Talk:Vantage Point (film)/Archive 1

Remake
Isn't this film a remake (of sorts) of the Akira Kurosawa film "Rashomon"? (I apologize that this has no topic bar thing, but I'm pretty inexperienced at all this.) 75.49.206.242 (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think so, although the plots are remarkably similar. (And I added a topic bar for you). 67.160.87.2 (talk) 07:19, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Spoiler Warning
A spoiler warning had been added and I deleted it. No need to add a spoiler warning. Please refer to Spoiler for reasons. --Quest for Truth (talk) 09:51, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

More Detail On Plot
I think there needs to be more detail on the plot, like what happens on everyones point of view. thanks

Rhcp1016 (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I added more detail to the plot, and then realized I went over 900 words, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines. But then, I would describe the plot of this movie as "very complicated". Opinions? I was going to flesh out the ending a bit too, but I'll wait. Dissentor (talk) 07:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed it doesn't mention if the real President was himself shot. L337 kybldmstr (talk) 02:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added some more detail to President Ashton's perspective since I think that a few more lines of detail were necessary. As I just watched the movie, I think that some relevant aspects of this perspective were left out. Hopefully this doesn't make it too bloated.--PIngp0NG (talk) 03:21, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

During Howard Lewis' perspective, he see a person standing by the window via the view finder of his camera just before the President is shot. But later on we are showed that the gun was remote controlled. So who was that in the window? Did I miss something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.185.151.180 (talk) 22:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Could have been the Secret Service agent checking the room with the ventilator in it. --ElLutzo (talk) 21:40, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Casting Section
Can anyone find any citations for the information in the Castings section? Been trawling the internet for references to no avail. --Norman22b (talk) 23:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ambiguity
Saying that the event of B being shot is shown from the perspective of A, while in fact A sees that C is shot, of whom he thinks it is B, is at least confusing. My clarification was reverted.--Patrick (talk) 22:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Plot fix
I'm fixing a minor plot detail. The automated rifle was retrieved by Matthew Fox's character, not placed by him. While it shows him retrieving it, it never shows him placing the rifle. While he certainly knows where it's hidden, we are never shown him placing it there, and for plot purposes it doesn't make sense either, seeing as how he would likely have been with the president all day long. Just a minor point and I'm taking care of it. Levid37 (talk) 07:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Plot & Perspectives
I haven't seen the movie, just the trailer. I think the plot should be explained first, then the perspectives. In my opinion it would be easier to engage in reading the plot that way. I can say that because I want to know about the movie, but don't want to read the perspectives first, because they're lengthy. But then, I haven't seen this movie. Could someone give their personal opinion on my suggestion? 98.202.38.225 (talk) 04:23, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Edited
I removed the line

"This block office extravaganza also starred the up and comming phonominal Michael J. Faison. You will not doubt see more of him, along side the likes of Denzel, Sidney, Forrest, and Jammmie."

It was grammatically incorrect, had spelling errors, was biased, and added nothing other than the author's opinions.


 * Who is Michael Faison. I don't see him in the credits here or on imdb for this movie. I don't eve see any page for him on wiki or imdb. Must not be phonominal. Tydamann (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

More Detail in Production
I think the "Production" section needs more work. Anyone have more info about the length of shooting, budget, etc.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.215.226.36 (talk) 02:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

POTUS
I kept hearing Quiad's character refer to the President as some sort of codename, but couldn't make it out clearly. A few days ago I was browsing on here and came across the page Secret Service codename so after a bit of searching (I had forgotten what the title of the page was) I saw it. It sounded like Quiad was saying 'Clodis' but when looking at the article, it's pretty obbvious he was most likely saying POTUS, for President of The United States. If you really want to be a jerk, I suppose you could argue the film made up it's own fictional codename 'Clodis' or some other nonsensical combination of random letters, but POTUS seems right to me. Also, I wasn't exactly sure where to put that information, I couldn't recall the first time Quaid's character (or anyone) used the word, so I put it in the second sentence under President Ashton's perspective, because the body double (mentioned in the first sentence) would most likely be referred to another codename, so the SS could tell them apart. Tydamann (talk) 19:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It was indeed POTUS. This has been shown in many other movies, and another codename used by the SS is Eagle.Erpbridge (talk) 17:24, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

Plot synopsis
The plot synopsis had been tagged as overly long, which it was, and it probably still is despite the fact I trimmed it as much as I could. Given the very complicated nature of the film, it's impossible to sum things up in 900 words or less. As long as it is now, it's stripped to the basics. LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 20:41, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Critics removed
I removed the following critics:

Richard Corliss of Time observed, "By this fourth or fifth rerun of the events, we have determined that Vantage Point has ambitions no higher than making the audience's collective pulse race as fast as the car Quaid will be maneuvering breathlessly through rush-hour traffic. The movie is best seen as straightforward, sometimes harrowing melodrama, packed with mistaken identities, beautiful villains, a kindly tourist who can outrace the bad guys, and a lost little girl whom the film brazenly sends onto a highway full of speeding cars."
 * Most of the times just retells the story.

Justin Chang of Variety wondered, "Can an implausible setpiece offer up fresh thrills and insights if replayed ad infinitum from different perspectives? Not according to Vantage Point, a 23-minute movie dragged out, via some narrative gimmickry, to a punishing hour and a half. Circling endlessly around a political assassination attempt and its violently contrived aftermath, the film proves every bit as crude, nerve-grinding and finally unsalvageable as the car accidents it keeps inflicting on its characters . . . At once timid and opportunistic, Vantage Point freely milks anxiety from both 9/11 and the 2004 Madrid train bombings, but otherwise stays safe and apolitical throughout."
 * Dito and the references to 9/11 and 2004 Madrid are obvious.

I removed the quotefarm box. --ElLutzo (talk) 22:02, 29 August 2010 (UTC)