Interesting movie, here.

I think it was viewed as a disappointment for a Matt Damon/Emily Blunt semi-big budget affair.  Budgeted at $50 Million, it did take in a respectable $62 Million here at the NABO, and another $65 Million overseas, for a WW gross of $127 Million.  It was also reviewed quite favorably by critics and fans alike...maybe that's why everyone expected so much more from it.

I think the problem lies in the source material and the fact that's it's a major hybrid of 2 genres that rarely play well together...love story and science fiction.  But then again, you'd think that both genre enthusiasts would go to see it?  Not sure.

I have mixed feelings here.  The premise itself is interesting.  The acting from Damon and Blunt is great, IMO.  The action is decent to good. And the message and payoff is also quite satisfying.

For some reason, though, it just doesn't quite work the way it's supposed to.

For me, the sci/fi elements are over used and redundant to the point where I was losing interest in them.  There are also loads and loads of plot holes that I just couldn't overlook.  Finally, I think it was over budgeted at $50 Million, but maybe Damon ate up a bunch of that in his pay, but his talent and star power was definitely necessary, IMO.

Written and directed by George Nolfi, who also wrote Ocean's Twelve, The Sentinel, and The Bourne Ultimatum probably also ate up a good chunk of change.  And finally, this is adapted from  Philip K Dick short story, and the rights could have been expensive.

Any way you look at it, it made money and has to be a success overall, but it flew under the radar and probably won't be well or fondly remembered.

It is worth checking out if you're a Matt Damon fan, a fan of love stories/romance or sci-fi.  You could do alot worse.

Haven't seen the movie, but for some reason I read the script a few weeks ago. The ending had some surprises I didn't expect, especially considering this was a Matt Damon movie. The script was an easy read. It definitely has the desirable effect of keeping you turning the pages. And it seems to me like an example of what others might call text book Hollywood pro. It conforms in every way to what has become standard format.

But the story in the end fell flat with me. It's one of those stories that interests you because of the concept, and that's probably how the producers sold this. But it seemed to fall flat because the antagonist lost power over the course of the movie. Even before the end, when the men behind the curtain explain their purpose, their menace factor was wearing down. They had such powers, and yet they always seemed so desperate. Even this kind of explained itself eventually, but the problem was that by then you were wondering why they weren't doing more than they were, so they seemed strangely weak. Then when you find out why, they were less menacing for a different reason, their intention.

I'll check out the film version when it comes on.

wasn't a fan of this one. personally, i thought the film had a GREAT concept, but it was wasted on a love story that really didnt captivate my interest. i felt that the movie never gave the audience a chance to like or even care about the characters to begin with. plus, theres a lot of fast forwarding (ie 5 years later). i thought the ending was downright terrible. felt too sentimental and easy/cheap. for me, this was another one of those films that makes rules simply to break them at the end (without a decent explanation). it really pisses me off when movies do this. you made the rules, now abide by them. its like playing monopoly with a bratty neighbor. you land on his shitty purple spaces and he charges you $50,000. you say that's not the rules, but he says its his game so he'll charge whatever he damn well pleases. youre forced into bankruptcy and he wins. blindsided and cheap.

also i hated how they hinted that the chairman was god, but never outright said so (lest they lose some of their audience). im not arguing for god, but lets not pussyfoot around the issue.

C- for me

Saw it in theatres and I thought it was alright. The first half of this film had me even though I had seen various premises like this before (specifically Dark City) and I was really into it. But then around the halfway point, the film takes this odd turn for me. In the third act, I found myself really angry with the film.

The film has teeth when The Bureau remains mysterious; when they manipulate people's choices or influence them to turn left instead of right etc. It makes you wonder what exactly is the danger of the couple getting together. Given the added bonus our protag is running for office and could be a Presidential hopeful "in the future" adds to this wonder.

Then the two AB guys, one of which is sympethetic to our hero, simply...give up seeing how keeping the lovebirds apart is futile. Still, we wonder: what was the danger. Ah! We are going to find out!! This is great stuff, right?

WRONG.
When the reason is given, I...wait, you mean it's not...

====SPOILERS R US====

...you mean...wait a minute. So she gets a bum knee and her dreams of being a famous dancer are shattered, all because our hero stays with her. Life will be so bad that she will become The First Lady ...what? That IS what they tell us, right? Okay, maybe "Hammer" (Terence Stamp) was fibbing. Or maybe he wasn't. What we do know is that her life will be a big mess being with a future Senator and pre-destined President.



Gee, thanks a lot. Big stakes there. Your dreams of being a famous ballerina is kaput. Instead you get an opportunity to...be famous and go into the history books.


