Haven't read anything about Deja Vu, so I can't say much about your comparison except that (IMHO) 7 Days was in no way a ripoff of Groundhog Day.

The repeating of some sequences and/or events has long been a given of many time travel stories, movies and TV shows - most predating GD. However, repeating time and the same sequence of events (for the most part) was not the central thematic element of 7 Days as it was with GD. If 7 Days had been about repeating the same 7 days over and over and over, then I'd grant you were right on with the comparison.

However, this new show Daybreak sounds like it's exactly that, a rip off of GD. Minus humor. I'd go so say far as to say that we'll probably see each episode end (or begin) with the character waking up and realizing he's going to be repeating the same day, just like Bill Murray's character did every time his alarm went off.

FWIW, I've got the feeling this show is going to grow old with audiences real quick.

I don't think it has a future.

Thankfully, Tony Scott has made a film without the seizure-inducing flash-cuts and without a too-warm color palette. Obviously Denzel carries the film because that's what he does, but it's the kind of role that he can sleepwalk through, playing an authority figure, Doug Carlin, an ATF officer investigating a ferry boat bombing on the coast of New Orleans.

The sense of deja vu for Doug gets generated through some super-hush-hush government project that investigates incidences of a terrorist nature, and it is quite a ride as a time-bender, featuring one of the nuttiest chase scenes I've seen in quite a while. But, the film is too long, by maybe 10-15 minutes, gets a bit too convoluted in the last act (I could follow the logic, but it opens up some other holes to get to the end).

I give it 2.75 stars, or a grade of B-.

I couldn't help but compare this to Enemy of the State: same director, thriller with well-known Black lead, interacts with high-cost low-profile secret government project, supporting "quirky" characters in the government (Jack Black, Adam Goldberg), technology generally too advanced and plot-hole ridden to be believed by audience, the list goes on.

The problem is, Enemy of the State makes the movie about Will Smith's desire to find the truth (and has a neat semi-twist) AND it has Gene Hackman. This movie has Val Kilmer, who's a great actor but is completely under-utilized. What's worse (slight, non-specific semi-spoiler),



I'll agree with Patman and DVD Talk's review: the chase scene is inventine, but too short. They needed to cut out about a half hour from this, and the beginning was a bit too fat and the whole bit in the bayou was way too long and unnecessary.

This is the first theatrical movie in a long time that I've almost fallen asleep to. Mind you I was tired to begin with and went at 11pm, so it's not a complete snoozer. I'd put this movie somewhere in between Out of Time and Enemy of the State. It is intriguing but not especially thrilling and a bit too long. I should've seen The Departed again.

Oh and this has NOTHING to do with Groundhog Day. It's not what you think it is.

Saw it, liked it. Up there with the rest of my favorites for the whole year.

I though DEJA VU was a pretty dopey sci-fi thriller. Not once did I find the sci-fi premise believable or convincing.



Denzel Washington was okay but he could do this role in his sleep. Halle Berry was fine as the damsel in distress but the role didn't have much depth to it.

...

I love time travel stuff, but man, I'm avoiding this one like the plague

Saw this Friday afternoon, thought it was really good. I could care less about everyone saying that the premise is a ripoff, I thought it was pretty entertaining on its own. Judging by the crowd reaction, I think most people liked it as well.
jc

Just got back from it. I thought it was pretty good. I didn't think it was anything like Groundhog Day or Enemy of the State however, it is your standard time travel story. Good acting all around but Denzel is the center of the movie so no one else is on screen long enough to be bad.

I went into this knowing they would pull some Six Sense stuff so paid close attention to everything. That might have made me enjoy it more. This movie isn't for everyone, it moves kind of slow and builds on itself. I can not see someone with a short attention span liking this with all the little clues in the film.

I would have preferred less time travel and more

This was the bastard child of 12 Monkeys and Enemy of the State.

Loved it. It was a heck of a ride, and pretty interesting throughout. While it did have some small aspects of some other films (which most every freakin' movie released these days does), it definitely stood out as it's own story, and a very entertaining one.

A-

Pretty good I thought. I really wasn't expecting the sci-fi time travel element (they were wise to avoid that in the previews - just for box office reasons) Man, Denzel's packin on the lbs tho...

Nice return to form for Mr. Scott after the Domino disaster.

***

My word! This movie turned out about as well as I could expect, just a very, very intense movie in a fun way. I'll be owning this DVD one day.

Saw it, liked it. It's one of the better Time Travel movies I've seen.

I liked a lot of the casting and the end was pretty cool.

Caught this tonight on DVD. Pretty good. Glad to see a Tony Scott movie that didn't give me a headache.

The time travel stuff...well, I'm not one to dig around and find plot holes, so it didn't bother me. The car chase was a bit of a let down.

That girl is a dead ringer for Halle Berry.

= J

Dumb, but I was thoroughly entertained.

I have a question for people who have seen the film -

Just caught this on DVD tonight. I went in with low expectations, and was very pleased. I liked the action/drama/suspense and the performances were on par. I love Tony's work and Man On Fire is one of my favorite films ever.

I did notice a few things:









I will definitely be buying this when it hits HD DVD.....oh wait.........

Good, dumb movie. If you think about the holes, it falls apart.

One thing I can say is that I was completely suprised by what kind of movie this turned out to be, even though I'm sure I saw plenty of previews. I don't know the reasoning behind hidings its true genre, but I wish every other movie studio would take a cue.

I really liked this movie up until the time travel. Not that I had a problem with the idea of time travel in the movie, but with all of the plot holes (or canyons) following it.

So, is the movie trying to say

I felt the same way going into the movie but really liked it too. That scene you mentioned sounds about right. I remember trying to figure out what was going on and by the end of the movie I forgot about it.

I think just to see how it plays out I'm going to watch the film again starting at the point where Denzel's charachter and then when it reaches the end go back and watch everything up til that point. Sounds weird but I think it will work as an iinteresting look at the story.

Mercury - as for your first question...



That was my take.

= J