Just saw ALONG CAME A SPIDER(Spoiler Warning!!!)
BillParcellsFan
Well, I went to see it because, even though I wasn't expecting much from it,
the last time I saw a really good thriller was YEARS ago(back in '93 when I saw
"The Pelican Brief"/"The Fugitive"/"In the Line of Fire"), so I was hungry for
a thriller.
It wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be, and there were good parts to
this movie that made it watchable, especially the heart pounding score(was it
Jerry Goldsmith who did the score ? because it sure sounded like his kind of
work), but this movie had alot of problems. I mean it was cliched, pointless,
contrived, & most of the time, you didn't know what the heck was going on as
peoples' actions in the movie made you scratch your head just about everytime.
It was like 'What the heck was going on?!?'. & while some scenes may speed up
and get your attention, they would just stop where nothing would happen in long
stretches.
and all in all, through most of the movie, it seemed like an "In the Line of
Fire" ripoff, except this time, it had the plotline flying all over the place
with badly underdeveloped characters. then it turned into something else, but
I'll explain in the spoiler space below.
funny thing though, I thought I read a few years ago when Freeman did that
aweful 'chain reaction', he pretty much did it so he could pay for his
daughters' college tuituins. But gheez, if he had won an Oscar already, I would
understand why he's been doing crapola movies for the last few years. but he
hasn't, and I'm still surprised he's been doing almost nothing but lame
thrillers(well, at least he did the excellent NURSE BETTY last year).
But I have questions for anybody who's seen it that could clear a few things up
for me.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
alright, when Morgan Freeman, after that guy kidnapped the girl at the school
and got away, was looking into the computer, and saw pictures of everything.
What the heck did he notice in them that made him figure a few things out ?
How did Freeman figure out that Monica Potter was also in on it. He had a
flashback from that scene where Potter stabs the guy after he picks her up by
the hair, and then Freeman shoots him with a rifle, and then she said something
like 'aces & eight', which Freeman used as a password to get into that
computer. But how the heck did he even figure she was in on it when he
remembered she said that ?
then when Potter went to get that girl they kidnapped toward the end, that girl
was relieved she came. then the next thing you know, it, again, goes in a long
stretch, and then the girl, for no reason, figures out she's one of the bad
people. But what did Potter do to tip her off that she was bad ? another time
where I really scratched my head.
this was just a few of many things in the movie that really had me scratching
my head _why_ people were making these actions, without any reason.
but hey, at least I liked the twists where that school security head was also
in on it, then it was found out that Potter was in on it as well. because it
nearly ruined it for me when they revealed that guy early on, not to mention
he's a pretty crappy actor too.
Ken Ream
"BillParcellsFan" <billpar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010407043658...@ng-fi1.aol.com...
He was looking for a missing picture. The empty picture frame in Sanji's
office was a clue from Sanji to look for a missing picture. So he compared
a 3D computer view of the room on the computer with the current room
and found the Lindbergh picture on the computer. When he moved his
mouse on it, it took him to a live camera view of Sanji/Merkowitz's place
where he looked for anything with a name on it. Why did he decide to look
on the computer for a 3D image of the room? A logical stretch. And once
again we see the magic of movie computers in action.
> How did Freeman figure out that Monica Potter was also in on it. He had a
> flashback from that scene where Potter stabs the guy after he picks her up
by
> the hair, and then Freeman shoots him with a rifle, and then she said
something
> like 'aces & eight', which Freeman used as a password to get into that
> computer. But how the heck did he even figure she was in on it when he
> remembered she said that ?
He realized she looked too much like Julia Roberts, so he... err, I mean...
He guessed she was in on it before he went to the computer. He deducted
they were being hoodwinked and suspected she was in on it because she let
Sanji get away in the police car. Because he suspected it, he went to her
apartment looking for clues. The flashback was just to show how he deducted
the password.
> then when Potter went to get that girl they kidnapped toward the end, that
girl
> was relieved she came. then the next thing you know, it, again, goes in a
long
> stretch, and then the girl, for no reason, figures out she's one of the
bad
> people. But what did Potter do to tip her off that she was bad ? another
time
> where I really scratched my head.
Just the kid being smart. She had been kidnapped by a couple people and
it dawned on her to be susppicious that Julia Roberts, er Potter, was
alone.
