza Mayor, you can invite all your terrorist friends to join us!). The rest of the plot follows this "wonderful" beginning supported by two essential ingredients in similar low quality Hollywood movies: the hero with some dramatic problems (here the thing is apparently some stomachache that makes Dennis Quaid's face turn into something painful from time to time at the beginning of the movie to show us how great a hero he is despite those pains) and second, the little girl (oh, the little girl!): don't miss the part where the Mexican or Centroamerican girl (nothing against any nationality but please, don't tell me you shot the entire movie in Spain!!) is in danger: one of the most pathetic scenes in movie history. I really recommend that you watch the movie with a big group of friends (especially if you have some from Spain), make some pop-corn and prepare to laugh with all the 'intelligent" moments in the film. There are so many!!!
  
  
• The all-seeing eye
  By A1RNMPOY4XIAA8 on 2008-02-23
  As the Bourne series raises the bar for action films, and audiences balk at two-plus hour runtimes, the filmmakers of Vantage Point seem like they are trying to bring a fresh, new, unconventional take on the action/thriller genre. Though it may annoy some people, I felt the new take turns Vantage Point into a taut terrorist thriller.
  
  
  The new take or approach is jumping right into the moment (everything is already planned out, people and weapons in place, etc.) of the action and then telling it from eight different points of view. This is where some people may be mildly irritated because after you see one point of view everything is suddenly rewound and shown from the next person's point of view (this is done six times) before they all converge into a thrilling finale filled with one massive adrenaline-fuelled car/chase sequence.
  
  
  Because of the complex twists and turns of the plot and characters I will be brief, very brief actually, on the plot. It starts with a TV network covering a large gathering of leaders from all over the world (including the President of the United States) who have come together to form an alliance against the war on terror. At the beginning of this meeting the US president is assassinated as he takes the stage, and it begins replaying the assassination through all the different points of view. The editing must be commended in this film as it blends all the points of views so sophisticatedly you cannot help being engrossed, and the star-studded cast includes Dennis Quaid, Mathew Fox, Forest Whitaker, William Hurt, and Sigourney Weaver simply adds to everything.
  
  
  In the theater I was watching some people called out their annoyance of "again?!" on the fifth rewind, which I find amusing as the filmmakers are simply trying to come up with something new in these sequel-ridden times. And probably as those same people say Hollywood is "out of ideas" they get angry when it tries something "different" and would rather go spend their money on Spider-man 8.
  
  
  I felt Vantage Point was an intelligent thriller, and yes it had its' share of implausible plot points, but these were minor as the new technique makes you feel like you have an all-seeing surveillance system. I kind of felt like I was putting a puzzle together, piece by piece, and as you see a new point of view it adds more to the story and just when you think you have it figured out it changes again.
  
  
  
• Unpredictable + Unique way of telling a story + Very suspenseful + Impressive special effects = Best thriller of 2008, so far.
  By AYWSFRCIMOAYE on 2008-02-23
  This movie is unpredictable. I could not guess what was coming until the end.
  
  It has a unique way of telling a story. The plot is unfolded in 4 or 5 different people's points of views. First, you'll see the motorcade of the president of the United States arrived at the scene. At about noon, he was shot. Then, a huge explosion occurred at the scene that killed a lot of people. Next, the film was rewinded to 23 minutes earlier. Then it was told in the eyes of a secret service agent, Dennis Quaid. This time the narration stopped about 15 minutes after the president was shot. It showed us what was happening after the explosion. Then the movie was turned back 23 minutes again. This time, it was told in another person point of view. Each time, it revealed a little more about the plot and action. To me, the filming and the technique are very effective. It's very suspenseful. It keeps my eyes glued to the screen from the beginning till the end.
  
  A few critics said the movie lost its momentum because when the climax was about to be reached, the movie was rewinded. Yes, the first time it was done, it irritated me a little but five minutes later I was completely satisfied. It was because more details of the plot were revealed in another person's point of view! Further, the picture moved at fast pace so the rewinding did not cause any boredom.
  
  The special effects are impressive. Especially, the explosion at the Plaza looks very real. It has some twists too.
  
  Somebody said the ending was far fetched. Yes, so are the endings of many other movies. That does not reduce their entertaining values because they are not documentaries.
  
  If you want something different, very thrilling and exciting. This is the film for you. It's the best thriller of 2008, so far. I certainly will buy it when it's released on DVD.
  
