Downtime

Downtime is not for anyone who is afraid of lifts. The claustrophobic atmosphere in this film is the best thing about it. In fact, I've used lifts all my life without giving them a second thought, but even I found myself taking the stairs for a month or two after watching this.

The story features an educated police negotiator and a foul-mouthed working class mother on the brink of suicide. They have virtually nothing in common, but one evening they find themselves trapped in an elevator. To complicate matters further, some troublesome kids start a fire in the same tower block which rapidly gets out of control.

There is an unconvincing love element to the story which makes parts of it hard to swallow. However, I was prepared to forgive the film for this unlikely plot development because as mentioned before the closed-in atmosphere is brilliantly captured. However, near the end the film does something truly unforgivable. For no reason at all, it suddenly brings in a half-hearted revenge subplot which belongs in another movie and uses it to end a film which has already reached a satisfying conclusion. The sheer stupidity of having a film set almost entirely in a lift suddenly switch location to a hospital room, with an angry father waving a rifle around, utterly undermines the good work that has gone before. Such a shame! Surely the two protagonists should have escaped from the lift and that should have been that.

Worth seeing, then, but it's best if you switch it off about ten minutes from the end.

I've waited to watch this for a long time . Round about the same time Paul McGann was cast as The Doctor in the American DOCTOR WHO television movie it was announced he'd be starring in a British DIE HARD type of thriller called DOWNTIME . That's what the exact phrase was " A British version of DIE HARD " and being a DOCTOR WHO fan there's nothing I and many other fans would have liked more seeing a former DOCTOR WHO being as famous as Bruce Willis . I heard absolutely nothing more about DOWNTIME until it was broadcast on Channel 4 a couple of years ago which I somehow managed to miss . I didn't see it until last night and to be blunt I didn't miss much

The fact that it's set in Newcastle and filmed in Liverpool ( Let this be the final word on settings and locations ) sums up the whole movie - It's something it's not in the same way Newcastle is not really Newcastle and this is not really a British DIE HARD , it's a love story except for much of the running time the movie meanders in lots of directions . For a few minutes it thinks it's a crime thriller , then decides it's going to be a kitchen sink drama , then gets up on its soap box to scream what a terrible place modern Britain is . Maybe an appropriate title for the movie might have been DIE HARD : TRY HARDER AT KEEPING A SCRIPT FOCUSED ?

It's not just the lack of focus that's a problem ( Though that's the main one ) it's other things too . Can anyone buy into Rob falling in love with Chrissy ? Neither can I . And I notice this is a French co-production . Perhaps I would have understood the dialogue better if it was spoken in fluent French because I had a serious problem making out the broad Geordie accents . Oh and unsurprisingly the film gets comes to a halt which led me to believe the last ten minutes ended up on the cutting room floor

DOWNTIME is a very ironic film since its often revolves a lift . Lifts can only go up or down but this movie moves in so many unlikely directions

This is a script which must have appealed on paper to the actors - there's lots and lots of snappy dialogue - BUT the pacing, structure and action sequences are woeful and in the end it leaves Paul McGann, Susan Lynch and Tom Georgeson, to name but three, in limbo, mouthing silly platitudes at the end and embarrassing themselves and us in the process.

So who's to blame - the writer or the director? And how come those producers from Channel 4 etc got involved? Couldn't they suss out this dog beforehand?

The photography (from Tony Imi) is dark and gloomy, appropriately enough, as most of the film is set in a filthy tenement lift shaft, but it makes for an unrelievedly gloomy look.

There's little attempt to show lives and characters other than during the action .

The film is mainly a real-time story, with a prequel where the two protagonists "meet cute" - she's hanging off a balcony & he's sort of trying to rescue her. Then we go to real-time lift shaft fun, followed by some truly mawkish stuff in the hospital at the end. Poor Tom Georgeson is given no real motivation for his actions.

Paul McGann does what he can with the script but he's playing such a ditz that one feels he'd be better off in some nursing home for the terminally frightened. He's also called upon to do illogical and stupid things (what a surprise, in this film). Susan Lynch plays with energy but again, it's a cardboard character with no reality, derived from memories of Hollywood films & television sitcoms. Again, she has to crawl up & down steel cables (as one so frequently does) whilst dressed in a slip of a dress and a cardigan....

This movie fascinated me for reasons other reviewers have mentioned. How on earth was such a camel created? DownTime was funded independently and mainly by (UK TV's) Channel 4 who are developing a fine tradition in backing wonderful films. Ken Loach meets Towering Inferno? Well you may not agree with Ken Loach's politics (I do) but he has a coherent world view. "Social comment"? What social comment? Poor caretakers are to blame? Just to locate a movie in a working class area of NEWCASTLE (not Liverpool!) means nothing. In such settings, unless writers suggest hope or an alternative then inferred conclusions are likely to be reactionary: the poor are to blame for their own misery, working-class youth are demons who must be crushed (as Jack Straw agrees). The suggestion that Susan can do well for herself by dating middle-class Rob is repulsive. I personally thought Susan Lynch acted better than Paul McGann - but who cares? I thought McCann stunk. OK he got dealt a bad hand: the script is so poor. However, I do not put this down to his character being a "ditz" - so what! This is when ACTING is called for. The weird thing is that the script occasionally suggests that the writer might have come into contact with humans. That's what is so perplexing about this film: the occasional suggestion that something better could have been created. I can only explain this movie as a cowardly retreat in face of criticism from the philistine right-wing on what films are funded. Happy to discuss ...

This is an underrated, decent little thriller. It probably cost peanuts compared to 'Speed', and the Elevator bit in this film was just as exciting as any I've ever seen.

Paul McGann isn't exactly an action hero type. He's just a bit too nice to be an action hero. But how many British actors match up to someone like Bruce Willis, so I guess he was as good a choice as any. I think it was a good thing that he was a sensitive, slightly wimpy with the asthma, and afraid of heights, because this made him a much better Romantic Hero. He, boyishly attempting to ask Susan Lynch out, and she swearing at him, was funny and sweet.

The film ending without solving any of the problems of the residents of the building (I mean that mean kid was never punished), but ending with Chrissy agreeing to go out with Rob, seems to imply that this was just a Romantic comedy all along.