Deja Vu

[TylerDurden182]

http://i79.photobucket.com/albums/j150/Durden_182/deja_vu_ver2.jpg

Director: Tony Scott

Starring: Denzel Washington, Paula Patton, Val Kilmer, Jim Caviezel

Plot Outline: An ATF agent travels back in time to save a woman from being murdered, falling in love with her during the process.

[Lazy Boy]

This looks surprisingly decent. I've heard that Scott toned down his editing palpitations to a near watchable degree, so that's a positive...hope the concept itself hold up to scrutiny instead of falling apart from the inside ("the center does not hold," as Yeats said).

And no obnoxious Supersized subtitles jutting their way into my corneas this time, okay, Tony?

[Strider]

If it's true that Tony Scott's direction and editing is less chaotic here, then all I have to say is: bummer. Call me crazy, but that's one thing I digged about Domino and Man on Fire. As for Deja Vu, it looks like one cool action thriller. So I'm there.

Strider

[Tyler_Durden_208]

I thought the trailer looked alright until I saw sci-fi Denzel driving his "time Hummer" or whatever that shit was. Then it kind of bummed me out. Might catch this is I run out of things to watch at the cinema.

[Nutcracker]

Early reviews for this flick have been pretty terrific. Everyone seems to be labling Deja Vu a "thinking man's action movie". Scott has returned to a more conventional editing style, after his more recent style seemed to have irritated and alienated many fans and critics (though I personally thought his editing stle for Man On Fire suited the film perfectly. It was a bit excesive for Domino though). This film may be the closest thing we have this year to Steven Speilberg's Minority Report, in terms of intelligent, action-paced mainstream science fiction. Hope it actually lives up to what people have been saying about it. I was particularly jazzed to hear Massawyrm (an AICN regular reviewer) refer to Deja Vu as a "geek" movie in his review.

Some reviews;

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/30687

http://www.aintitcool.com/node30693

httP://www.popsyndicate.com/index.php/site/story/deja_vu/

[MadsenOMC]

You actually trust reviews from AICN? Massawyrm also loved Domino, so right there I am in total disagreement with him. I don't think he could possibly be more wrong about Man on Fire and Domino, especially the latter. If this is even half as good as Minority Report, I'll be shocked.

[DareDevil]

I'll be there for sure! I loved Man on Fire but didn't care to much for Dommino. Glad to here the early buzz is positive!

[ZenDude]

Didnt care too much for Domino. Way too stylized for its own good. The camera got in the way of the story (what little of that there was to begin with) Man on Fire on the other hand, was excellant! This new one looks like its gonna rock!

[MadsenOMC]

SPOILERS!!!


I am seriously stunned that anyone could rave about this movie. It is so exceptionally average in every way possible. Not terrible, not great, just plain old average. There's nothing remotely exceptional about it. For an action thriller, it has hardly any of either.

The ferry explosion near the Crescent City Bridge in New Orleans begins the movie. 543 people die.

ATF agent Doug Carlin (Denzel) arrives on the scene to investigate. Authorities are unsure whether it was an accident or intentional. Carlin figures it out in no time. Evidence underneath the bridge and along the water's edge makes it clear that it was a terrorist act.

Strange shit starts happening then. Carlin gets a call at work from a mystery woman. When he calls her back she is not around.

A little while later a local policeman informs him of something odd. A woman's body was found washed ashore. She has wounds consistent with that of someone in an explosion. The problem is that her body was discovered minutes before the ferry was blown up.

Then it all gets really weird. FBI agent Paul Pryzwarra (Kilmer) brings Carlin to a top secret lab. He claims that they are going to view satellite footage of the crime scene.

It turns out that they will actually be doing a little time traveling. A doctor (Adam Goldberg) and his team accidentally discovered how to go back into the past. They can only go back exactly four days and six hours. It involves folding time and using massive amounts of energy (it causes huge blackouts). Most of the science talk went over my head.

The objective is to travel back in time to learn the identity of the person responsible for the bomb. They might even be able to prevent it from ever happening in the first place. Maybe they can even save the dead woman (she plays a major role in the proceedings).

Thankfully, Tony Scott has toned it down a notch. He has essentially given up the migraine-inducing directing style employed in Man on Fire and Domino. He still throws in a totally pointless slow-motion shot now and then, including in a scene with Denzel answering his cell phone, but overall his direction is solid.

The movie also begins well enough. While Denzel is trying to figure out what in the hell is going on, it is fairly engaging.

It goes south in a hurry though. The entire midsection, nearly an hour of screen time, is spent watching people watch screens in the lab. This becomes quite monotonous. Watching people watch something does not make for exciting cinema. Initially it is interesting enough, as we learn and see how it all works. But after 15 minutes it becomes boring, and it goes on for a hell of a lot longer.

After we go back to the real world, Deja Vu morphes into just another routine race-against-the-clock movie. Denzel tries to save the day and win the girl. You know exactly how that is going to turn out.

I certainly didn't hate this movie. Washington makes pretty much anything watchable. But that is about the biggest compliment one can pay here. There's hardly any action after the beginning and the story is not compelling enough to sustain it for the duration of its two-hour running time. When all is said and done, this is a mediocre Hollywood action flick. Nothing less and definitely nothing more.

5/10

[BriZai]

Just saw an advance screening of this movie tonight @ The Palms. I enjoyed the movie, it was quite different from what I was expecting from the trailers. Again I think Jim Caivezel pulls off a great role. I recommend it, it was a good time at the movies.

[DareDevil]

MadsenOMC it wouldn't have token much of a genius to guess you weren't going to love this movie. And no I’m not trying to argue, but your score comes as NO surprise.

[Nutcracker]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
You actually trust reviews from AICN? Massawyrm also loved Domino, so right there I am in total disagreement with him. I don't think he could possibly be more wrong about Man on Fire and Domino, especially the latter. If this is even half as good as Minority Report, I'll be shocked.

How about this very positive review from Emmanuel Levy, a very well regarded critic;

http://emmanuellevy.com/article.php?articleID=3620

As far as I can tell, this movie is going to go down really well with "real" critics, not just sites like AICN.