>
> this was just a few of many things in the movie that really had me
scratching
> my head _why_ people were making these actions, without any reason.
Most of the reasons for the things you mention were there. There's just
a lot of logical holes and the need for a lot of suspension of disbelief.
> but hey, at least I liked the twists where that school security head was
also
> in on it, then it was found out that Potter was in on it as well. because
it
> nearly ruined it for me when they revealed that guy early on, not to
mention
> he's a pretty crappy actor too.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
The Mgnt
>and got away, was looking into the computer, and saw pictures of everything.
>What the heck did he notice in them that made him figure a few things out ?
He felt the empty picture frame in the office was a hint left by the kidnapper,
so he used the computer with a 360 image of the classroom to see if anything
was different. Charles Lindbergh was missing. Charles Lindbergh, as explained
in the movie, was famous (a hero) and his child was kidnapped. He zoomed in,
clicked and boom, got sent to a webcam at the kidnappers place where he was
able to zoom in with amazing clarity at a label and get the address.
What bugged me was: if they figured out who the kidnapper REALLY was (ie: name,
address, etc) why the hell did they keep using his "disguise" name in referring
to him? Wouldn't further investigation on him revealed he had a boat or
something? I doubt Sanji would have set up that entire house just to add the
additional clue of the book on the Lindbergh kidnapping.
>How did Freeman figure out that Monica Potter was also in on it.
In trying to figure out who hoodwinked the kidnapper he went back to the
survalence tapes at the school and realized the secret service agent could have
easily stopped Sanji. He also realized Potter could have stopped him at the
school as well. Plus when she didn't fire at Sanji in the car, etc.
>then when Potter went to get that girl they kidnapped toward the end, that
>girl
>was relieved she came. then the next thing you know [... the girl] for no
reason, figures out she's one of the bad
>people. But what did Potter do to tip her off that she was bad ? another time
>where I really scratched my head.
The girl knew the male diamond theif from the school. She knew he was there to
patrol the school, but he kidnapped her from the kidnapper. At first when
Potter showed up the girl was relieved, but then figured if one of the agents
was bad, why should she trust Potter. Thus the asking as to why she was alone.
There were lots of little things that bothered me. Like when the guy reading
the paper answered the phone. Why didn't Freeman's character grab him and
asked what the caller said? He was still standing there. Freeman couldn't
have known it was a wrong number.
All in all a so-so flick.
-paul
Andrew
: Well, I went to see it because, even though I wasn't expecting much from it,
: the last time I saw a really good thriller was YEARS ago(back in '93
: when I saw "The Pelican Brief"/"The Fugitive"/"In the Line of
: Fire"), so I was hungry for a thriller.
: It wasn't nearly as bad as I thought it would be, and there were
: good parts to this movie that made it watchable, especially the
: heart pounding score
I walked out of "Along Came A Spider" after about 40 minutes. No, the
movie wasn't horrible, but it certainly wasn't that great. What
really upset me were two bad leaps of movie logic (one of which, the
Lindbergh picture, you mentioned), in which the writers seem to have
gotten lazy or thought the audience was too dumb to notice.
(mild spoilers below)
First of all, why does Morgan Freeman's character get to work on the
case at all? When he first shows up at the school with a boot and a
tape recording, he's denied access. But wait, he has EVIDENCE - OK,
you can be part of the investigation now. Huh??? In real life, he'd
never be allowed to participate - he's now involved in the case and
biased. There's no other reason for him to be involved. Why couldn't
the writers have given him some other reason (i.e. perhaps Soneji was
a suspect from an earlier case). They don't even employee the old
"cop told not to work on the case but he does it against the rules on
his own time" cliche. Too sloppy.
Secondly, the whole thing with the Lindbergh picture - huh? How would
Freeman ever piece this all together? It's just too neat. Sure,
maybe the missing picture (and Lindbergh being the topic of the day
she was kidnapped) and the fact that Lindbergh's kid was kidnapped
might have been a clue, but then Freeman's character figures out in
two minutes that there is some magical web link to a cam in Soneji's
house??? It's one of those leaps where the character does something
not because it makes any sense but because it's time to move the movie
along - and oh, isn't this a neat techy, trendy reference for our
up-to-date film?
