Movie review: Perspectives collide in ‘Vantage Point’

“Vantage Point” aspires to be like “Rashomon,” and though it doesn’t come close to that classic film of a story told from three different points of view, it is however entertaining and suspenseful.

In “Vantage Point,” the same events are played out six times. Each iteration is shown from a different character’s perspective and shows more of the events than the previous run through. This, by itself, is a very intriguing premise.

Add to this the assassination of the president of the United States by terrorists, and there is the potential for a great movie.

But it turned out to be only a good movie.

There are plenty of twists to keep viewers on their toes. Just when you think you know what happened, the next version comes on and you learn something new. This adds to the tension and curiosity for the next repetition.

An exciting car chase near the end of the film gets the adrenaline pumping even if the actual motions of the cars seems a bit too familiar. Yet, the scene does have the almost unique twist of having the good guy chasing the bad guys. For once in a chase scene, you might actually hear yourself saying, “Get him, get him, get him!”

Director Pete Travis used an interesting technique of showing each version in reverse when that segment was over. Each new version began with a dark screen showing that the time is once again noon. This technique has the benefit of making it very clear that we’ve gone back in time to before the main events happened — no confusion here.

Dennis Quaid offers a solid performance as one of the president’s secret service agents. There is an effort made to give Quaid’s “Thomas Barnes” some depth by giving him a back story (one of only two character’s to get one). In this case, Barnes had taken a bullet for the president the year before. This made him and the other agents a bit nervous about whether he was ready to be back in the field. Quaid displayed just the right blend of agitation and resolve.

But then, Dennis Quaid is nearly always great. He’s one of those actors who can be counted on to give 100 percent no matter what the role is.

Also good was Forest Whitaker as an American tourist with a camcorder. He was the other character given a hint of back story: He is traveling alone through Europe as he tries to give distance to a troubled relationship at home.

And he is relentless in his recording of unfolding events, even pursuing secret service agents as they in turn pursue a suspect. Whitaker plays his Howard Lewis as a tenderhearted man willing to endanger his own life to do the right thing.

Few of the other characters are given enough space to develop. And really, in a 90-minute film that tells the story of events that unfold in less than an hour, how much depth could most of the characters be expected to show. Especially since most of the 90 minutes replay the same 10-minute sequence.

The end of the film feels a little like a cheat. But it is interesting how at the climax of the film, all of the different view points converge and out of that convergence comes the resolution.

The worst part about not giving the other characters, particularly the bad guys, any depth or history, is there is no clear motive for their actions. The terrorists’ actions are attributed to some vague retaliatory response — a stereotype of terrorists’ motives.

Where the film disappoints the most is in untapped possibilities of using multiple perspectives. The viewer gets more information as the film progresses mainly because each repetition is longer than the previous one.

It would have been so much more compelling if there were clues for the audience, so that by having seen all the points of view the audience could solve the mystery before the people on screen.

As it is, the audience never gets to wish the hero knew what they knew.

In the end, the different “vantage points” are really just a gimmick — an entertaining gimmick, but a gimmick nonetheless.

Amanda Brooks can be reached at 737-1056 or at abrooks@

lompocrecord.com.