To me, this movie is perfection.

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Vantage Point - ''And the Oscar goes to......''This is not only a well crafted American political action thriller but an original motion picture in which the viewer quickly begins to feel that they are being stimulated by a complicated puzzle. Those of us who don't want to sit passively but require a real cerebral workout to satisfy our film expectations need to see Vantage Point. Action movies are a genre much overlooked by the Academy. Yet, while packing an astonishing amount into the 90 minutes, this is a film boasting a wealth of A-rated actors, fantastic cinematography and a novel way of exploring the heart stopping events of an afternoon in Spain.Since it was created by Columbia Pictures in 2008, ''Vantage Point'' has been a much underappreciated action-thriller, concerning an assassination attempt on the President of the United States, as seen from a different set of vantage points, through the eyes of the various characters. The story is told and retold from several different perspectives and right from the outset the onlooker is immediately put on edge when they are challenged intellectually. Although this was designed to be a commercial movie, what is achieved is an excellent production of a refreshingly novel script. The story unfolds in the beautiful town of Salamanca where President Ashton (previous Academy Award winner William Hurt) is about to address a landmark peace summit to halt global terrorism. Needless to say, there are protestors in the crowded square and various political factions intent on causing mayhem. As the President raises his arms into the air to greet the cheering crowd, shots ring out from an unknown source and the thrilling whodunit begins. The confusion is maximised as a small explosion causes panic and chaos in the square, closely followed by carnage as a large bomb is detonated.The leading character is Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid) a harrowed looking man, back on his first day of active duty, protecting the president, following a nervous breakdown. Is he up to the job? Barnes is obviously a man intent on his mission but he is struggling with his own internal demons, having been shot, saving the president, in a previous attempted coup. Quaid is thoroughly deserving of an Oscar in this role for maintaining this anguished persona throughout. William Hurt brings much gravitas to the role of the president. Unlike the much acclaimed Bourne series, Vantage Point does not generally aim to consider issues of morality but Hurt does offer us a serious, dignified leader who, when asked to retaliate with missiles against the enemy (''Mr President we need to act strong''), he replies ''No we need to be strong. We need to be better than this''.Sigourney Weaver plays an effective cameo role at the beginning of the film as the director of outside news broadcasting. It is her footage which eventually gives the strongest clue to identify the enemy within the presumed secure zone. Forest Whittaker (The Last King of Scotland) plays a memorable part as Howard Lewis, a tourist who, estranged from is his wife and children, is on holiday making memories and fortunately using a camcorder which continues to roll as the complicated plot thickens. The director, British born, Pete Travis, whose previous work includes the TV mini-series Henry VIII and the highly regarded Omagh, offers us an engaging movie with a tough, down-to-earth feel whilst also requiring us to constantly think and rethink about what we're watching. Travis developed the perfect formula for action movies: powerful soundtracks, breakneck editing, dynamic camera work and powerful crash scenes.Vantage Point was generally met with negative critical reviews and at times it is predictable but personally I found it to be a triumph due to the sophisticated cinematography, the wealth of sublime acting talent and Pete Travis' magical ability to hold the tension to the end. This original action movie most certainly deserves to have been nominated for an Oscar or two.

Multiple loop running retrospective can be good film, and in Vantage Point it's getting close to being something great, but not quite. Not that a plot where there's a conspiracy to assassinate the US president is very original, and that they could have found somebody else than William Hurt to play him, but the editing and directing and some of the acting here is damn good handwork. It's the story that could have been better worked out.The action scenes are some of the better that I've seen, never boring, and the story also has some creative unexpected turns. Too bad then with the holes in plot and some loose ends. The plan behind the assassination is barely mentioned, no answer to who and why, and it seems that there has been a strong urge to make the action thriller and not being too political. It works some how, though it ends up lacking realism. And calling the TV broadcasting company GNN is just a bit silly. This is after all not meant to be a parody. The media and political terror aspects could have been given more space and some how woven in to the plot, but this was decided to be 1 hour 28 minutes, no more, like some sacred genre code. The result ends up being not as good as the potential, so why the rush? Still, they made a few seconds in the end to remind as that this was inspired by the JFK assassination, though a similar but longer kind of version of that conspiracy could have been much more interesting.

The "hook" of Vantage Point is that when the President of the United States is shot in a crowded town square, many people witness the event. This film explores those multiple "vantage points", adding a new layer to the plot with each story. The film really works on two different levels:First, it contains enough twists and turns to really engage the mind into generating theories as to what is actually happening. Seemingly with every vantage point seen, the one before it is called into question. Thus, this leads to many "whoa" moments.Second, the acting is terrific. Matthew Fox, Dennis Quaid, William Hurt, and Forrest Whitaker (among others) all fit into their roles with ease, and each story is compelling enough to make you actually care about what will happen to each person. Plus, without trying to give too much away, the film also messes with audience's perceptions of actors from previous roles (cryptic, yes, but you'll get it once you watch).The only reason I do not give this film 5 stars is that the ending degenerates into nothing more than a Jason Bourne-style car chase scene, nothing like the provocative storytelling mode throughout most of the film.Overall, this is a great concept-film that showcases an entirely new type of storytelling. If you are a fan of action movies and love your "no way!" moments, you will enjoy this film immensely.

I love Dennis Quaid and Forest Whitaker but this is far from a good movie. They actually look bad because of bad script and even worse directing. Too many repeated scenes without any good reason, boring chasing scenes, everything about this movie is bad. Only thing that is good is cast along above mentioned two actors there nare also Sigourney Weaver and Bruce McGill.. But even that could not make this movie worth watching. Main story is not even resolved and there is no room for sequel (thank God). There is mention of some kind of war but thats it. Side stories are pointless. I wasted my time watching this and i highly recommend that you don't waste your. 2 out of 10 just because respect i have for actors, otherwise pure 0.