Premonition: 7 días

I just saw this in the cinema last night with my girlfriend. First of all, this movie was not even close to as bad as pretty much every review has said. This was a very interesting movie and worked upon an original idea and executed it in an above average manner. The only gripes I had with it were that the priest in the end and Dr. Roth were casted very poorly and detracted from the punch in the end. Speaking of the ending, it wasn't nearly as a let down as people say on here either. Not quite a movie I'd see more than once, but it kept me interested and entertained until the end- what more could you ask for? The scenery and cinematography were excellent and the whole movie seemed like it took place either at sunrise or at sunset, which added a serene and quiet backdrop to it, which I noticed right away. The soundtrack was fantastic and right up there with the Sixth Sense in terms of effectiveness; none of it got in the way of the action.

I highly recommend this movie to families and couples- it's a great way to forget about the outside world for an hour or so! Grade: B-

Here's a clue on how to watch this movie: If you're looking to be disappointed based on any inconsistencies, pay closer attention to the movie. The so-called "inconsistencies" are actually based on a series of events that combine to actually change many of the things you end up seeing happening early on in the movie. Remember: The events that you see happening on the screen aren't happening linearly. The calendar hops all over the place throughout the movie, so it is possible for events that transpire one day to effect what ends up happening in future days. There are two days that are especially noteworthy in terms of what would change the events of the future and they happen toward the end of the movie. Think of how these events will affect the other events that happen in the future and remember that as you see what happens at the end of the movie.

I think the reason this movie hasn't been garnering a lot of critical praise is because movie critics don't really want to have to utilize logic while watching a movie. Another poorly reviewed film starring Sandra Bullock, the truly brilliant The Lake House, was an even bigger victim of movie critics' pathetically anemic logic processing skills. In watching both movies, you really have to keep your faculties alert and not lull yourself into a sense of "okay, I can just turn my brain off now." And really, even though this movie isn't as good as The Lake House, it is equally blessed with the beautiful, talented Ms. Bullock, on top of featuring the beautiful, talented Nia Long, the totally likable Julian McMahon, and some very good acting by the child actors. And the film is very beautiful to look at, too; I now understand why Bullock was raving about the cinematography and direction.

So please do see this movie and don't be dissuaded by the negative remarks. You really do have to pay attention to this film in order to enjoy it, but once you do pay attention, you will be richly rewarded. I'm glad I went to see it and so should you.

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.

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

I had a premonition this movie would suck, but it wasn't even that bad. The movie is another mystery thriller that toys with the concept of time. Actually it borrows heavily from Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse 5" with the main character jumping back and forth in time. The problem is that the viewer is always two steps ahead of Sandra Bullock. We watch her slowly finding out what we have known all along and that takes away a lot from the tension.

What's worse are the many mistakes that director Mennan Yapo makes along the way (like a huge continuity error that involves one character getting her face cut and "losing" the wounds for one day). Also, the title is a bit inapt since Sandra Bullock doesn't actually have a "Premonition" but rather lives the days of one week in the wrong order.

So, yeah, this movie is definitely no masterpiece, but it's good enough for one more or less enjoyable viewing. Think an overly long episode of "Twilight Zone" and you'll have an idea of what you're getting from "Premonition".