Premonições

Sandra Bullock has to try to figure out if her husband is a live or dead as she shifts through time and dream to sort out her life and his possible death.

New Age-y story is too confusing and less than engaging in a Lifetime style supernatural tale for the big screen. TV movie feel aside the film suffers from doubling and tripling back on itself about nine times too many so that when you get to the end, the "THIS IS REAL" moment you really won't care since you'll have ad the wool pulled over your eyes once too often. I saw this in the theater and began to play a video game on my cellphone to pass the time to the end because I didn't care what was happening I just wanted to know what the end really was(and lest you think I disturbed anyone by doing so, I was all alone). Whats worse my reaction at the end was a loud "Thats it?" said in disbelief.

Its movies like this that make you wonder why we go to the movies when they throw such crap at us.

Relative newcomers, writer Bill Kelly and director Mennan Yapo, have concocted a testy little conundrum of a movie titled PREMONITION: whether the audience decides to step into their little nightmare or reject the premise that powerful emotions can drive the brain to peculiar directions of functioning will be the divisive break in acceptance of the film's premise. It is a fairly well done, thought provoking experience and is carried by some better than average performances by a strong cast.

The Hanson family is introduced as the husband Jim (Julian McMahon) and wife Linda (Sandra Bullock) buy their new home. Jump forward after the credits to a family that now includes two young schoolgirls (Shyann McClure and Courtney Taylor Burness), a seemingly mildly depressed Linda and a workaholic Jim. Abruptly, Linda is informed by a police officer that Jim has died in an auto accident and her close friend (Nia Long) and mother (Irene Ziegler) help Linda through the early moments of the tragedy. Yet Linda continues to 'relive' moments: one day Jim is dead the next he is alive, and all of the pieces of the puzzle that erode Linda's mind become clues to investigate information she doesn't want to know. She encounters a warped psychiatrist (Peter Stormare) and a possible 'other woman' in Jim's life (Amber Valletta), and as she attempts to mold the puzzle pieces to make sense, she learns about the possible 'why' of the mental state in which she is trapped.

The film has problems holding credibility, but then the premise is a novel enough to allow such missteps. Sandra Bullock takes over this role completely, gains our empathy, and in the end the film works because of her. She is becoming an actress who is learning the value of understatement and that aspect of her craft serves her well. No, this is not a great movie, but it is a well-produced little mystery that asks the audience to engage both mind and imagination, and that is a good thing! Grady Harp

Time travel, eh? What a tricky old subject it is. Never seem to get it quite right, do they, these filmmakers? They always seem to drop a clanger that's caught not only by those film geeks who can spot obscure meaningless anachronisms that nobody else cares about, but even those who are paying only passing attention (eg. the older daughter doesn't have scars when she should). On top of this, the character caught up in this time-hopping conundrum resolutely fails to do the one thing every ordinary person would do in the same situation: try to break the chain of events. If the reasoning of this film is to be followed the outcome would be the same, but at least there would be a little logic involved.

Sandra Bullock plays the depressed housewife who, for no apparent reason, finds herself batted back and forth in time like a ball of wool between a kitten's paws. Every time she wakes up she finds herself one side or the other of her husband's death and very slowly pieces together the pieces of the puzzle. For the most part her predicament is surprisingly uninvolving, possibly because the writers neglected to give her any sort of character whatsoever, just a set of predictable responses to fantastic situations. Only at one brief moment, when Bullock asks her screen mother, 'If I let Jim die, is that the same thing as killing him?' does the film even remotely look as if it is going to go off in some interesting direction. Unfortunately, that idea is dropped as quickly as it is suggested, and the film lumbers toward one of those predictable conclusions that used to be a twist when Rod Serling wrote it in the 50s.

The film isn't boring, but it isn't particularly interesting either. Bullock does what she's paid to do, but she's a lightweight actress at the best of times so, really, you should know what to expect when you see that she's appearing in this type of film.

I read some negative reviews of this movie before I went to see it. They were completely misguided! The movie is both intelligent and emotionally appealing. The actors are excellent. The literary symbols are consistent and right on the mark for the destination of this very well-made film. It is important to keep in mind that the movie is made on a time-line of contingencies, so that what would otherwise be inconsistent actually can make sense in light of changes introduced by the non-sequential experiences of Sandra Bullock's character. I suppose those looking for some kind of horror movie or brain-blank thriller (both of which can be enjoyable in their own light) might not have enjoyed it. But those looking for a narrative worth following, a message with some significance, and a generally well-made movie ought to see it.

I went to see Premonition yesterday and I enjoyed it very much, so I can't understand why people say that this is a bad film. It's a good psychological drama with top acting and good directing. It's a movie on which you have to focus, but that goes automatically and it's not so hard to follow when you don't think "What the hell is going on" during the film.

Sandra Bullock is very convincing, as always, and we also get some good performances by Kate Nelligan, Nia Long and Julian McMahon.

So please, don't listen to the critics, they don't know what they're talking about. And as for the rating on IMDb: the only explanation I can think of is that a lot of people don't get this film because it's too complicated (although it's not), or because they didn't like the ending, or maybe because they expected too much. But this is definitely a very good drama, and it's one of those movies that make you think about how important life is.

Everyone who wants to see this movie: see it without any expectations and prejudices, you won't be disappointed.