Maybe I'll agree with your review when I finally see it, but you seemed kinda obviously predisposed to dislike this film before actually watching it, so I'm still encouraged by the fact that most early reviews dig the movie. I 'm going in with an open mind. Scott is hit and miss with me. Domino sucked balls, imho. But I thought Man On Fire was a brilliant, underrated piece of filmmaking,that if it had been made in Korea, instead of by the Hollywood director of Top Gun, would have been instantly hailed as a masterpiece of it's genre.

In fact, I suspect if something like Deja Vu came from Korean or Japanese cinema, instead of Scott and Bruckheimer, certain people would act as if the wheel had just been reinvented, even if the plot points and resolution were exactly the same.

[MadsenOMC]

I'm sorry to be so predictable DareDevil, but I'm not surprised either. It looked pretty average to me in the trailer and TV spots and that's exactly what it is. I will be shocked if this does well "real" critics and not just places like AICN. Anything is possible, but I just don't believe that will happen. Man on Fire has a much better story, even if the direction is much worse. It's better than this. Jim Caviezel's role is tiny and he has little to do. I don't think he is in it enough to make a lasting impression.

[dreamcurls]

Originally posted by MadsenOMC
You actually trust reviews from AICN? Massawyrm also loved Domino, so right there I am in total disagreement with him. I don't think he could possibly be more wrong about Man on Fire and Domino, especially the latter. If this is even half as good as Minority Report, I'll be shocked.

I loved Domino too. Well mostly Choco. . .
but anyways, about Deja Vu. . .I love Denzel. And the teaser trailers really looked cool.(was that Jim Caveizel in there?) But then I saw the full trailer and this being able to look back in time thing kinda killed it for me. . . I might just wait for DVD

[ZenDude]

If Madsen gave it a 5/10, I'll probably really like and give it a 7 - 8/10 :D

[MadsenOMC]

Just to make people happy, I guess I should have pretended to love it.

[SheLizard]

I was supposed to go to a screening last night (for once! argh!) but I couldn't make it. The people I was supposed to go with have been raving about this movie all morning. Apparently Jim Caviezel is great in his part.

I keep hearing very good things about it, so much so that I'd see it even if I didn't think Tony Scott + Denzel is awesome (which I do). So, the short version: it looks good to me! I'm planning on seeing it over the long weekend, anyone else?

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by SheLizard
Apparently Jim Caviezel is great in his part.


His role is so small, and cliched, I don't understand how he could make that much of an impression on someone.

[SheLizard]

Madsen, did you like anything about the movie? :)

From what I've read and heard from friends that have seen it, it seems that Caviezel does a good job and is really memorable in the role, but I'll reserve final judgment until I see it. I think he's a good actor (playing Jesus isn't easy), so I'm inclined to think he'll do well with whatever part he has.

I think I like this cast as a whole, actually. Lots of good folks in it. Val Kilmer is finally back doing a big movie, yay! (I still have such a leftover teen crush on him.)

[MadsenOMC]

SPOILERS!!!



It's not that I think Caviezel is a bad actor. But he doesn't show up until very late in the movie, and he has very little screen time. Plus, he is given nothing to work with. He's just an anti-government crackpot. It's a familiar character and Caviezel does nothing special or spectacular with it. I'm confused as to how he made such an impression on them.

Kilmer's role is thankless. He's a by-the-book FBI agent. Again, not a huge role and it's certainly not a challenging one either.

Frankly, there's not much to like about it. Like I said, it's a completely average movie. Not great, not terrible, just 'eh.

[ilovemovies]

I'll be seeing this tomorrow along with The Fountain. I can't wait as I think this looks pretty cool. Although it sounds like Bruce Greenwood, an actor I have been a big fan of for a LONG time, has a small role which is kinda disappointing.

[MadsenOMC]

Originally posted by ilovemovies
Although it sounds like Bruce Greenwood, an actor I have been a big fan of for a LONG time, has a small role which is kinda disappointing.

Same here. I've been a big fan of his since The Sweet Hereafter. Sadly, his role is small. Just a few scenes. Denzel is in basically every single minute of this movie, not that I'm complaining.

[ilovemovies]

This movie has one of the coolest and most unique car chases I have ever seen in a movie.

I really liked it. Lot's of cool and neat and clever little twists. Denzel Washington is his usual reliable self and Paula Patton is pretty hot. Oh, and she's a pretty good actress too I suppose.

It's a tad overlong and everyone other Washington and Patton is wasted. But I really enjoyed it otherwise.

[chinton]

After going in with no expectation I was really really surprised at how much I liked this film. Great concept with some interesting twists and turns and just a generally really tense film. The last 20 minutes had me on the edge of my seat. I also have to give it up for Paula Patton who effortlessly steals the movie. Credict also has to go to the editor specifically during the monitoring sequences which were extremely well put together.

If there was one flaw and it was rather large its that the Cavaziel character not only was lame, but his motive just felt really tacked on and unbelievable.

Still I loved this movie.

8/10

[MadsenOMC]

I feel like I saw a different movie than everyone else. What twists were interesting? How was it tense? I sure as hell wasn't anywhere near the edge of my seat. I saw an average action flick that is standard in just about every way. I'm trying to figure out what I missed.

[ElderPredator]

I'm very excited to see it. I'll check it out on the weekend for sure.

[ThirdOuting]

Originally posted by DareDevil
MadsenOMC it wouldn't have token much of a genius to guess you weren't going to love this movie. And no I’m not trying to argue, but your score comes as NO surprise.

Oh, another dig at Madsen for giving his opinion. Mate, you should probably just pretend to like films to keep these folks happy, you know. Still, it's good to see that these boring comments have no effect on you.

[CreeperBEATNGU]

Originally posted by ThirdOuting
Oh, another dig at Madsen for giving his opinion. Mate, you should probably just pretend to like films to keep these folks happy, you know. Still, it's good to see that these boring comments have no effect on you.

It's not an insult to say that you aren't surprised that someone didn't like a film.

