Reviews

For me there were many subtle, poignant pleasures in this film. Early on we see Bruno, sleepy and petulant at being displaced, wearing striped pajamas; as soon as we meet Schmuel, we think - aha - THIS is the boy in the title. But when the devastating ending begins to unfold and Bruno puts on the prison uniform, the sinking realization comes that the title in fact did refer to Bruno all along.

Many reviewers lament the lack of development of Schmuel as the title character - to me, they've missed the point.

It also didn't seem improbable that Schmuel could have a few stolen moments to talk through the fence. Bruno was so extremely lonely and bored after being taken from his close group of pals, it wouldn't have taken much time or conversation for him to form a strong dependence on even fleeting contact with a playmate.

I liked that Bruno wasn't romanticized as a saintly child. It was entirely believable that he would, under threat of punishment, betray his friend. He was bitterly sorry afterwards, and wanted to make amends by finding Schmuel's father. This also appealed to him as a lover of adventure stories, "knights in shining armor." At a great but understated turning point, you so want Schmuel to crawl out of the camp (as he tentatively suggests) rather than Bruno crawling in - to him the logical action since he's naively confident he'll succeed like the heroes in his books.

During the last harrowing sequence, I was on the edge of my seat, hoping Bruno would be shown in an epilogue, still friends with the rescued Schmuel... that the Commandant (he WAS after all a loving father) had seen the light and taken everyone to Switzerland like the von Trapp family! That would have been a trite cop-out, but it would have been an outcome suitable for a kid's movie. Though this is from a child's viewpoint, it's way too sad and disturbing for children - the 13 part of the PG-13 should be strictly observed! Those small, clutching hands of friendship and comfort in the most desperate situation made the tears flow. That image will stick with me, a symbol of children everywhere who don't deserve to be caught up in horror and violence; and also that both sides in a war have the capacity of our human nature to choose common ground and humanity. Maybe that's what is meant by becoming as little children, because then we can easily see what's truly logical and important.

It was annoying to me that many in the packed theatre responded with such abandon (groans, laughter, references to Groudhog Day) when the action repeatedly 'rewound' to give yet another character's perspective of the film's main event. I was trying hard to concentrate and forgive Quaid's character's wild-eyed twitching and sweating, which would surely have caught someone's attention before he was assigned to what was touted as an uber-risky and globally important mission ... also hoping that a potential "plot twist" thrown up first thing like a big grapefruit would be a red herring ... and people were laughing and hooting - how rude! Number one: With the ubiquitous previews, how could so many be surprised at the format? And Number 2: Weren't they too engaged, anxious to keep solving the puzzle, to lose focus on the excitement and unfolding drama? Whatever the answer to number 1, number 2 trumps it with its obvious conclusion: "Evidently not." However interesting the concept, I couldn't very well blame my fellow audience members for failing to be sufficiently enthralled. Vantage Point tries to be edge-of-your-seat serious, and a prat-fall by the story-telling device is disappointing to say the least.

Worse than any of the above, however, the villains' behavior in THE pivotal moment of the story made me (after keeping sanctimoniously quiet and glaring at my seatmates) almost stand up and yell "WHAT?!?" If there was any groundwork laid for a sudden attack of conscience, that vantage point must be on the cutting-room floor.

Vantage Point was entertaining and no more hokey or improbable than other thrillers. William Hurt, Dennis Quaid, Sigourney Weaver and Forest Whitaker are all fun and appealing to watch. The point I guess was that my expectations were higher - comparisons to Rashomon put it at a distinct disadvantage.

I saw this movie twice at Sundance. The organizers praised it highly, the Jury awarded it Spirit of Independence Prize and the audiences loved it. Too bad the first reviewer wasn't interested or was offended by the subject matter and tone. The three stories are connected with the theme: well-intentioned fantasies gone bad in small-town America. Two rednecks feel compelled to save the world from jihad because of a suspicious pistachio nut (to fans of Dubya, this may be offensive.) A homeless hippie cares for his orphaned niece, trying to reassure her that at least the tooth fairy's real. A rich man worries how to remedy the fact he knows no black people. The situations are absurdly funny at times but the characters' emotions are heart-wrenching and genuine. The middle story is a particular gem with a wonderful (not depressing) ending. I'd call the whole thing gently outrageous, somewhere between Little Miss Sunshine and Pulp Fiction.