One of those circling stories destined to connect different characters from different situations, surrounded by strange events where the small of movements might cause the butterfly effect, changing their lives forever. The hyperlink is a terrific formula when presented in many films but it only works with brilliancy when the speech and the message are truly important, when the cast is fantastic, and when all the elements put together makes total sense, even in its wildest absurdity. Altman, Iñarritú, P.T. Anderson and many others have tasted from this source and made remarkable masterpieces with the hyperlink. "The Power of Few" goes to show that the power of making such movies is really in the hands of few. The cast was good, the situations given to the characters went from relatively good to miserably dull. The message at the ending almost saves the film, after many bumps and pointless conversations and scenes.
It revolves around the robbery of the decade happened in Vatican (plot given so little detail and almost irrelevant to the rest of the movie) and a crime drama involving drug dealers, inexperienced thieves, a delivery messenger, two hobos, some secret agents and one smart kid. They're all gathered in one impactant moment, played repeated times each time new characters are introduced in the plot, very similar to the presentation given in "Vantage Point". That's when the movie started to become predictable. Those encounters always to revolve around deaths, accidents and unbelievable schemes. There's no time to care for the characters because they're so brief on the screen, so when they start to get killed, you don't feel anything for them. I only liked the kid (Devon Gearhart) who was trying to rob a drugstore to get medicine for his young brother. All the others were plain annoying, slowing down the movie with their gibberish and small talk.
Respect and importance could be given to this project if treated as a serious drama instead of an action flick filled of thrilling moments with a defining purpose only given in the ending. By that time it's so shallow, pretense and hollow. It tries to show how powerful we are (or can be) in moments of weakness and despair, and how everything changes with just one small step, one small action, one mistake. The plot twist comes when it finally uses a retroactive mode to show how things could be for those characters. The tragedy goes off, the good possibilities walks in. So simplistic that hurts. To name a similar (and better) experience I suggest "Blind Chance" (1981), which focus on a man whose life is presented three times to us, with one turning point repeated to us several times, altering a few things. It was a great philosophical film about how small things can affect everyone's lives and how sometimes there's no greater change on the other side, it all leads to catastrophe. Comparing both films is ridiculous since it's not the same kind of audiences who watch them, but I insist you to watch it, and skip "The Power of Few".
To quote the smart kid, this is about biting your cheek really hard and having to live with the pain. There's no turning back, you wish it didn't happen but now you're gonna have to live with it. Yes, the pain of having seen this and endure the great Christopher Walken acting in a movie that doesn't deserve his talent. 4/10
It revolves around the robbery of the decade happened in Vatican (plot given so little detail and almost irrelevant to the rest of the movie) and a crime drama involving drug dealers, inexperienced thieves, a delivery messenger, two hobos, some secret agents and one smart kid. They're all gathered in one impactant moment, played repeated times each time new characters are introduced in the plot, very similar to the presentation given in "Vantage Point". That's when the movie started to become predictable. Those encounters always to revolve around deaths, accidents and unbelievable schemes. There's no time to care for the characters because they're so brief on the screen, so when they start to get killed, you don't feel anything for them. I only liked the kid (Devon Gearhart) who was trying to rob a drugstore to get medicine for his young brother. All the others were plain annoying, slowing down the movie with their gibberish and small talk.
Respect and importance could be given to this project if treated as a serious drama instead of an action flick filled of thrilling moments with a defining purpose only given in the ending. By that time it's so shallow, pretense and hollow. It tries to show how powerful we are (or can be) in moments of weakness and despair, and how everything changes with just one small step, one small action, one mistake. The plot twist comes when it finally uses a retroactive mode to show how things could be for those characters. The tragedy goes off, the good possibilities walks in. So simplistic that hurts. To name a similar (and better) experience I suggest "Blind Chance" (1981), which focus on a man whose life is presented three times to us, with one turning point repeated to us several times, altering a few things. It was a great philosophical film about how small things can affect everyone's lives and how sometimes there's no greater change on the other side, it all leads to catastrophe. Comparing both films is ridiculous since it's not the same kind of audiences who watch them, but I insist you to watch it, and skip "The Power of Few".
To quote the smart kid, this is about biting your cheek really hard and having to live with the pain. There's no turning back, you wish it didn't happen but now you're gonna have to live with it. Yes, the pain of having seen this and endure the great Christopher Walken acting in a movie that doesn't deserve his talent. 4/10