These kinds of leaps are near my worst pet peeves in Hollywood films,
and I figured there would only be more of them in the film. So when
the sound went out for a minute, I used that as an excuse to walk
out, tell the manager that the sound had a problem, and walk back into
"Blow", which had just started in the next auditorium.
I guess I'm tired of poorly-written thrillers. "The Fugitive", as you
mention, is an example of a great film - not too many movie leaps of
logic (except for Harrison Ford's literal leap into the falls....hmm,
do ya think he could have surived that? The film was good enough to
overlook that one I guess.)
Andrew
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
andr...@bizave.com ** Portland, Oregon Web Site: http://www.bizave.com
The Movie Pundit - http://www.moviepundit.com
The Mgnt
might be too um, critical. :)
>First of all, why does Morgan Freeman's character get to work on the
>case at all? When he first shows up at the school with a boot and a
>tape recording, he's denied access. But wait, he has EVIDENCE - OK,
>you can be part of the investigation now. Huh???
The kidnapper called Freeman's character at home, remember. He essentially
challenged Freeman to catch him therefore he becomes part of the case. Also
keep in mind that this character has an ongoing series of books/movies (see
Kiss the Girls, also by James Patterson) and is one of these "supercops" so he
is highly respected by the department, not just some rookie.
>Secondly, the whole thing with the Lindbergh picture - huh? How would
>Freeman ever piece this all together?
[...]
>Freeman's character figures out in
>two minutes that there is some magical web link to a cam in Soneji's
>house??? It's one of those leaps where the character does something
>not because it makes any sense but because it's time to move the movie
He didn't necessarily figure it out. He was zooming in on the picture looking
for any type of clue. He happened to click directly on the picture and
something happened. It's not as if he *knew* it would be a web link. In fact,
he didn't even realize what happened, it was the woman investigator beside him
who realized he was now at a webcam.
Granted characters in movies these days suffer from too much ESP and it annoys
me too (ie: aces&eights), but I don't think this movie was that bad of an
offender.
-paul
Andrew
: While I agree that the movie was weak altogether, I don't think your
: criticisms might be too um, critical. :)
:>First of all, why does Morgan Freeman's character get to work on the
:>case at all? When he first shows up at the school with a boot and a
:>tape recording, he's denied access. But wait, he has EVIDENCE - OK,
:>you can be part of the investigation now. Huh???
: The kidnapper called Freeman's character at home, remember. He essentially
: challenged Freeman to catch him therefore he becomes part of the
: case.
That's great in the movie world, but it would never happen in the real
world. The kidnapper cannot assign a detective to a case by calling
him and giving him information. You might think I'm being too harsh,
but all I ask is that movie writers not be so lazy. Example: why not
create a history of Freeman's character having investigated this
character before or something? Or have the cops come to him because
of his special expertise? Either of these is a simple, common-sense
way to move the story along logically. Perhaps the writers/producers
thought it more dramatic to have the kidnapper try to get the
detective involved in the case with a creepy call, but it didn't make
sense to me.
: Also
: keep in mind that this character has an ongoing series of books/movies (see
: Kiss the Girls, also by James Patterson) and is one of these
: "supercops" so he is highly respected by the department, not just
: some rookie.
Again, why not then have the police call him? Maybe Soneji could have
planted certain types of clues that he knew would force the police to
get Freeman's character involved; that keeps the idea that Soneji
manipulated him into joining the case.
:>Secondly, the whole thing with the Lindbergh picture - huh? How would
:>Freeman ever piece this all together?
: [...]
:>Freeman's character figures out in
:>two minutes that there is some magical web link to a cam in Soneji's
:>house??? It's one of those leaps where the character does something
:>not because it makes any sense but because it's time to move the movie
: He didn't necessarily figure it out. He was zooming in on the
: picture looking for any type of clue. He happened to click directly
: on the picture and something happened. It's not as if he *knew* it
: would be a web link. In fact, he didn't even realize what happened,
: it was the woman investigator beside him who realized he was now at
: a webcam.
Still seemed much too cutesy and coincidental to me. I admit that
Hollywood films make these movie leaps of logic all the time, and I
guess this time I was tired of it and figured I'd be seeing more of
the same throughout the rest of the film, so I walked out.
: Granted characters in movies these days suffer from too much ESP and
: it annoys me too (ie: aces&eights), but I don't think this movie was
: that bad of an offender.
I guess I'm oversenstive because I've seen far too many of them like
this...