They could've gone deeper than they did, but I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. Caviezel was used sparingly, but he was a damn good villain. To make the transition from the son of God to a psychotic terrorist is about as diverse as you can get.

SPOILERS




I thought the finale on the ferry was pretty suspenseful, I really didn't know what was going to happen when Caviezel ran back onto the ferry, and I was glad they came up with a resolution other than the lame old "you can't change the past so you shouldn't try" angle that I expected them to go for (ie. The Butterfly Effect). The music and visual style were quite a treat, as I expected from Scott(the Scott I'm much more impressed with over the past few years compared to his brother). The rather slow pacing was a bit surprising after Domino, but I was never really bored. It's not a great movie, but it's a very good one.

[Jerk Shapiro]

Going into this movie expecting all the crazy shit cokehead Tony Scott usually delivers, I got everything I wanted.

Great acting on all parts, although Caviezel's character is the weak point in my opinion. Denzel again turns out to be THE man, and the lovely Paula Patton steals the show.

Not a masterpiece by any means, but still pretty fucking enjoyable and pretty fucking cool.

8/10

[jaw2929]

Me and my bro decided to watch this newest movie directed by one of my favourites, Tony Scott... It was a pretty good flick... I'm not sure exactly what I was expecting, the whole concept of "Deja Vu" or time travel as it is... Almost turned into a science fiction flick of sorts in a way...

Coupla plot holes of course in the whole "time travel" concept.... It's also very formulaic as far as the whole story/premise is concerned too... I liked Jim Caviezel in his role as "bad guy" but he hardly had any screen-time, and didn't really have shit to work with, in terms of back story, or explanations behind his actions....

A lotta the movie required you to buy a lot of unbelievable scenarios and possibilities as well... There's a car chase sequence that I really didn't care for, and THAT was the point in the movie were it stopped being "realistic" to me....

Other than that though, Denzel as always makes this one entertaining and watchable for me... A little bit less "stylistic" for a Tony Scott flick, but still love the grittiness and vision this movie had...

Not sure if I'm going to bother buying this one on DVD or not... Loved Domino and Man On Fire... So I just might, if not to watch it again and try to make sense outta plot-holes that may never make any sense!

I recommend this one if you're looking for a decent time to spend a coupla hours... But would prolly say wait for the DVD overall...

[chinton]

I thought the car chase sequence was easily the high point of the film. Such a clever and original way of doing it and a very good job of editing.

[Bourne101]

Going to see this on Sunday. Would see it tomorrow, but I have to see Tenacious D asap.

[SkyNet]

really enjoyed this flick. Wasnt expecting the Sci Fi angle of it... but i really enjoyed it. Nothing overly special, but enjoyable none the less!

[ElderPredator]

I just got back from the late night show and I have to honestly say that it is one of my favourite Tony Scott films ever and I own every single one of his films. I think he is far more talented than his brother, Ridley.

The sci-fi/thriller angle of this movie was terrific and I understood the story perfectly in one viewing which is great. Denzel was fantastic and steals the show once again. Paula Patton is absolutely beautiful and a true rival to Halle Berry in my opinion. I think Halle had better watch her back cause Paula is picking up the pace. Wow! :D

Overall, kudos to the fantastic editing of the movie, the acting, special effects and the story. One of the better movies of this year and a great triumph for Tony Scott. I can't wait to see the "Warriors" remake!

I was almost falling off my chair from beginning to end!

Final Score: 9/10

[ElderPredator]

Did anybody see the trailer for "Wild Hogs" while they were at the theatre? :D

[therealjohng]

8/10.



Loved it.

[SpikeDurden]

**SPOILERS**

Man on Fire is one of my favorite films in the past few years. I've yet to see Domino. I think that the hyperactive editing and subtitles used in Man on Fire was extremely affective and greatly added to what could have been a mediocre revenge thriller. Tony Scott found a style that worked for that screenplay, and he went with it. As far as Deja Vu is concerned, the style is majorly toned down, though he still overuses slow motion.

Toned down style and all, however, the film is not very good. While Denzel Washington is his usual charistmatic and awesome self (there are very few actors out there who are as consistant as he is, let's face it), the movie is completely ridiculous and inane. There is no suspense, there are no exciting twists and turns, there is no good action, and there is no substance. The plot makes very little sense, and the science within the film is laughable. If the film actually took place in the future perhaps it would have been believeable, however setting the film in 2006 was really streatching it. Simple time travel is one thing; the display devices, and the hummer/goggle vision was another. Throwing in the Jim Caviezel character and his absurd and silly motivations was just another bad mistake in a film filled with a lot of them.

I wanted this film to be an intelligent and exciting action thriller, but its not. Denzel Washington is the only thing that makes it watchable, and the always reliable Adam Goldberg (he's the man).

I don't see how so many people are loving this, especially when there's such a classy and well crafted action film out right now: Casino Royale.

**END SPOILERS**

*/****

[Lazy Boy]

7/10

*SPOILERS*



I liked it, it subverted the usual conventions of action thrillers (i.e. a car chase is done via two different points in time, wonderfully realized) and it was nice to see Tony Scott ditch the self wankery for a while and tell a story (albeit a rather outlandish one that, if you think about it too much, might leave you scratching your head and finding holes on the drive home).

As far as the weak motivations of the Caviezel character, I can basically sum up a lot of the movie as faith versus disillusionment. The Adam Goldberg character doesn't think sending a human body through the portal will do any good, but his faith allows him to finally do so. On the opposite end of the spectrum, there's Caviezel's disillusioned wannabe patriot -- don't think the throwaway line where Washington says, "Yeah, Oklahoma City" isn't meant to refer to Tim McVeigh, because I think most viewers can and should get that loud and clear. Plus, the references to Katrina, and the shots of the urban shacks sitting in a destroyed, muddy waste -- one of the more striking shots of the film is the SWAT team busting into an abandoned home, where underneath the mud and grime, we see a sticker saying "Support our Troops" -- all this idealism and patriotism buried in literal mud, discarded by a parental government authority figure (in the film, represented by Bruce Greenwood), causing a snap and a strike back against the military which he felt abandoned him. That's my take on his motivations -- an extremist gone too far. His rationale was whacked, his motivation was definitely indifensible, but the allusions are too obvious to ignore.

