‘88 Minutes’ a little too long
Veteran actor fails to thrill audience
“88 Minutes”is nothing more than a mediocre crime-based thriller that not even Scarface himself can save. With uninspired acting, feeble plotlines and flimsy editing, this film can’t even survive 88 minutes of its own 108-minute run time.
After the rape and murder of a young woman, forensic psychiatrist and professor Dr. Jack Gramm (Al Pacino, “Ocean’s Thirteenâ€) testifies against the accused, Jon Forster (Neal McDonough, “I Know Who Killed Meâ€). Forster is then sentenced to execution as a result of Gramm’s pivotal testimony. Shortly after the trial, Gramm receives a mysterious phone call informing him that he has only 88 minutes to live. “Tick tock,”says the voice.
“Tick tock”indeed. “88 Minutes”drags on through a series of typical thriller twists and turns: anonymous messages, framings, murders, car bombs and more mysterious phone calls updating the audience on how long Dr. Gramm has to live.
As a professional psychologist whose expertise is analyzing criminals, Gramm turns a suspicious eye to every person he encounters, cycling through nearly every major, minor and ignorable character as potential suspects. Already swimming in a sea of red herrings, Gramm’s discovery of the true villain loses all of its shock value and leaves audiences wanting more.
With a predictable plot and not-so-thrilling scenes, it looks as if “88 Minutes”was counting on Pacino to deliver the punch only a legend like himself can. Unfortunately, Pacino’s performance is as sub-par and unconvincing as the performances of the supporting cast, which is littered with hip, young stars such as “The O.C.â€s Benjamin McKenzie (no doubt in an attempt to lure in the swooning teen girl demographic). But McKenzie’s acting is as annoyingly unimportant as his character.
Against all odds, it was Neal McDonough’s portrayal of Jon Forster, the accused murderer, toeing the line between guilt and innocence, that temporarily brings the movie out of its rut. McDonough generates the only real suspense, keeping the audience on its toes as to whether or not he was wrongfully accused. Despite his standout performance, McDonough gets a disappointing amount of screen time.
Complementing its messy plot, the film’s editing proves to be dismal. In a scene just after Gramm receives the first threatening phone call, the color tones of the scene change from a soft, warm palette to dark and foreboding blues in order to set up an upcoming torture scene. The change is as shockingly abrupt as walking into the bright neon rooms of The Peppermill. Even something as simple as determining Gramm’s profession turns into an editing fiasco, as the filmmakers can’t seem to decide on whether he is a forensic psychiatrist or psychologist (It seems the filmmakers must have invented the ‘forensic psychiatrologist’ just for this film).
In a bleak effort, “88 Minutes”fails to grasp the unique complexity of successfully compelling crime-based thrillers like “The Departed”and “Se7en.” Unlike “88 Minutes,”these films only begin riddled with intricate and confusing plot points—they don’t leave the audience clinging onto them.
‘88 Minutes’
Release Date: April 18
Director: Jon Avnet
Starring: Al Pacino, Alicia Witt and Leelee Sobieski
Genre: Thriller
Rating: R for disturbing violent content, brief nudity and language.
Grade: D
Photo from movieweb.com
Related Posts:
Leave A Comment
Latest Comments
- Tyra: Apart from people who would bleach their anus for ...
- Keys in the Coffin: Eric doesn't your comment support what I say then?...
- Eric Thornley: Milton Glick did take a paycut, and many faculty v...
- Keys in the Coffin: You can really justify the level of maturity in a ...
- Re:Emerson Marcus: Dear Emerson, Love the article. With home court ...
- what about the radio?: Wolf Pack Radio is another publication department ...











One Response to “‘88 Minutes’ a little too long”
I thought this was a good movie. I don’t understand why so many people don’t like it. What I do understand is that everyone has an opinion but the majority of people who have seen this movie didn’t enjoy it. CRAZY! it was good:)
(Report comment)