From the get-go, Anson Mount's acting was terrible. It continued to be terrible throughout the movie. Fortunately, the acting of everyone else in the movie was quite good. In particular, Robert Vaughn was excellent. All the actors but Anson gave very believable performances and made their characters more than 2-dimensional at the least. The acting saved this movie from being a 1 or a 2 / 10.
As for the plot, it was a bit contrived, something like you'd see from "Law and Order", but I have seen worse. There were a number of loose ends never tied up, and a few places that didn't really explain things very well. A number of the questions stemmed from the questions arising about the main character played by Anson. It makes one wonder whether his acting was sufficiently terrible, or whether it was a combination of bad acting and poorly done character development in the script.
Cinematography was adequate; it wasn't bad, and wasn't fantastic, but it certainly didn't look like some horrid soap-opera shots.
Overall, the movie was bland, save for some of the acting. I rented it on dollar movie night, so I didn't feel cheated, but I wouldn't pay more to see it.
As for the plot, it was a bit contrived, something like you'd see from "Law and Order", but I have seen worse. There were a number of loose ends never tied up, and a few places that didn't really explain things very well. A number of the questions stemmed from the questions arising about the main character played by Anson. It makes one wonder whether his acting was sufficiently terrible, or whether it was a combination of bad acting and poorly done character development in the script.
Cinematography was adequate; it wasn't bad, and wasn't fantastic, but it certainly didn't look like some horrid soap-opera shots.
Overall, the movie was bland, save for some of the acting. I rented it on dollar movie night, so I didn't feel cheated, but I wouldn't pay more to see it.