Didn't like how they resorted to another shoot-'em up style ending, and was it me, or did they deliberately try to model Caviezel in the style of the Terminator, what with the long coat and weapons in both hands?



*END SPOILERS*

[dman476]

I think making Cavaziel look like the Terminator was unintentional, but I can see why you'd think that. :p

Overall, I agree with Lazy Boy...pretty much 100%.

[anakinsrise]

For Deja Vu ,director Tony Scott has definitely toned down his almost seizure causing visuals(see Domino,Man On Fire)and gives us more of an Enemy of The State type of feature.Including techies and a lot of tech talk about time,time travel,and ti...well you get the point.
Denzel Washington as Doug Carlin is as brilliant as ever as an ATF agent who falls for a woman (the lovely and talented Paula Patton,much better here than in Idlewild)who has died 4 days prior,and who is somehow tied to a terrorist bombing.
Most of the other roles are here and there portrayed by familiar faces,Val Kilmer,Elden Henson,Erika Alexander ,Bruce Greenwood,and Adam Goldberg being the standout(who has adopted Jeff Bridges King Kong look)Caviezel provides great intensity as the bombing madman.
Great chemistry between Patton and Washington so much so that i hope to see them together on the big screen soon.
A few plot holes and the film over stays its welcome by about 10 minutes,but still a fun film.
Scale of 1-10 an 8

[Lemmywinks]

Just got back from seeing this. I have to say, it surpassed my expectations. It was very easy to follow and had a similar vibe to another movie with Jim Caveziel, "Frequency." I have to say I loved it though. I was on the edge of my seat and the whole experience was just awesome. One of my favorites of the year. I really dug the sequence where Denzel was in the hummer.

9/10

[cletus66]

I liked Deja Vu, but I thought the last Scott-Washington collaboration Man On Fire was a better film. Some of the stuff towards the end got pretty unrealistic as it does in many movies where time travel is involved. But paradoxes aside I thought Deja Vu was a very good action film and it was nice to see Tony Scott get away from the frantic editing style he used in Man On Fire and Domino. I don't mind the frantic style but for this film I don't think it would have worked.

7.5/10

[Strider]

Deja Vu - 6/10 or ***/***** stars

Save for an unsatisfying ending, which raises unanswered questions and creates a large plot hole, Deja Vu, the latest collaboration between Tony Scott and Denzel Washington, is a decent, entertaining futuristic action/thriller. The concept, though original and intriguing, could not be more preposterous. Bursting with an endless amount of mumbo-jumbo, the film is impossible to understand. Admittedly, I was left lost and confused at times (I doubt I'm the only one), and I realized there was no point in attempting to figure it out. As long as the viewer turns the brain switch off and never dares to question the concept or story, Deja Vu works.

Strider

[Badbird]

I enjoyed it, but in the end, it was really just Enemy of the State with a cool sci-fi concept slapped on top of it.

The car chase was really cool and intrigueing, but there were good chunks of slowness in this movie. I realized that I too had been watching guys watching TV screens for about 45 minutes before anything happened.

But what I liked the most was how all the pieces starting falling into place - that the attempts they made to change things were what actually caused them to happen. I really like that kind of shit.

But in the end, it was pretty good. Nothing remarkable. The villian isn't so much Jesus the terrorist, but time itself.

And SPOLIER ABOUT THE ENDING:









If it's true that by going back and changing things, Washington created a separate timeline, and that one of the theories as to the original timeline is that it ceases to exist, then he actually sacrificed the entire universe just to save 500 people.

[veddhead83]

Review * May Contain Spoilers*

I really enjoy Tony Scott films (yes even "Domino" which as it sounds almost nobody liked). After hearing this was only PG-13, I wasn't expecting anything from this movie.
Boy, was I wrong. The sci-fi twist is something different, bringing a little freshness to your average action flick. I would actually call this a mix of "Enemy of the State" mixed with "Frequency."
Denzel is good as usual. He carries every scene and without him this may have fallen flat. Kilmer, who has added about 50 lbs., was sort of wasted. Maybe he should have been cast as the villain or something.
The action was decent for a PG-13 film. The action was nothing like Scott's "Man on Fire," but what films are?
I don't know about the rest of you, but I was putting the clues together and had it figured out before the final frame rolled.

**SPOILERS
The clues saying Denzel had been to her house already. The crashed ambulance, etc. **



Although I like Scott's previous work more, I feel the film worked overall and I was surprised that I enjoyed it as much as I did.

Rating: B

[Zhoozhitsu]

***MAJOR SPOILERS*****

Can we discuss the plot? I have a hard time putting the pieces together, but here's my take on what happened:

Denzel goes back in time at least twice to save Claire and stop Caviezel. When the movie starts, he had gone back at least once. Here's a chronology of events (the 1st two take place before the movie starts):

1. Before the movie: Caviezel successfully blows up the ship without involving Claire.

2. Before the movie: The FBI unit hunts for the killer and gets Denzel involved. Together, they send a note back in time to Denzel, but his partner gets it and goes down to the dock to get killed in a shootout with Caviezel. Caviezel's SUV is damaged, so he uses Claire's. This is when Claire gets involved. Claire is obviously killed, but not before Denzel goes back in time to attempt to save her and stop Caviezel from blowing up the ship. Denzel saves Claire from Caviezel's hideout (ambulance crashed into shack), leaves her at her apartment to go to the dock to stop Caviezel. This is why we see blood-soaked rags and Denzel's prints and blood all over Claire's apartment in section 3 below, when the movie starts. Denzel is unsuccessful in saving the girl or the 500 people on the ship the first time he goes back. When they capture Caviezel, he mentions that short of a divine intervention, the terrorism act cannot be stopped. It's obvious he's aware that someone or a group is trying to stop him through time travel. He also mentions there will never be a trial. I don't know what to make of that. How did he know there would be no trial, unless he was aware that at some point Denzel would be successful in stopping him?

