Part heist-thriller, part coming-of-age, and part drama, The Lookout is a small film that aims big.
Chris Pratt (Gordon-Levitt) is a promising high school athlete. When tragedy strikes, it leaves Chris with more than a scar and head trauma. Four years later, Chris is still trying to cope with life and his loss. Now sharing a crummy apartment with a blind guy Lewis (Daniels), Chris takes a job working as a night janitor at a local bank -- the only thing he can do. Needless to say, he hates his life.
One night, he meets Gary Spargo (Goode) at a bar. Gary is a charismatic man with confidence to spare, and he seems to know Chris from his glory days. Chris starts to hang out with Gary and hooks up with a former erotic dancer Luvlee (Fisher). All is good until Chris discovers that Gary and his gang are planning a heist at the bank. Gary convinces Chris to become part of the team, as a lookout. But Chris soon changes his mind, and everything goes wrong.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt (3rd Rock from the Sun, Shadowboxer) grows up nicely to take on this highly moody role. The film rests heavily on his shoulders, and he does a fine job portraying a confused, sensitive young man who is trying to figure out his past from his future, right from wrong. Jeff Daniels (Infamous) is solid as Chris's laid-back roommate. Even though he's blind, he sees better than Chris and takes care of him. And Matthew Goode (Imagine Me & You, Match Point) plays against type as the rough, manipulative but charming criminal. His intensity and Daniels's sense of humor help lift the film from its heaviness.
Isla Fisher (Wedding Crashers) is fine as Luvlee, the girl who seduces Chris. She shows enough vulnerability and sweetness to offset the otherwise two-dimensional character. Sergio Di Zio (Cinderella Man) is excellent as the goofy but kind Deputy. His character has tragedy written all over it.
Written and directed by Scott Frank (The Interpreter, Out of Sight), the story is actually rather straightforward and simple. The storytelling style and technique, however, are not necessarily conventional. Yes, the story begins with an intense prologue that sets everything in motion. Then the pace slows down and we wonder: where is the plot? (If you haven't read the premise, you wouldn't know what to expect). The pace starts to pick up with Chris realizes what's going on, but that's halfway into the movie. There's a lot of characterization. At times it feels like Frank is trying too hard to build these characters, and make them different and unique. They feel manufactured. From the down-and-out hero to the good (but blind) roommate who philosophizes everything, from the girl who falls for Chris to the happy-go-lucky Deputy whose wife is expecting, these characters are in many ways cliched, and you know where they're going and what they will end up doing.
I feel like there are two movies in one, here. The first half works as a personal drama, and the second half a crime movie with a few twists and a predictable ending. There are a few plot holes, and at one point I wonder: why go through all that trouble? The motivation doesn't make sense. For example, the heist could have been easily carried out without Chris Pratt. So why all the charade and then a dramatic reveal. And with Chris's physical and mental problem, why would the DMV allow him to drive? That's a little hard to believe. And then there's that Memento-like subplot about Chris's memory loss -- he needs to keep notes to remember the sequence of events. It serves the plot but, again, it feels contrived.
This is Scott Frank's directorial debut, and it's obvious. The pacing needs tightening, and the camera work is inconsistent. But once the action picks up in the second half, Frank is able to sustain the tension and build up to an interesting ending, albeit rather predictable. The stereotypical characters do serve a purpose, and there's a good adrenaline rush at the end. But there are way too many loose-ends and I have a hard time sustaining my disbelief; it also gets a bit melodramatic. So while I was over all entertained by the film, I wasn't too impressed. But look out, Hollywood is going to feed us more of these memory-lapse stories until we say, "Enough already."Stars: Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jeff Daniels, Matthew Goode, Isla Fisher, Carla Gugina, Bruce McGill, Alberta Watson,Sergio Di Zio
Director: Scott Frank
Writer: Scott Frank
Distributor: Miramax
MPAA Rating: R for language, violence and sexual content
Running Time: 99 Minutes
Ratings:
Script – 6
Performance – 7
Direction – 7
Cinematography – 7
Music/Sound– 7
Editing – 7
Production – 7
Total – 6.9 out of 10
Noah Wilder (O'Neil) is a ten-year-old with a vivid imagination. Craving his busy father's attention, Noah loses interest in school and is lagging behind, especially in Math and Science. During a family weekend getaway at their beach house, Noah and his younger sister, Emma (Wryn), find a strange box that contains a few strange "toys," including a stuffed bunny. Emma immediately becomes "friends" with the bunny and calls her Mimzy, as if the toy actually is talking to her.
