So much average

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

One of the most extraordinary films you will see this year. Take that as you want.

A word of warning to those who decide to watch this movie because Val Kilmer is prominently advertised on the DVD box. He actually only has two scenes in the entire movie, and his total screen time can't be more than three minutes. Actually, the movie has more problems than false advertising. For the first 30 minutes, the movie seemed to be going nowhere - just a bunch of scenes and characters that seemed to have no relationship with each other. If I hadn't read the plot description on the back of the DVD box and known what was coming, I would have been asking myself, "Just what is this movie about?" But after this bad beginning, the next thirty minutes are a big improvement. Showing the hotel robbery in action, these thirty minutes are interesting, suspenseful, and even have a little humor added in. I was entertained by this whole section of the movie.Unfortunately, the last thirty minutes of the movie quickly fall apart. This last part of the movie is slow-moving, often lacking explanation, and at one point relies on a wild coincidence to advance the plot.This movie doesn't work, though I wouldn't call it one of the worst movies ever made. That middle section is good, and the movie has a few other positive attributes like some good acting and some atmosphere by the snowy conditions of the winter setting. But even when you put all this positive stuff together, I don't think the movie is good enough to seek out (unless maybe you are planning a cinematic thriller of your own and want to see what NOT to do.)

I bought this movie at a low price because I thought that the plot idea was intriguing and because Val Kilmer was starring in this flick.In the end, many great ideas and a lot of potential wasn't well used. The title seems to underline the importance of a certain time that was finally completely redundant. The connection between several events in the hotel like the suicide of an old man and, the strange sex scenes between a television star and his bodyguard and the meeting between one of the gangsters and the ex-wife of the investigating police officer. Many scenes are rather redundant, especially in the first thirty minutes or so when the thieves are introduced, sometimes is a completely boring way and sometimes in a crazy and exaggerated way. When the thieves get out of the hotel you expect an intriguing investigation story or some fatal encounters or coincidences but instead of continuing on a high level after the intriguing hotel sequences, the movies slows down and goes nowhere before a dramatic and tragical conclusion kicks off.Sometimes, I think that the movie wants to be too many things at the same time. For a thriller, there is not enough tension in it and not enough surprises as we quickly now what will happen in the next one and a half hour. For a tragic drama, the characters are not profound and touching enough, even in the fatal ending. For an action movie, there are not enough special effects a part of the shooting scenes. For a comedy movie, there are only a few entertaining slapstick scenes that happen in the hotel. The problem is that the movie has many ups and downs and all the mentioned elements are used in a rather incoherent way without any dominating genre. The mixture doesn't create an original melting pot but rather a strange and mixed up potpourri that fails to work. Let's also mention that the great Val Kilmer has only two little scenes and a redundant role of a paranoid diamond dealer and is one of many unnecessary sidekicks that add nothing to the main plot even if you exactly expect that in the beginning and his role could have rated up this movie by much.In the end, we have a diversified and entertaining movie here that has some good ideas but a bad executions and too many ups and downs. The good elements are the entertaining hotel sequences and the diversified soundtrack. One could have done a movie of three hours with all the different characters but chose to concentrate on only a couple of elements that are randomly chosen.The ending is disappointing and too simple. The acting is too wooden and the characters itself not profound enough. The plot scratches on an interesting surface but doesn't go deep enough. Many sidekicks turn out to be completely unnecessary. There are too many missed occasions and wrong expectations in this movie. The movie is worth being watched once because of its interesting story basis but that's more than enough.

That part still alludes me. Why was that the perfect time? They never explain that, or a bunch of other things in this film that tries desperately to be part of the cool kids, but fails to achieve the goal. The problem lies within a script too short and full of useless bits that distract from the overall goal of the story. 2:22 has two recognizable names in it. First is Val Kilmer, the guy who played Batman. He has a small role as a Jeweler who isn't all there. Kilmer seems to be having some fun with the role, which is nice. He has two scenes. Second is Gabriel Byrne, who looks like he DOES NOT WANT TO BE THERE AT ALL. He also has two scenes, very minor, as the detective. Somehow he manages to catch the luckiest break of all time near the end and inexplicably solve the case. I like heist films and when I see one I'm usually rooting for those stealing the loot. I unfortunately couldn't give a damn with this one. Are we suppose to sympathize with the lead characters? One of them shoots a freaking dog for Christ sake. Anyways, the plot is more absurd. They plan to steal out of the safety deposit boxes from a hotel on New Years. Why they decide to steal at the one time where they know a bunch of people are going to be staying up late? I have no idea. Second, you know a bunch of people are going to be in hotels, so this doesn't seem logical to me. Again, they plan to start at 2:22, no mention as to why. Okay, so we get to the hotel and apparently only two people are working. The guy at the front desk and some guy in the kitchen. Shouldn't there be more staff on one of the busiest nights of the year for hotels? The guys tie them up and get to work, but ring ring. Someone is calling the front desk for some room service. So we get some comical bits with the thieves having to answer the phone and taking care of the guests needs. One guest is planning on killing himself, they continuously cut to him either going to blow his brains out, or jump off the building. You would figure this has some significance to the plot, maybe his death will alert police to come to the hotel? Maybe he will start a shoot out? Nope, nothing comes of it. Pointless beyond belief. The second half of the film is them trying to lay low, but failing at it. One guy gets caught and rats on his friend, which leads to a death, some revenge and then the final sequence that is irritating and unbelievable. The film is set in America, evident by the money they are stealing, yet it is clearly shot in Toronto. They don't even seem to want to hide the fact, we see the CN TOWER design on the front door of a strip club. Ads for Tim Hortons and the TTC is seen everywhere. As a Canadian I couldn't help but laugh at this. If they are going to show a Canadian city, that is very Canadian, set the damn thing in Canada.2:22 is a poor heist film. You'll get a bit of entertainment from the heist itself, but the film lacks focus and drive. It has no idea what it wanted to do and this is clear by all the useless crap the helps eat up the run time. Two underused actors, Kilmer and Byrne, one who seems to be trying, the other looks like he couldn't give a damn. Skip it.

The script is shallow, the editing choppy and discontinuous. Contains multiple scenes of animal abuse and child neglect which would be OK if they had some bearing on the story, but they are written as if to offer some kind of bizarre comic relief.The characters lack depth and the photography is mediocre. The editing seemed to include scenes that could or should have been deleted for lack of contribution to the story. The sound track is also horrendous - after one rather depressing scene it cuts to a fast driving scene with upbeat music and the transistor is jarring to say the least. Avoid like the plague or you will walk away disappointed and disturbed.