3. During the movie: Denzel goes back again, but this time during a deja vu moment in Claire's apartment as he's putting together the alphabet on her fridge "You can save her", he realizes he must've been there before and failed to save her. So he takes Claire with him the second time, and he succeeds in saving her and stopping Caviezel, but he dies. The other Denzel who hasn't time traveled shows up.

It's possible that Denzel went back in time a total of three times as some clues during the movie allude to that.

Any thoughts on what the plot was?

- Brian

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
***MAJOR SPOILERS*****

Can we discuss the plot? I have a hard time putting the pieces together, but here's my take on what happened:

Denzel goes back in time at least twice to save Claire and stop Caviezel. When the movie starts, he had gone back at least once. Here's a chronology of events (the 1st two take place before the movie starts):

1. Caviezel successfully blows up the ship without involving Claire. The FBI unit hunts for the killer and gets Denzel involved.

2. FBI's team sends a note back to Denzel, but his partner gets it and goes down to the dock to get killed in a shootout with Caviezel. Caviezel's SUV is damaged, so he uses Claire's. Claire is obviously killed, but not before Denzel goes back in time to attempt to save her and stop Caviezel from blowing up the ship. Denzel saves Claire from Caviezel's hideout, leaves her at her apartment to go to the dock to stop Caviezel. This is why we see blood-soaked rags and Denzel's prints and blood all over Claire's apartment. Denzel is unsuccessful in saving the girl or the 500 people on the ship the first time he goes back. When they capture Caviezel, he mentions that short of divine intervention, the terrorism act cannot be stopped. It's obvious he's aware that someone or a group is trying to stop him through time travel. He also mentions there will never be a trial. I don't know what to make of that. How did he know there would be no trial, unless he was aware that at some point, Denzel would be successful in stopping him?

3. Denzel goes back again, but this time, during a deja vu moment in Claire's apartment as he's putting together the alphabet on her fridge "You can save her", he realizes he must've been there before and failed to save her. So he takes Claire with him the second time, and he succeeds in saving her and stopping Caviezel, but he dies. The other Denzel who hasn't time traveled shows up.

It's possible that Denzel went back in time a total of three times as some clues during the movie allude to that.

Any thoughts on what the plot was?

- Brian

No, he only went back the one time.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Either you haven't watched the movie or you missed a whole bunch of clues, some obvious ones.

How do you explain Denzel's prints and blood allover Claire's apartment on two different occasions? Once the first time Denzel visited Claire's apartment, and a second time when he went back in time? Also, Claire leaves him a voice mail at the beginning of the movie, which he receives after Claire's death. Again, this happened the previous time Denzel went back in time.

[Badbird]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
Either you haven't watched the movie or you missed a whole bunch of clues, some obvious ones.

How do you explain Denzel's prints and blood allover Claire's apartment on two different occasions? Once the first time Denzel visited Claire's apartment, and a second time when he went back in time? Also, Claire leaves him a voice mail at the beginning of the movie, which he receives after Claire's death. Again, this happened the previous time Denzel went back in time.

Well, the problem is actually the story structure and the use of time travel. See, he really shouldn't have been able to prevent the explosion. What should have happened was an infinite loop. When they sent things back they actually caused the events to happen - so the outcome should have been the same. They broke the time travel paradox in order to save the ferry.

But it really shouldn't have been that way. And I think he only went back once, despite him saying "What if I already have?" when he went back.

Chalk it up to poor writing. They had been clever to a point.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by Badbird
But it really shouldn't have been that way. And I think he only went back once, despite him saying "What if I already have?" when he went back.



He went back at least twice. Remember the first time he saw the crashed ambulance in Caviezel's compound? When he travels back in time, he steals an ambulance and crashes it again in his compound.

Also, remember in the beginning of the movie he visits Claire's apartment and puts on latex gloves before he goes in? Later, one of his colleagues calls him and says his prints are allover Claire's place. How can that be the case if Denezel was wearing latex gloves the entire time he was there?

Also, the first time he visits Claire's place, there is blood and bloody rags allover Claire's apartment. Later, when he goes back in time, it turns out is was his blood.

I don't think it was poor writing. The intent was to show he had gone back in time at least twice to stop the terrorist act and save Claire.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
Either you haven't watched the movie or you missed a whole bunch of clues, some obvious ones.

How do you explain Denzel's prints and blood allover Claire's apartment on two different occasions? Once the first time Denzel visited Claire's apartment, and a second time when he went back in time? Also, Claire leaves him a voice mail at the beginning of the movie, which he receives after Claire's death. Again, this happened the previous time Denzel went back in time.
No. The prints were there just from him going and fixing his wound.
No. The phone call from her was ther from when he was there fixing his gunshot wound.

He only went back once.
It really isn't that hard to get.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
He went back at least twice. Remember the first time he saw the crashed ambulance in Caviezel's compound? When he travels back in time, he steals an ambulance and crashes it again in his compound.

Also, remember in the beginning of the movie he visits Claire's apartment and puts on latex gloves before he goes in? Later, one of his colleagues calls him and says his prints are allover Claire's place. How can that be the case if Denezel was wearing latex gloves the entire time he was there?

Also, the first time he visits Claire's place, there is blood and bloody rags allover Claire's apartment. Later, when he goes back in time, it turns out is was his blood.

I don't think it was poor writing. The intent was to show he had gone back in time at least twice to stop the terrorist act and save Claire.

He didn't crash it again...that was the crash from the ONLY time he crashed it. The timelines are interwoven. You must pay attention.

His prints are from him fixing his wound, as I mentioned before.

He only went back in time once.......I feel this is Deja Vu debating this with you. YOU must not have seen the same film as the rest of us.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by veddhead83
He didn't crash it again...that was the crash from the ONLY time he crashed it. The timelines are interwoven. You must pay attention.

His prints are from him fixing his wound, as I mentioned before.