Soon, Noah and Emma discover they're starting to have superpowers. Noah's intelligence and new-found academic excellence surprise his parents (Richardson and Hutton) as well as his Science teacher, Larry (Wilson). Larry and his New-Age girlfriend Naomi (Hahn) realize that something is very special about Noah and Emma. Confused and scared, however, the Wilders forbid the children from playing with the toys. Noah's defiance results in a blackout across the state of Washington, and the Feds are hot on their trail. Meanwhile, Noah and Emma discover that Emma has a destiny to fulfill.
Newcomer Chris O'Neil does a wonderful job as Noah. He has a very natural ability to convey emotions and deliver his dialogue, and he's extremely likable as the unlikely hero. Rhiannon Leigh Wryn (
Joely Richardson (
The writers have done an okay job adapting and expanding Padgett's SF short story. The film opens with a prologue and ends with an epilogue, which seem a bit tagged on. And the story unfolds too slowly, losing our interest at various places. They try to introduce the characters and their relationships with each other, but they still feel two-dimensional. The story picks up when the children discover the toys. The dialogue is typically family-oriented, leaning a bit on the "info dumping" side. I believe the narrative could have been stronger if they would integrate these information more effectively with the plot.
Producer-director Robert Shaye (
However, as a family film, 
When Linda wakes up, she finds Jim alive and well. Confused, she goes about her day thinking maybe she's had a bad dream. But it feels too real to her, and she's seeing people she's never met before (such as the sheriff). Then, Linda wakes up again, and it's now Saturday, the day of the funeral. But Linda has no idea what is happening. She has no memory of anything, including another accident that happened. One bad thing leads to another, sending her into a psychiatric ward.
But then, she wakes up again and it's now Tuesday. Once Linda realizes what's going on, she starts to piece everything together, and she realizes that she's having premonitions, and Wednesday (or Thursday, when she heard the news) hasn't really happened yet, and that she can still stop Jim's death. But should she? Her marriage to Jim is falling apart, and she suspects that he's having an affair. She asks, "If I let Jim die, is it the same as murder?" What is she going to do?
Sandra Bullock (
Courtney Taylor Burness (
Speaking of the script, written by Bill Kelly (
Even if you figure out the time line and the story arc, there still seem to be too many plot holes. And even when I understand what is real and what is premonition, I still have trouble figuring out why the order? Why Monday first instead of Sunday, if she's going to live her real life in chronological order. It's baffling, and judging from the buzz on Internet bulletin boards, I know many people feel the same way. And I think that's a detriment to the screenwriter. True, 
German director Mennan Yapo (
On top of that, just because of how the events are played out, it's very frustrating to watch Linda repeating everything she "sees" in her premonitions, and without noticing that she's doing it. I mean, hello? She's not all that bright, is she? And that's frustrating. If she knows her husband is going to die or something is going to happen to her daughter, why not try everything she can to stop it, like tying him up or something? I understand -- yes, I do -- why the events have to happen because of its philosophical theme, but as a story, the character loses her credibility. And that's one thing I find very annoying. I really wanted to love this movie, but if I had had any premonition about this before, I would have chosen to wait for it on Netflix.
As the narrator begins the story, King Leonidas (Butler), like all the kings before him, has been bred and raised as soldiers, the best of the best to represent the military state of Sparta. He and his queen, Gorgo (Headey) enjoy the beauty and the peace of their land with their son until the Persian king, Xerxes (Santoro) rages a war against Sparta and all of Greece.
