| About | BBlog | BBloopers | BBoard | BBspot's Book of Geek | BBshop | Archives | Poll:
Werewolves vs Vampires
|
|
Results: 1 matches for your search:
Untraceable Redux I can confirm that Untraceable was horrible. The movie felt like a special two-part edition of CSI rather than a movie. This movie was overburdened by needless exposition for the benefit of the audience that always appears in those shows. Characters spent more time explaining things than doing anything. The tech jargon was not as bad as the trailer. In the movie she said he was able to see her files, not see all her keystrokes. It still wasn't realistic, but it wasn't a major distraction. It's still puzzling me how the guy could have a streaming video site capable of handling over 17 million visitors in less than 5 minutes and not have it be traced. The movie explained it by saying he had hijacked a bunch of sites using Trojans, but he still had to upload the video to all those sites somehow. Anyway, I don't want to get bogged down in the technical snafus. The trailer does lay out the plot well. Some guy has set up an untraceable site. The more people that visit the site the faster the victim dies. He's set up elaborate devices to torture these people to death. For me, watching torture is not enjoyable. Let's get to the notes… "Piracy warning" one false lead sends the police to a guys house. He's got all sorts of gay porn images posted all over his house. He's not the killer, but the FBI bust him for copying movies. A not-so-friendly reminder from the folks at the MPAA. I don't think they have to worry about anybody copying this movie though. Diane Lane was "emotionless." I imagine an FBI agent would be serious, but you'd think they would show more emotion than Lane did. One headscratcher from the movie. At one point one of the victims sends a message while being killed. Lane notices this while it's happening and enlists an expert to decode the message. The victim gets the message out, but they only get part of the message. Um, hello? Apparently the FBI isn't recording this video stream of an online murder. They're unable to go back to check the tape to find out what the whole message is. It doesn't matter, because she takes no time decoding the partial message, but still. "Oh please!" From the trailer you know that the killer pops up in the back of Lane's car. I consider this a big spoiler revealed in the trailer. This happens at the end of the movie, and if you've seen the trailer it's no surprise. It is surprising that just moments before Lane had her gun drawn suspecting someone was in the car, yet fails to secure the car for someone sitting in her backseat. Yet another "headscratcher." "Exclaiming plot points." I mentioned this earlier, but too often the characters would explain plot points. At the end one character says, "He disabled her computer so we can't track her car," to no one in particular. That's just so you know why they aren't using the Onstar system in her car to find her. "Ten people watching." The more visitors to the site the faster the victims die. The FBI knows this, yet every FBI person has the site open on their computers? That's good police work there. "Couldn't see that coming?" The meticulous killer took great measures in his earlier murderers to make sure the victims couldn't escape from their torture box. However, for the final victim, it's obvious before he evens starts how the victim could escape. You expect your heroes to do something spectacular or ingenious to escape, not something glaringly obvious. There were about twenty people in the screening that I was at. I think the local high school was out because there were many high school kids at the theater. I overheard these quotes after the film's "climax." "That's it?" and "Well, that was a waste of money." I couldn't agree more. Filed under Musings by Brian - Fri Jan 25, 2008 @ 2:46 PM (Permalink - Discuss) |
|
|