He only went back in time once.......I feel this is Deja Vu debating this with you. YOU must not have seen the same film as the rest of us.

Let's deal with one point at a time:

The movie begins with Denzel starting an investigation, during which he finds his own bloody rags in Claire's apartment. He gets a call from one of his colleagues that his prints were all over Claire's apartment and he wonders how this could've happened if he was wearing latex gloves during his visit. Obviously, he'd been back in time once before visiting Claire's apartment looking for clues. After the visit to Claire's apartment with latex gloves, he goes back in time again during the movie. Get it?

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
Let's deal with one point at a time:

The movie begins with Denzel starting an investigation, during which he finds his own bloody rags in Claire's apartment. He gets a call from one of his colleagues that his prints were all over Claire's apartment and he wonders how this could've happened if he was wearing latex gloves during his visit. Obviously, he'd been back in time once before visiting Claire's apartment looking for clues. After the visit to Claire's apartment with latex gloves, he goes back in time again during the movie. Get it? No he hadn't. Other wise he would have known about Val Kilmer/Adam Goldberg and their little lab of time travel. These were all just clues leading up to him going back in time - ONLY ONCE!!!!!!!!!!

If he traveled more than once, answer me these questions?

Why would they only show him travel once?
Why didn't he know Val Kilmer/Adam Goldberg?
Why wouldn't he go back and save his partner or put him at risk?
Why would the same bloody rags, cup of water be exactly where he left them from fixing his wounds?
Why would he have the same wound if he traveled more than once?
Why would he steal two ambulances and cause the same wreck?

Do you want me to bring up other reasons why he only went back once??

Dude, he only went in time once!!!
Those fingerprints, bloody rags, etc. were just clues telling us he had been there or was about to travel in time. It is the storytelling. That is it!!!

Does anyone else feel this way???

[Lazy Boy]

Yeah, he went only once...at the beginning, he's understandably confused that he's getting calls from this woman, that his fingerprints are all over the place, the bloody rags, etc.

I don't think that means he went through time twice. It's that headache inducing time travel logic that means he already went in the future, or at least it was saying that he already did, so by going into the transporter, he was fulfilling that prophecy of future logic, that by going into the machine he would eventually do those things (he couldn't change his future). Or something. Owww, my brain...

I agree with veddhead, basically, and his points.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by veddhead83
No he hadn't. Other wise he would have known about Val Kilmer/Adam Goldberg and their little lab of time travel. These were all just clues leading up to him going back in time - ONLY ONCE!!!!!!!!!!

Not necessarily my friend. The Denzel who went back in time the first time was a different Denzel we saw in Claire's apartment with latex gloves. Remember, traveling back in time doesn't mean you replace yourself. At the end of the movie, the Denzel we saw travel back in time was killed. The other Denzel who had never time-traveled found Claire and was clueless about everything that had transpired.

If he traveled more than once, answer me these questions?
Gladly.

Why would they only show him travel once? This was a 2:00 movie. If they were to show the story everytime he traveled back, they'd have to turn this into a sequel.

Why didn't he know Val Kilmer/Adam Goldberg?
Because he wasn't the same Denzel who'd gone back in time the first time. That Denzel could've been killed by Caviezel in Denzel's first attempt to stop Caviezel. Remember he was trying to rip Denzel a new bunghole on two separate occasions at the end. My guess is Denzel is killed each time he goes back in time. The last time he's killed, he stops Caviezel.

Why wouldn't he go back and save his partner or put him at risk?
Because Val Kilmer's crew could only send him back something like 8 hours before the explosion on the ferry. Remember how he was in a mad rush to go to the ferry after he saved Claire to stop Caviezel? Besides, each time they sent a note back through time to his partner, they weren't aware that his partner would be shot and killed by Caviezel. At that point, they weren’t even thinking about sending Denzel back in time. Everytime this story repeats itself, everyone is unaware of how things happened because they’re not the same people. There are moments of déjà vu, everytime history repeated itself, but that’s the limit of everyone’s knowledge of events that had transpired one or more times before.

Why would the same bloody rags, cup of water be exactly where he left them from fixing his wounds?
Why would he have the same wound if he traveled more than once?
Why would he steal two ambulances and cause the same wreck?
Because everytime you travel back in time, history will repeat itself unless you have a moment of déjà vu and decide to change course because of it, i.e. Denzel messing with the alphabet on Claire’s fridge before deciding to take her with him instead of leaving her at the apartment like he’d done in the past.

Do you want me to bring up other reasons why he only went back once?? Please do. Your assumption is that if Denzel goes back in time, he will remember how things happened, and can therefore do things differently, i.e. save his partner. But you’re ignoring the idea that everytime he goes back in time, he’s killed by Caviezel. History will repeat itself unless you change course from a déjà vu moment, and even then you may not create a ripple strong enough to change big events such as the explosion of the ferry. Adam Goldberg even mentions this before Denzel is sent back in time.

By the way, I'm not saying your dead wrong. I just think I have a more plausible explanation of the plot of the movie. My story connects the dots better than yours. I'm still anxious to hear your timeline of what the real story is.

[Badbird]

You're trying to find reason in a time travel paradox, which is impossible.

How could Reese be the father of the child he was sent back in time to protect? John Conner wouldn't exist without him, yet John Conner was the one who sent him back in time.

Time travel... just go with the flow. It's not real.

Denzel only went back once, creating a paradox that should have looped on itself for infinity.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by Badbird
You're trying to find reason in a time travel paradox, which is impossible.
Denzel only went back once, creating a paradox that should have looped on itself for infinity.

But there are contradicting events in your assumption.

I think you would agree that the only reason why Claire got involved is because the FBI and Denzel sent back a message in time, received by Denzel's partner who got involved in a shootout with Caviezel. The shootout damaged Caviezel's SUV, and this in turn became the reason why Caviezel sought out Claire's SUV and killed Claire.