Leonidas wants to lead his troops to fight off the invaders, but according to Spartan laws, he must obtain the blessing from the Ephors. Little does he know, politician Theron (West) has corrupted them. Not to be discouraged, Leonidas recruits 300 of his finest warriors, each have at least a son to replace them, on a suicide mission to hold off the Persian army while Gorgo tries to persuade the council to send a pan-Greek army to their aid.
Leonidas' 300 Spartans clearly are outnumbered by Xerxes' 100,000-strong army. But they find a way to fend off the Persians for as long as they can, by guarding the mountain pass of Thermopylae. Xerxes gives Leonidas ten days to surrender, or he threatens to slaughter the Spartans. The 300 Spartans are joined by about 700 Thespians and slave soldiers, and they fight bravely, killing thousands of Persian soldiers, and holding the pass for three days. Unfortunately, a local shepherd, Ephialtes (Tierman), betrays Leonidas by showing Xerxes an alternate path around Thermopylae. The Spartans fight till their last breaths and their sacrifices inspire the rest of Greece to band together to later defeat the Persians.
Gerard Butler (
As Theron, Dominic West (
The script and storyboard by Zack Snyder, Kurt Johnstad and Michael Gordon follows Frank Miller's graphic novel closely. The storytelling is rather straightforward, with over-the-top narration and on the nose dialogue. Except for the tortured soul Ephialtes, good and evil are clearly defined. 
The story has a surreal fantasy feel to it, and the characters are all larger-than-life with no ambiguity. It seems that the writers are determined to create some catch phrases ("We are SPARTANS!" Leonidas proclaims before kicking a Persian messenger off into a well), which generally work very well for the genre. They have done a good job creating a fluid storyline with Queen Gorgo's subplot as a counterbalance. That creates good tension and drama, even though we all know the story and the ending so well. Unfortunately, the story is a bit thin over all, so it drags in places and some of the action feels somewhat repetitious.
Zack Snyder (
Obviously, Snyder and company know who their audiences are. The film is overripe with testosterone, especially with the heavy metal soundtrack. The battle scenes are well-choreographed and rendered, and the stylized violence, gore, and dismemberments are oddly pleasing (at least aesthetically). Yet the females get to have their beefcakes, too. 
If you're looking for something deeper and better rounded, this might not be for you. And those who have been spoiled by 
In the summer of 1969, a murder rattles the communities of Vallejo, CA. When the killer, who calls himself the Zodiac, sends an anonymous letter with an encrypted code to the San Francisco 
James Graysmith (Gyllenhaal) is a cartoonist at the 
Their leads from four California counties point them to a few possible suspects, including Arthur Leigh Allen (Lynch), who fits all the circumstantial evidences. However, there is never enough hard evidence to make an arrest, and the case remains open for more than 20 years. As the investigation lingers in limbo, Graysmith's obsession with the case, especially the true identity of the Zodiac, leads him on a personal journey despite many obstacles. His discoveries reveal details the police has neglected and make many connections overlooked by others. For once, Graysmith is on the verge of finding the true identity of the Zodiac Killer, at the risk of his own life.
Jake Gyllenhaal (
In fact, the performance of the entire cast is excellent. There are no frills, no over-the-top extravagance. Just good, solid characterizations that make the fact-based story real. Okay, maybe the exception is Robert Downey Jr. (
Writer James Vanderbilt (
Even though there's a true villain in the film, we never really know who that is -- the audiences are guessing as the investigation continues -- and we never really know who the protagonist is either. Sure, in part it's James Graysmith's story, but in truth it really is an ensemble effort, and everyone does a great job.
Director David Fincher (
There's always a sense of dread (if and when will the Zodiac strike again?) and intrigues (will they ever find the guy?) At the same time, both Fincher and Vanderbilt don't want to commit to a definitive conclusion -- they try to let the audiences make up their own mind and come to their own conclusion. 
However, they're also true to Graysmith's analysis, experiences and speculations. We may think that they're all trying to coerce us to come to a certain conclusion, but there is always a certain doubt. We just won't know for sure. And as a true crime film,