  
  
• Not at all original to any film buff:VANTAGE POINT
  By ATXL536YX71TR on 2008-02-23
  VANTAGE POINT may fare better with people who are not familiar with films such as Akira Kurosawa's Rashomon (In the Woods) ~Original Release ~ [Import, All-regions] (Dvd),The Red Violin,or Groundhog Day (Special Edition); but director Peter Travis (a BAFTA winner for Omagh,which is an Irish film that is light years different!!!) has not created anything original or compelling in this film which creates the multiple-perspectives of a political assassination in a Salamanca piazza.After shots are fired and bombs explode,killing virtually no one,the film then rewinds multiple times (and I do mean multiple times) showing the original scene from different "vantage points" (hence the title)
  I saw this at a free screening and we were informed that this film had been held back for a year.Why? I don't know.I can say that I felt that the Barry Levy screenplay,( a teacher of 3rd and 9th graders,who had his script picked up by Columbia),was dreadful!!!Again, from my "vantage point" this film has been done many times before and with much better results and acting.William Hurt,Sigourney Weaver,Forest Whitaker,Dennis Quaid.....Oscar actors wasted.One vantage point is enough.2 and 1/2-3 stars.
  
  
• Swiss cheese plot
  By A1ZH9LWMX5UCFJ on 2008-03-08
  At first I thought this movie was going to be like Memento where we had to follow it backwards, but the 'rewind' was just setting up the six different vantage points. It became very predictable after the second viewpoint though and I agree with others that Forest Whittaker was the most engaging character. Some of the 'big brother' stuff was creepy, the US thought they had the edge, but the terrorists used technology to their own twisted benefit too. More than once during the car chase my husband looked over at me and said 'yeah, right'. All that chasing and Quaid still knows at the end he is "six blocks east of the plaza". Que? I've seen worse but wait for the rental.
  
  
• "Rashomon" crossed with "Groundhog Day"
  By A19ZXK9HHVRV1X on 2008-03-17
  ***1/2
  
  As its title suggests, "Vantage Point" is all about the unique perspective each of us brings to the events we witness. To explore this theme, the movie employs the old "Rashomon" technique of telling the same story from the viewpoint of a half dozen or so characters present at the scene. The incident in this case is the attempted assassination of the President of the United States at an anti-terrorism summit being held in Salamanca, Spain, an event at which two massive bombs are also detonated. In Barry Levy`s screenplay, each angle of the story functions much like an individual piece in a giant jigsaw puzzle, the full picture of which comes fully clear only after each element has been successfully fitted and secured in its proper place.
  
  "Vantage Point" features a large cast of well-known actors, including William Hurt as the President; Dennis Quaid and Michael Fox as secret service agents; Sigourney Weaver as a TV news producer; Forest Whitaker as an American tourist; Zoe Saldana as a news reporter; and Eduardo Noriega, Edgar Ramirez and Ayelet Zurer as Spanish terrorists (the Spaniards definitely get the short end of the stick in this movie).
  
  Despite the deliberately fragmented nature of the narrative, the main focus of the film falls on Quaid's character, an agent who less than a year earlier took a bullet for the President and who is now returning to his job an obviously shaken and high strung man.
  
  Directed by Pete Travis, "Vantage Point" is a high octane political thriller that gets the job done without ever distinguishing itself overmuch. By constantly returning to the same event (the movie sometimes feels like a somber remake of "Groundhog Day") and relating the story through so many eyewitnesses, the film sacrifices some of its character development for sheer narrative pyrotechnics. Still, the storytelling is occasionally ingenious and Travis keeps the action percolating along at a fast enough clip to keep us from noting the sometimes farfetched and overwrought nature of much of what the movie is showing us (it also points up just how many nefarious things one can presumably do with an iphone these days). There`s even a humdinger of a car chase through the beautiful streets of Salamanca that is sure to get the adrenalin pumping, even if the mind is left reeling by its overall implausibility.
  
  "Vantage Point" may have you rolling your eyes from time to time in confusion and disbelief, especially towards the end of the movie, but it is at least guaranteed to keep you entertained for the ninety or so minutes it takes to tell its story.
  
  
• Rashomon is Art.....this isn't...
  By AUR1AB6253R0Z on 2008-04-12
  As a huge Kurosawa (Akira, but Kiyoshi too) fan, I wish reviewers would stop indicating that the movie "Vantage Point" has anything in common with Kurosawa's masterpiece "Rashomon". When "Rashomon" showed the same event from different viewpoints, the event as described was very different to each person...the point being that reality is subjective, and as a main character remarks "all men lie". "Vantage Point" merely shows the same event as seen by different people, the only difference being what they happened to see or be exposed to. As such it is a presentation/storytelling technique, not a philosophical statement.
  