This means originally, the killer blew up the Ferry without involving Claire. Then the FBI and Denzel got involved, and Claire was killed. The third or fourth time around, Denzel was able to save Claire and the 500+ people onboard the Ferry. End of paradox or whatever, and everyone went home happy, including the non-time traveling Denzel.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
Not necessarily my friend. The Denzel who went back in time the first time was a different Denzel we saw in Claire's apartment with latex gloves. Remember, traveling back in time doesn't mean you replace yourself. At the end of the movie, the Denzel we saw travel back in time was killed. The other Denzel who had never time-traveled found Claire and was clueless about everything that had transpired.


Gladly.

This was a 2:00 movie. If they were to show the story everytime he traveled back, they'd have to turn this into a sequel.


Because he wasn't the same Denzel who'd gone back in time the first time. That Denzel could've been killed by Caviezel in Denzel's first attempt to stop Caviezel. Remember he was trying to rip Denzel a new bunghole on two separate occasions at the end. My guess is Denzel is killed each time he goes back in time. The last time he's killed, he stops Caviezel.


Because Val Kilmer's crew could only send him back something like 8 hours before the explosion on the ferry. Remember how he was in a mad rush to go to the ferry after he saved Claire to stop Caviezel? Besides, each time they sent a note back through time to his partner, they weren't aware that his partner would be shot and killed by Caviezel. At that point, they weren’t even thinking about sending Denzel back in time. Everytime this story repeats itself, everyone is unaware of how things happened because they’re not the same people. There are moments of déjà vu, everytime history repeated itself, but that’s the limit of everyone’s knowledge of events that had transpired one or more times before.


Because everytime you travel back in time, history will repeat itself unless you have a moment of déjà vu and decide to change course because of it, i.e. Denzel messing with the alphabet on Claire’s fridge before deciding to take her with him instead of leaving her at the apartment like he’d done in the past.

Please do. Your assumption is that if Denzel goes back in time, he will remember how things happened, and can therefore do things differently, i.e. save his partner. But you’re ignoring the idea that everytime he goes back in time, he’s killed by Caviezel. History will repeat itself unless you change course from a déjà vu moment, and even then you may not create a ripple strong enough to change big events such as the explosion of the ferry. Adam Goldberg even mentions this before Denzel is sent back in time.

By the way, I'm not saying your dead wrong. I just think I have a more plausible explanation of the plot of the movie. My story connects the dots better than yours. I'm still anxious to hear your timeline of what the real story is.

You are not making any sense.
They could not send him back more than once and here is the killer reason: They can only replay a moment that happened 6 days ago once. No other chances. A one shot gig. Remember, they said that too. It wouldn't make sense if he could keep going back over and over. Illogical my friend.

The scenes that give us clues that he has been there before are there to show us he will be time traveling.

IN A NUTSHELL: His present self is not aware that his future self traveled to solve the past. His future self knows that if he messes with the past, shit will hit the fan.

Here is the same concept in a different movie: It is just like Back to the Future. When Marty goes back and changes things with Biff/His Mother/His Father. In that film, he changed little as possible so that his future wouldn't be lost. The only reason they show him traveling once is because - HE ONLY TRAVELED ONCE!!!

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by veddhead83
You are not making any sense.
They could not send him back more than once and here is the killer reason: They can only replay a moment that happened 6 days ago once. No other chances. A one shot gig. Remember, they said that too. It wouldn't make sense if he could keep going back over and over. Illogical my friend.

I never said they'd send the same Denzel back more than once. In fact, I've been saying the opposite. The Denzel who goes back in time the first time is killed. He was unable to create a ripple strong enough to change history. The Denzel who is sent back again is the one from the past in reference to the Denzel who got killed. This Denzel had never time traveled. This Denzel also becomes successful in saving Claire and stopping Caviezel.

I think the most obvious clue to my assumption is when Denzel visits Claire's place the first time and discovers his bloody rags, and as it turns out, his own prints all over Claire's apartment. In that time frame, Claire was dead. We know this because Denzel saw her dead body in the morg. So, in one sequence of time, Claire is dead and Denzel's prints and blood are all over Claire's apartment. What does that tell you my friend? That Denzel had gone back in time once and was unable to save Claire.

Do you accept that at one point, Claire was dead while Denzel's blood and prints were found in her apartment? If you do, then you must also accept that Denzel goes back in time a second time. This time, his prints and blood will also be all over Claire's place, but Claire is saved (a different outcome than the first time).

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
I think the most obvious clue to my assumption is when Denzel visits Claire's place the first time and discovers his bloody rags, and as it turns out, his own prints all over Claire's apartment. In that time frame, Claire was dead. We know this because Denzel saw her dead body in the morg. So, in one sequence of time, Claire is dead and Denzel's prints and blood are all over Claire's apartment. What does that tell you my friend? That Denzel had gone back in time once and was unable to save Claire. However, the time traveling Denzel had just rescued her from JC's place and had already left her apartment.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by veddhead83
However, the time traveling Denzel had just rescued her from JC's place and had already left her apartment.

I don't think your explanation makes sense. Let's break it down further:

What is your answer to the following question:

The very first time Caviezel carries out his plan, is Claire involved or not?

Keep in mind that niether the FBI, nor Denzel had knowledge of Caviezel's plan.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
I don't think your explanation makes sense. Let's break it down further:

What is your answer to the following question:

The very first time Caviezel carries out his plan, is Claire involved or not?

Keep in mind that niether the FBI, nor Denzel had knowledge of Caviezel's plan.

Not sure. They only time they show us any of the attack before the FBI or Denzel had knowledge was the first scene in the film - so not sure if she was involved or not.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by veddhead83
Not sure. They only time they show us any of the attack before the FBI or Denzel had knowledge was the first scene in the film - so not sure if she was involved or not.

See, now this tells me you don't have your story straight. Allow me to respond for you:

You said Denzel went back in time only once. If that's the case, then obviously Claire was involved in the original plot, because her body washed up the shore after the explosion. The ATF/FBI even figured out she wasn't on the ferry during the explosion, and that she was killed and her body dumped in the water before the explosion.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
See, now this tells me you don't have your story straight. Allow me to respond for you:

You said Denzel went back in time only once. If that's the case, then obviously Claire was involved in the original plot, because her body washed up the shore after the explosion. The ATF/FBI even figured out she wasn't on the ferry during the explosion, and that she was killed and her body dumped in the water before the explosion. Duh! Dude, are you finished debating this already!?!?!?!

