I wrote a rather lengthy previous review of this movie, pointing out the reasons why I find it so objectionable. I'm not surprised it didn't get printed. IMDB has become extremely corporate, and does the best it can to filter good reviews.
That aside, this movie is still terrible. I saw it recently on a movie channel and decided to give it another shot. It makes even less sense on the second viewing.
What pervades this film is an obvious sense of not caring. This can be completely attributed to David Koepp's awful screenplay. As the movie progresses it becomes Pollyanna-esque. It is evident that any plot contrivance which can place the heroines in peril will be used, regardless of its inanity or detriment to the impact of the story.
The setup itself is ridiculous: recently-independent feisty woman with diabetic daughter alone in giant brownstone they obviously cannot afford. I could take that, alone. Really. But things quickly get worse.
The first obvious problems are Koepp's terrible, cringing attempts at humor. Scenes which should be serious are wrapped up with zingers and one-liners which just thud. An example is the pyrotechnic scene with the propane. Immediately after the action, Meg cracks wise with her daughter, "Don't you ever do that!" It just doesn't work. One-liners are a relic from 80's popcorn action films. I remember few in masterful suspense movies.
Detailing the numerous, obvious flaws and plot holes would take pages. But I will list a few of my favorites:
This is all very early in the film. This is when Koepp and Fincher should be building the suspense, drawing us in. But it's hard to do that when the setup is so contrived and mechanical.
The payoff at the end is itself fraught with problems, not the least of which is the Van Damme comeback of the guy who gets whacked in the face with a sledgehammer. I've actually seen that once before in a Three Stooges short.
I have never seen a good movie by David Koepp. Some good ideas, but all with lazy and sloppy execution. It seems he works backwards from the results: he sees where he needs to go and hacks out a path to it. That's product development, not writing.
What we had here was a cool concept for a story, some really good actors, and a good director. Koepp just blew it. But it sold pretty well, so expect "Panic Room 2: Panic Harder" any day now.
That aside, this movie is still terrible. I saw it recently on a movie channel and decided to give it another shot. It makes even less sense on the second viewing.
What pervades this film is an obvious sense of not caring. This can be completely attributed to David Koepp's awful screenplay. As the movie progresses it becomes Pollyanna-esque. It is evident that any plot contrivance which can place the heroines in peril will be used, regardless of its inanity or detriment to the impact of the story.
The setup itself is ridiculous: recently-independent feisty woman with diabetic daughter alone in giant brownstone they obviously cannot afford. I could take that, alone. Really. But things quickly get worse.
The first obvious problems are Koepp's terrible, cringing attempts at humor. Scenes which should be serious are wrapped up with zingers and one-liners which just thud. An example is the pyrotechnic scene with the propane. Immediately after the action, Meg cracks wise with her daughter, "Don't you ever do that!" It just doesn't work. One-liners are a relic from 80's popcorn action films. I remember few in masterful suspense movies.
Detailing the numerous, obvious flaws and plot holes would take pages. But I will list a few of my favorites:
- The door makes a tremendous noise when opened. That is covered early in the film, then is forgotten later, when the plot requires it. - When Meg comes out to get her cell phone, the bed has at least a foot of clearance underneath it. Yet she only just puts her arm under the bed, and struggles to reach it. This is so she will knock over the lamp and alert the criminals. - The cell phone would have worked if she reached all the way out the duct. - Simply dialing 911 would have brought a desired response from the cops. - If the job was supposed to be easy, why were three guys involved ... except to get the requisite crazy gunman into the tale.
This is all very early in the film. This is when Koepp and Fincher should be building the suspense, drawing us in. But it's hard to do that when the setup is so contrived and mechanical.
The payoff at the end is itself fraught with problems, not the least of which is the Van Damme comeback of the guy who gets whacked in the face with a sledgehammer. I've actually seen that once before in a Three Stooges short.
I have never seen a good movie by David Koepp. Some good ideas, but all with lazy and sloppy execution. It seems he works backwards from the results: he sees where he needs to go and hacks out a path to it. That's product development, not writing.
What we had here was a cool concept for a story, some really good actors, and a good director. Koepp just blew it. But it sold pretty well, so expect "Panic Room 2: Panic Harder" any day now.