Our protag loves his gal so much that he walks out on her because even if he doesn't think his romance will result in 'tragic' circumstance, the Bureau will cause her injury as a result of this infraction. They threatened to make him into a kook, but he must eventually be an important political figure.

Help, people, help. Did I miss something? Did I understand that right? The "plan" for our hero is to be an eventual leader of the country, but the biggest threat is to make him looney tunes (thus foiling the 'plan' which they want to enforce) and the second biggest threat is to ...what, exactly? That's right. Blunt's character gets injured; the worst thing that will happen is that she's misable in The White House.

So she gets back with an old flame. Not a bad guy. Just not the right guy by Hollywood standards. He does not have a Matt Damon smile. She's about to marry a guy she is in love with.

And here's where I turn nasty.
This is what wrecks the entire film.

So, is her life going to be a wreck with this new guy? No!! She is going to be happily married and while she's no First Lady, she is a famous dancer! Right!

Is our protag's life going to be a wreck without her? No!! His campaign trail is going well, he gets on just fine without her.

So in the end, our hero becomes  a selfish, self centered bastard who steals another man's fincee (who does not love our hero anymore) with an Act Of "God" if you wiill and...they belong together after all.

> > >

What a jip.

^^  I thought it was a very idealistic story.  My imagination of Nolfi's responses would be (bear with me if I'm off the mark because I've not seen the film since it came out in theatres):

1)  Fulfilling your dream is the most important thing in life...being rich, famous, etc is not important at all.  Therefore, Damon WOULD have been ruining her life.  Ruining her dreams is about the highest stakes possible, from the film's perspective.  

2)  True love.  She and Damon were always soul mates, and they both knew it.  Yes, their lives will be a wreck without each other, because they're meant to be together -- it's written in the stars.

Although I'd agree with the generally lukewarm reviews of the film, I did find (what I perceived to be) its unabashedly wide-eyed, idealistic perspective of life infectious.  For a slight film, it gave me a good vibe for a few hours.

To me, this movie lived and died based upon lead actor chemistry.
Do I buy Damon and Blunt as a destined couple?
When they're not running around, I did buy them.
Unfortunately, for most of the movie, they're running around.

The talky ending didn't help after all that running.
Probably the most talky climax since Shutter Island.
After a couple of truckloads of exposition, everything turned out okie dokie.
Well shot, earnest acting somewhat undone by slight storytelling.

E.D.

Darren, I think you missed something.  What I got was...

...that if they were together, Damon would not fulfill his prophecy to be President, and she would not end up being a famous dancer.

...they were "good" for each other in small spurts, not the long run.

Maybe I missed something...

I wish I could have grown an enormous fifty foot penis and a pair of huge, hairy, veiny, stinky balls to whip out and jizz syphlitic acid all over the master copy.

What an absolute steaming pile of poo.

The scene where Damon talks about how to get through the doors with the "case worker" is the single worst scene I've ever seen in my life and the whole "Angels have to wear hats to go through doors thing"...fucking hell!!!

Like it was written by someone heavily sedated in a mental institute after they'd had a stroke during a massive psychedelic drug binge in the local brain beating club.

The fact the film exists proves there's no Godly plan.

lol Just read your review, Rick. This one really got to ya, huh? I never saw the film, because I read the script. Fortunately that cost me less time. I think Damon needs to start doing less movies and getting a little more choosey. Maybe he's been losing too much money at those high stakes card games he holds. Great actor, but he's been in some real stinkers lately.

What was the script like?

Philip K. Dick was an amazing writer...I find it almost sacrilegious what they've managed to do to his story tbh.

The film's probably not THAT bad...the core idea remains relatively strong even in such inferior hands...maybe because it COULD have been  good it made me hate it more.

I read the script a while ago. I remember thinking it was like a lot of stories: effective set up, disappointing conclusion. In this case, very disappointing, even ludicrous. But the big problem I alluded to in the post above.

They set up these shadow people behind the scenes, and they seem at first to have immense powers. But pretty early on you find yourself asking the wrong kind of questions for a movie like this. You find yourself saying, "if they can do all this, why can't they do this?" When you make an antagonist almost all powerful at first, but then have them inexplicably not using their powers, it leaves people confused. It diminishes the antagonistic force to a degree that is actually fatal, because you no longer fear it. Eventually, there is an explanation for the weakness of this force, but that doesn't really help in any way, because then they just don't seem menacing at all.

The story is all set up. Problem is the antagonistic force weakens too quickly, and you're left with two things driving the story: a love story, and we are slightly curious who the Adjusters are and what they're up to. I'd be surprised if anyone didn't leave the theater disappointed, based solely on the script.