A Common Man

This movie was so terrible that I was so surprised that how could it turn out to be, with an actor like Ben. But then I realized that the whole production team and the cast was just horrible, so there's no surprise that it was an epic failure.

Made me wonder whether they did have a casting session before selecting the cast or at least even read the script twice! Why didn't they go for Sri Lankan actors? Instead, they had to go for people who called themselves actors, only god knows from where they were picked up from.

Major blow to Sri Lanka and as a Sri Lankan, I am quite crossed about making this movie. I hope people will not think bad about Sri Lankan movies, because we produce many good movies which goes and wins foreign movie festival awards. But among them, here this is, smearing mud on our faces.

Absolutely horrible. Cannot give 0. So I'm giving 1 out of 10.

Despite B movie prod. value, its a great effort, engaging and.....Ben Kingsley and Ben Cross. You'd have to dig hard into the 45+/- years of Ben Kingsley's career to find something not worth revisiting.

its refreshing to see suspense, well paced action/editing and performances in a movie that may unfortunately escape mainstream media's radar. too many times, big budget films prey upon the audience's desires for violence, T&A and the obvious, but this one didn't.

The movie has some flaws, we've seen similar themes (its a remake too) in other big releases, and again, the prod. value is flawed, particularly dubbing. My vote of 8 stars is generous, but attention should be drawn to A Common Man.

Maybe you predict the ending, maybe not.

I consider this a nice change of pace. In fact, after viewing the film, I visited IMDb, saw one review (more or less panning A Common Man), so i chose to offer my first review. I hope my opinion is helpful to you.

A terrorist (Ben Kingsley) plants several bombs throughout the city of Colombo, Sri Lanka and threatens to detonate them unless prisoners are released.

Writing a review for this film without revealing the end is a bit hard to do, but I will try. There are many things about this production that can be said...

First of all, this is a remake of an Indian film called "A Wednesday". I have not seen it, but if the reviews are any indication, the original is vastly superior (and probably worth my seeking out).

Second, Kingsley is completely wasted here. He is one of the great actors of our times, and is vastly underrated for some reason. He gets cast in movies that are forgettable, like this one and "The Wackness". Even when he shines (which is almost always), it is hard to appreciate the talent when he is surrounded by rubbish.

Lastly, the people who made this did not seem to grasp English. When Kingsley speaks, it sounds pretty okay. But when others speak, they talk in a nonsense style sometimes, repeat themselves a lot... it just never makes sense. This is the film's biggest weakness -- do not try to make a film in English if you cannot speak the language. I would much rather watch a Sri Lankan film with subtitles if it would sound more natural...

The reason im rating this movie awful is that i have seen the original movie by which is in Hindi and was released in 2008. This is simply a English version of the movie "A Wednesday" which is one of the best movie's i have seen. The only reason i picked this movie to watch was because of Ben kingsley and i am very much disappointed and never expected such poor performance from him. I recommend everyone to watch "A Wednesday" with subtitile you maybe also find that on youtube.

This movie is awful in its every aspect either its the direction, production, editing, and above all the acting. When people copy something i would expect that to be a better version, improved one. This is just an awful movie and waste of time, i again recommend to watch the original movie "A Wednesday http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1280558/?ref_=fn_al_tt_4 ".

Firstly, there are several sound problems left over from poor editing. A loud crackle at 7 minutes, echoed dialogue at 30 mins etc. These are caused by gaps and sync issues in the time-line of the editing software. They are short and don't interfere with the film, but it shows a lack of faith in the producers, editor and director that they cant even watch their own product before sending it to market. There are also moments when some dialogue is quiet so you turn the volume up, then it gets loud and you turn it down. Keep the remote nearby as you will be juggling the volume a lot. There is some English dubbing throughout but thats to be expected for a film not set in an English speaking country.

The director is very ambitious. He knows how to position a camera to get artistic. Overhead shots of fights in the alley, crane shots and quiet long takes showing the bomber. It appears he has just come out of film school and this is his first passion project. How he got Ben Kinglsey onboard is the biggest question to ask. Even the cameras are a decent grade HD, better than some big budget blockbusters. I will say the colour is a little drowned out though. He also needs to learn to avoid pointing the camera at the sunlight from windows when doing interior shots.

The acting is poor, and the script is cliché. The dialogue is tough to watch. Thankfully most of the film is focused on the silent bad guy, who holds your attention enough to keep you watching. Its short and the story is easy to follow.

This is not however a bad film. It has lots of potential and is a learning experience for the crew especially. You can see them enhancing their CV credits while they pretend to be background police officers. If they watch back this film and learn from all their mistakes, they will be rewarded.

As for us viewers, watching what is essentially a student film, its not something I can recommend mainly because of the constantly changing volume issue. I picked it up on bluray at the dollar store, so its not breaking the bank at least.