[Bourne101]

Going to see this tomorrow night for sure. I can't wait.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by Bourne101
Going to see this tomorrow night for sure. I can't wait.

Be sure to let us know what you think the story is that connects all the dots. I wasn't able to get much out of vedhead with his limited vocabulary.

[veddhead83]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
Be sure to let us know what you think the story is that connects all the dots. I wasn't able to get much out of vedhead with his limited vocabulary. Ouch!!! Why don't you learn how to post a little more and then come and see me....thanks for playing....by the way, are you ever going to review the movie or just bullshit with everybody about your plot philosophy??

[JCPhoenix]

DEJA VU 7/10

A nice return to form after the decent Man on Fire (6/10) and the barely passable Domino (5/10).

Tony Scott finally takes a break from the crazy over-the-top style that he's exhibited in those last two films and returned to his great/solid films from before that period (Crimson Tide, Enemy of the State, etc)...gone are all the crazy (useless) flashes back and forth, the endless repetition, phrases popping on the screen - back is the solid, clean filmmaking that Scott was known for before.

Movie is excellent up until the third act. The screenplay sets itself up BEAUTIFULLY for an un-Hollywood ending that never happens and instead, the third act creates a whole slew of plot holes and a moronic decision or two. Still, the third act is enjoyable - just the film had so much more potential and was set up so well for another ending that it's disappointing that it ended the way it did.

Washington is great (as usual) as the ATF agent who investigates as is the rest of the cast (the sadly underused Val Kilmer, Paula Patton, Jim Caviezel, Adam Goldberg)

It's fun with a neat sci-fi twist to the whole story but always grounded enough so that it doesn't feel so "out there".

The ending is so separate from what the rest of the film seemed to be leading towards that I question whether the original script ended in the same way; somehow I doubt it. With the proper ending this could have been a high 8/10. As is, it's a high 7/10 still and recommended if you're looking for a good night of (fairly intelligent) entertainment.

ETA: Originally posted by Badbird
Well, the problem is actually the story structure and the use of time travel. See, he really shouldn't have been able to prevent the explosion. What should have happened was an infinite loop. When they sent things back they actually caused the events to happen - so the outcome should have been the same. They broke the time travel paradox in order to save the ferry.

But it really shouldn't have been that way. And I think he only went back once, despite him saying "What if I already have?" when he went back.

Chalk it up to poor writing. They had been clever to a point.

This is EXACTLY my problem with the third act. From the time they mentioned the fingerprints my thought was that there was NO WAY possibly he could change the past cause it was clear that he had already visited the past in the "current day" that he was in and that he would attempt but fail - and I thought that was an awesome and nice way to end the film...unfortunately, it didn't end that way.

And when Washington says, "What if I have" I'm not getting the impression that he's saying he's went back another time, I get the impression that he's saying "What if I have already gone back" as in "What if I have already gone back this time" - which, in a sense, he clearly has since there were fingerprints all around the apartment and the "You can save her" thing was there already.

There is no way there was a third time travel. I wish but I chalk this up to bad writing as well...a third time travel would just create a whole new set of plot holes.

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by JCPhoenix
DEJA VU 7/10

There is no way there was a third time travel. I wish but I chalk this up to bad writing as well...a third time travel would just create a whole new set of plot holes.

So you think he went back in time twice?

[JCPhoenix]

I meant "second"...accidentally wrote "third"...so no, I think he went back once.

[Scorpio24]

Haha this thread just perked my afternoon up. I love it when 2 people can't leave something go. Especialy when 1 is WRONG!! :D

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
Haha this thread just perked my afternoon up. I love it when 2 people can't leave something go. Especialy when 1 is WRONG!! :D

There are no right or wrong answers here. Just supporting arguments for differing opinions. Time travel movies can sometimes get so convoluted that the only way to know for sure what happened is to hear it from the horses' mouth (the script writer).

[Scorpio24]

Originally posted by Zhoozhitsu
There are no right or wrong answers here. Just supporting arguments for differing opinions. Time travel movies can sometimes get so convoluted that the only way to know for sure what happened is to hear it from the horses' mouth (the script writer).

And if that was the case he would say that he either travled once or twice. Proving one of you wrong. You're first two sentances contradict each other.

1 of you is WRONG

[Zhoozhitsu]

Originally posted by Scorpio24
And if that was the case he would say that he either travled once or twice. Proving one of you wrong. You're first two sentances contradict each other.

1 of you is WRONG

Yes, but you said "I love it when 2 people can't leave something go. Especialy when 1 is WRONG!!

Your statement implies that one person is obviously wrong, i.e. he/she keeps arguing when it's obvious there is no case to be made.

My point was, unless we hear from the horse's mouth, neither is wrong. You're innocent until proven guilty, no? Nobody has been proven wrong here in this argument, at least not conclusively.

[Scorpio24]

No my statement intsills that 1 of you is wrong. Which one I don't know or care. I haven't seen the film yet. But one of you is wrong. Simple as that.

You're both debating the shit out of it. One of you is most definitley wrong because you are arguing from different ends of the spectrum. This is not one of theose oh we are both right things. 1 of you is wrong.

Twist my words into whatever sentiment you want. The point is legite and it stands.

Have fun.

[Bourne101]

Deja Vu

I went into this movie expecting an intense, well acted and action packed movie. I also expected it to be a little on the weird side, which I wasn't siked about but I could live with it. And that is exactly what I got. The movie is extremely intense and suspensful. The movie is well acted on all parts, but there's no denying Denzel had the best performance. There was tons of action, from bombings, to shootings, to chase scenes. It had all the ingredients for a Blockbuster action flick. I could've lived without the whole time travel thing, and I think a different solution could've made the movie even better. But in the end it didn't really matter, and it worked with fewer flaws than expected. This is definitley worth a view.

8/10