Derailed -- Spoilers

[jasonf]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 11:49am

Just watched this last night - is it me, or was it the most predictable movie ever? I mean, if you've seen ANY movie along these lines, the end "twist" was SO obvious from almost the start of the film. I will say when Winston was shot I jumped because I wasn't expecting it at that moment. I kept waiting for a good extra something at the end since the initial twist is revealed with another 20 minutes left -- but the end was just kind of a lame coda that didn't really make any sense...

Do you think it's possible any more to make movies that have a twist that completely throw you off your guard along the lines of The Usual Suspect or Fight Club? (And for the record, M Night Shaymalan has yet to make a movie that I couldn't figure out the ending to - I got the Sixth Sense within moments of Willis getting shot.)

[peach]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 12:12pm

I agree about derailed - was not bad to watch, but I had predicted the twist long before the reveal.

I LOVE mind-bending plot twists. The problem with me is that I often figure them out before the reveal. So it's a bit of a spoil. That's one reason The Usual Suspects is so brilliant - had me going till the bitter end.

I am looking forward to M. Night's new movie....
Updated On: 7/3/06 at 12:12 PM

[jasonf]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 12:46pm

Exactly - The Usual Suspects was also the first in the recent string of that type of movie. I went in having no idea there was a twist of any kind, so I was blown away by it at the time. Now, every movie seems to have a twist - and this one REALLY projected that there was going to be a twist to it.

I'm looking forward to Lady in the Water or whatever it's called, but I was REALLY disappointed by The Village...

[MOXIEINTHECITY]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 5:13pm

That "twist" was obvious from the trailer alone.

[JerseyGirl2]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 8:13pm

I didn't know the twist and was so freaked out by the rape scene that I couldn't finish watching it. I have heard since then that I should have. Eh, I don't know.

[jasonf]

Posted: 7/3/06 at 8:15pm

You should watch the rest - aside from one startling moment, there's nothing else in the movie that's anything remotely like that.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 6/18/07 at 5:26pm

MAJOR SPOILERS. Finally caught up with this mess today, on cable. I'm glad I found this year old thread, because I couldn't believe how obvious the "twist" was, and then, how poorly it was used once it was revealed. Was I crazy -- or maybe just too busy multi-tasking to pay close attention -- or was Anniston trying to play some sort of emotional connection? As if she'd really fell for Clive (becaus he's Clive, and the other guy she was duping was a zhlub).

So much of it is implausible. First of all, Clive's character's behavior -- was this not the stupidist main character you've ever seen in a film played by a hot star? None of his behavior, once the plot kicks in, made any sense. He was so terrified of being found out -- that he'd gone to a hotel with a woman -- he was willing to risk everything? By the time he was standing by the dead man in the car, pretending to be a john afraid to turn a trick with the whore -- while the Chicago police pimp him on! -- I was ready to howl. And did he really believe a hundred grand would shut up a man who never left him alone? And think hiring a redemptive thug to do away with him was morally superior to just turning the whole damn thing over to the cops?

Then there's the scene where he bursts into the room to stop the next poor slob from being duped. I loved it when he stood there delivering an aria to the poor doomed man, explaining the entire plot. As if suddenly, he "owed" it to this man he didn't know. And that's when Anniston threw Clive her painful invested look.

It's one of the most bizarre messes I've seen in a while. Wildly watchable, but totally artificial, right down to an including the way 100 grand sits in a briefcase and gets schlepped all over Chicago! Why, why, why was that money being hauled around?! And why was Clive of all people teaching a writing class in prison?

I cannot stop thinking about those actors reading this script, coming up with questions -- and then how they were answered. I've never seen a main character so ludicrously drawn.

[jasonf]

Posted: 6/18/07 at 5:46pm

It's obviously been a while since I've seen it - but yeah, the movie WAS a ludicrous mess. Still, as you said Auggie, it was watchable - there have been too many movies I haven't even been able to make it through long enough to know or care if there was a twist!

[Auggie27]

Posted: 6/19/07 at 10:38am

I had insomnia last night and couldn't stop thinking about this damned movie, how Clive Owen could end up in such a wimpy leading man role. I read a couple of old reviews, and apparently the entire strategy was to cast Owen and Aniston against type -- he would appear stronger, more in charge, and she would seem more girl next door. Call it not traditional casting of a specific type. In this case -- rather like John C. Riley as Stanley -- it backfired, because we ketp waiting for Owen to wake up and deal with things. Aniston's relative innocence was supposed to throw us off tha scent. It didn't so much backfire as not track; she played her final scene with Owen as if she truly had the hots for him (that would've made the movie more compelling). Anyone else?