  With that out of the way, I actually thought "Vantage Point" was better than I had expected. Excessive car chase, over the top acting, coincidences and resolutions, but as American movies go it didn't suck.
  
  If you'd like to see a REALLY good movie that presents the same events from different points of view, try the Korean film "Jakarta". As good a screenplay as "The Usual Suspects" IMHO.....
  
  
• Started out great, then became ridiculous
  By AU6A78VXCKHZ2 on 2008-07-06
  The beginning of the movie was excellent. Somewhere along the way, it turned into a unbelievable comic book adventure with Dennis Quaid as a near indestructible secret service agent. Suffice it to say that the entire ending/climax rested on the most oblivious pedestrian in the history of the world. Not only will this 10 year old year girl blindly bump into Forest Whittaker with her ice cream cone, she'll walk through four lanes of speeding traffic with a care. Cars will speed past her and barely miss forcing her off the freeway, then incredibly she'll keep walking back into the lanes. They were better off making her blind and retarded, which would have been much more realistic than a girl who repeated walked back and forth through highway lanes for no apparent reason. Of course, all the Spanish drivers were too much in a hurry for, I dunno, any of them to stop or *gasp* slow down because a idiot girl keeps walking into traffic. Of course, her equally stupid mother is off on the side of the road encouraging our female Magoo to cross even more lanes and come over.
  
  Much of the movie felt forced and contrived like this scene.
  
  
• It's a test.
  By A9LAPV8XNKZVZ on 2008-07-06
  If you watch this and get to the 30 minute mark, and don't know who the traitor is, you fail. Or you are young. You need to watch more movies. Clue, a big red flag waving= a big star small role. You ask "What's he/she doing here? Probably being bad. What a waste of a lot of talent. Bad car chase. Doesn't traffic exist?
  
  
• FILM SCHOOL Rewind Time Displacement OVERKILL
  By A14Z0Q1DU6CBJJ on 2008-07-03
  I got here fully prepared to dish this thing a 1 star stabbing, but the more I thought about it, the more I thought... there actually was a pretty good movie in here, if it weren't for the EXPERIMENTAL, it's cool to jump around timelines like MEMENTO, PULP FICTION & 21 GRAMS, film school BS that you had to put up with for the first 55 minutes.
  
  Once the film got into the point of view of President Ashton (William Hurt) the movie actually had a fairly good payoff, only to be ultimately ruined in the end, but I'll get to that. Once Secret Service Agent Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid) puts his finger on the pulse of the assassination attempt and multiple bombings, after a god-awful amount of rewinds that have us watching the movie from multiple VANTAGE POINTS, the movie kicks into high gear with an exciting hotel room scene, an intense car chase and a coincidental finalle that ruined it all.
  
  The rewinds, I believe there are 6, while interesting in an EXPERIMENTAL way, fail miserably, ultimately frustrating the viewer and wishing they could fast forward to the end. Yet, when they finally got to the Presidents POV, I realized, yes, the rewinding was frustrating and disjoining, but there actually was a pretty cool movie hidden here, with doubles, double-crosses and terrorism, and once the action and answers starting kicking in, I thought... If they had just told the movie without the experimental film school junk, this could have been a cool movie.
  
  Then... of course, you throw in the coincidental ending that basically had everybody involved in the plot, and solving the plot colliding in the exact same intersection underneath an overpass. Even though, there was a crazy car chase and some guy on foot arrived at the location a good 5 minutes before guys in an ambulance, despite looking at each other back at the collisium.
  
  VANTAGE POINT is a complete mess and it's a shame because for the last 20 minutes, minus the coincidental ending, they actually entertained us... too bad there was a whole other hour there that was terrible.
  
  
  
• A movie that plays with all your expectations and perceptions
  By AUHG8KSHI529U on 2008-07-13
  This is a movie that plays with your perceptions and expectations. William Hurt plays the President of the United States in a time of Global Terror. He attends a conference in Spain and is shot. Dennis Quaid plays Thomas Barnes, a Secret Service Agent who is brought back for this event after being shot and nearly losing his life a year earlier.
  
  The first half of the movie shows us the event, rewinds and shows us events from another person's point of view, and does that four times (as I recall). After that we think we have the pieces together and the movie tells its narratives as some of the previous views converge for different reasons. I really don't want to say any more about the plot.
  
  I thought it was a pretty good and entertaining movie. Quaid gives a solid performance as a serious, brave, but understandably tentative agent. William Hurt is good in his smallish role. Forest Whitaker gives the movie an emotional center. Sigourney Weaver, Bruce McGill, Matthew Fox, Edgar Ramirez, Saïd Taghmaoui, Ayelet Zurer, and several others fill out a really good cast.
  
  While not a great film, it is worth seeing.
  
  Reviewed by Craig Matteson, Ann Arbor, MI
  
  
  
• Initially Thrilling But Ultimately Ludicrous Melding of "Rashomon" and "24"
  By A13E0ARAXI6KJW on 2008-07-17
  There is no argument that first-time feature director Pete Travis maneuvers this 2008 action thriller with propulsive intensity throughout its surprisingly fleet ninety-minute running time, but contrivance and coincidence seem to be the two guiding forces behind the overly tricked-out screenplay by first-time screenwriter Barry L. Levy. The concept starts promisingly as it aspires to be a contemporary take on Rashomon, Akira Kurosawa's classic melodrama about the subjectivity of truth and the uncertainty of factual accuracy. Under the guise of a political thriller, however, the film only replicates one part of Kurosawa's cinematic equation - showing the multiple perspectives of the participants to a traumatic event - without really addressing the complexity behind the individual perceptions. The basis of the differences in perspective lies wholly within the facts to which each participant is exposed. Consequently, Travis and Levy use the recycling gimmick to peel away components of the central assassination plot until we are left with a straight-ahead finale that is as ludicrous as it is chaotic.
  
  As just seen in Jieho Lee's even more preposterous The Air I Breathe, Paul Haggis' Crash has inspired yet another overly connected storyline that sacrifices any sense of realism for 24-style cliffhanger plot devices. This time, the Plaza Mayor in Salamanca, Spain is the setting for an anti-terrorism summit among 150 world leaders at which U.S. President Henry Ashton is about to speak onstage. He is shot twice after which there is an explosion some distance away from the square, and then a few minutes later, a bomb explodes under the stage causing several casualties. This all occurs over a twenty-three-minute period, and it is first seen most effectively through the eyes of a CNN-type news crew led by veteran news producer Rex Brooks. Their viewpoint ends when their onsite reporter is killed in the bombing. The movie is strong in a pulpy way up to this point, but then we see the same series of events six times over. The second perspective shows Secret Service agents Thomas Barnes and Kent Taylor on active duty. Just back after recovering from a nervous breakdown brought on by another presidential assassination attempt a year earlier, Barnes is especially anxiety-driven during the events that unfold.
  
  The third viewpoint is that of a Spanish police officer named Enrique who may or may not have a connection to the terrorists involved. By the time we see the same events a fourth time, the novelty has genuinely worn off as we see everything again from American tourist Howard Lewis' perspective and then once again from the President himself. These particular episodes spin into an incredulous series of circumstances that lead to the final viewpoint represented by the terrorists themselves. The plot finally moves forward in time once we are privy to what all the participants experience. Performances prove to be secondary in a labyrinth thriller like this, although Dennis Quaid registers the most as the tortured and heroically persistent Barnes, and William Hurt shows true executive élan in the surprisingly meaty role of Ashton. Forest Whitaker valiantly attempts to make the most of a no-win role as Lewis as his character becomes more far-fetched. A similar problem befalls Matthew Fox as Taylor, but Sigourney Weaver has no problem acting authoritative in a near-cameo as Brooks during the best ten minutes of the movie.
  
  An international supporting cast fills the remaining key roles expertly - Spain's Eduardo Noriega, Venezuela's Édgar Ramirez, France's Saïd Taghmaoui (Amir's driver in The Kite Runner), and Israel's Ayelet Zurer (Avner's wife in Munich). Interestingly, while the plot could have been fodder for an anti-Bush political diatribe, the film holds back from such easy targets. The downside, however, is a murkiness in character motivation that is never really clarified beyond the basic good-versus-bad dynamics. Features on the 2008 DVD are pretty standard with Travis going solo on the film's commentary track. While he provides insight, interactive dialogue with Levy or some of the principal cast could have held more interest. The making-of featurette, "An Inside Perspective" runs nearly a half-hour and provides the standard back-slapping from cast and crew as well as behind-the-scenes footage. The sixteen-minute "Plotting an Assassination" seems repetitive even with the focus purely on the script and the characters. The seven-minute "Coordinating Chaos" focuses on the elaborate stunts, especially the Bullitt-style car chase that was filmed in Mexico City doubling for Salamanca. A one-minute gag take (not that funny) and several trailers complete the extras.
  
  
• Well I liked it.
  By AF1D1SXVYVK4Y on 2008-07-20
  I just finished watching this movie and I have to say that I liked it. I know that some were put off by the use of flash backs but I thought that it help sell the movie. And the action (though not believable) was there from start to finish. After renting this from Walmart for one dollar, I must say I got a lot of bang for my buck. It more than made up for the movie I lost while also renting AVP. That movie sucked!!!!!
  
  
• A good fast moving action flick
  By A2TVAG2XX0LWIO on 2008-07-20
  I wanted to see Vantage Point since it came out in theaters, but I never got the chance. Maybe that was a good thing because while this movie has its points I don't feel that it is as a complete story line as it is made out to be. The best way that I can describe this movie is when you are unwrapping a present in a big box, and then you find a smaller box inside of the larger box and so on. That is how this movie is, times 6, because of the 6 different vantage points that the film is based on. Not until you get to the last box that you are unwrapping do you see how all of the parts fit together, and that is really what spins this movie. There is plenty of action which keeps this films constantly moving, and one thing that I did like is when each vantage point is rolled back and the time starts over. I felt that when I was watching it the replays told the viewer that the vantage point was starting over which made the movie easier to follow.
  
  
• I'm giving it an extra star
  By A4PPZNQF1X2IY on 2008-07-24
  This is probably a 4-star movie at best, but I'm giving it extra because:
  
  1) It's not gratuitous with violence or language, and has no sex
  2) It doesn't waste my freaking time with superfluous footage, long intros, extensive backgrounds, dull dialogue or any other filler crap.
  It gets to the point and gets it done.
  3) As others mention, I love the "Rashomon" or "Run Lola Run" format
  of different perspectives on the same event.
  
  Sure, it's over the top in parts, extremely coincidental in others, or just plain unbeleivable at times, but it's a nice little family type thriller that pushes the pedal down and gives a good ride. Hell, that's something that's hard to find at Blockbuster these days. Props!
  
  
• BEST VANTAGE POINT IS YOURS
  By A2DAHERP7HYJGO on 2008-07-26
  VANTAGE POINT was a movie whose preview seemed to play nearly every time I went to the theater. So much so that by the time the movie was released I was tired of seeing it. A major mistake on my point as this was one of the most thrilling movies I've seen in years.
  
  The film revolves around a visit by the US President (William Hurt) to a conference on terrorism in Spain. Several countries have agreed to back his proposal in and effort to stop the killing. As the President walks to the podium in an open air square where the conference is taking place, he is shot by an assassin's bullet. This starts the film.
  
  But there is more to it than that. As the title states, the film is offered from various vantage points of the same scene. The opening scene is offered via a news network's truck as it watches the carnage that happens when the President is not only shot but a bomb blows up in the public square.
  
  Through them we are introduced to Secret Service Agent Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid) and lead Agent Kent Taylor (Matthew Fox). These are the agents in charge of protecting the President, a job Barnes knows well as less than a year earlier he took a bullet while protecting him. On edge and looking for signs of trouble, Barnes' sharp eye and instincts kick in just before the shot is fired.
  
  But Barnes' perception is not the last we are offered. We are also given the viewpoint of Enrigue (Eduardo Noriega), a policeman who becomes suspect by the Secret Service when he rushes the podium to protect the President. Another view is offered through the eyes of vacationer Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker) who is filming all he sees with his new camcorder. An important view is that of the President himself when we learn it was not him but his double who took the bullet! The last view offered is that of the terrorists whose job was to kill the President...or was it?
  
  Each section takes a 23 minute time period and condenses it to offer the varying viewpoints of each character. And with each differing viewpoint we as viewers ourselves are offered more clues as to just who is behind the assassination attempt. Until the last view offered I had no firm idea.
  
  Movies have been called white knuckle rides but this movie fulfills that line to a T. The breakneck pace of the film, while showing us the same basic scene over and over, holds you in its grip not just for the carnage that ensues but because of the action that follows. Leads are discovered and agents set in motion as they try to capture the person responsible.
  
  Many people have claimed that THE FRENCH CONNECTION or BULLIT or lately the Bourne films have offered the greatest car chases of all times. I think that title can now be taken by the stunt drivers in this film. Moving at breakneck speed through tiny streets that are little more than alleys filled with pedestrians and cars takes your breath away.
  
  All performances are top of the line. While Quaid's might seem one note, that is actually the demeanor of Secret Service agents. Their job IS to protect the President and nothing more. It happens in this film. High speed, explosive and breathtaking are all apt descriptions of this movie. If your palms aren't sweating by the end, you weren't paying attention.
  
  
  
  

• The Bank Job
• 21 (Single-Disc Edition)
• Jumper
• 10,000 B.C.
• The Bucket List