Dave Thompson
I really do have to laugh at some people's reviews at times, and over the years, if I totally believe all the bad press that some (if not all) films receive, it would never ever be worth my while visiting a cinema or buying a DVD ever again. If I see a film, like it, and then see all the bad reviews I am sometimes left thinking 'am I the only one that got it?' or 'am I the only one that thought this was good'. In short, reading too many reviews can drive you absolutely insane. OK, so 88 Minutes received largely negative reviews......especially on IMDb. So at the time of writing this, the film has a rating of 5.9, which I class as just above average (5 is average right?). I am more than just a little annoyed that most of those that gave the film an above average rating failed to review it. However, it leaves me with the conclusion that most people are more than happy to complain, rather than go with the flow. After all, I don't think that here are many films for which I haven't read a review from somebody saying that it's the worst film they've ever seen. 88 Minutes, in my opinion is a good, above average, watchable movie. But some of the contradictory comments on people's reviews did my head in. For example:- Al Pacino's performance............Al Pacino is undoubtedly a brilliant actor. His character in this movie is cocky, self assured, calm and in his opinion, always right. Pacino plays this perfectly, so why do people think that he was out of place? Was there any need for him overstate and overact? No there wasn't. Did he look uncomfortable in his role? No he didn't. To me, maybe the reviewers were expecting some powerhouse acting which they didn't receive. The plot.........come on people!!! It wasn't muddled. It was easy to follow. Throwaway yes, but don't we, every now and again enjoy a film that we don't have to think too much about? Yes we do!! It is true to say there is a certain degree of implausibility about things but people should just look at the movie for what it is.......entertainment. I, for one, was entertained, although I did guess who was behind the killings. I mean come on, even true stories have that certain implausibility factor about them in order to make them entertaining...don't they? The acting........it seems that because Pacino's performance was (rightly) understated, everybody else acted badly. It is true that some performances did not bring out the best in the actors (Alicia Witt and Leelee Sobieski), others were excellent, especially William Forsythe and Neal McDonaugh. I'm done with the film now, but had to laugh at one on the extras on the DVD. The director stated that this was a 'low budget' movie. OK maybe it is in comparison to some.....but calling $30m low budget is an insult to my ears!! Anyway.......conclusion!! A good, but not brilliant film that a few more of you have actually enjoyed but not openly admitted. Good grief, those of you that have reviewed think it's so bad, I am left thinking that I have just stepped out of the 'bad movie' closet!! Watch this movie for what it is........entertainment!!!
Nico Monetti
This movie is not good. That said, it is entertaining in terms of how silly it is.If you watch this movie you'll get to see Al Pacino as a character under extremely stressful circumstances, in a position where each minute he wastes someone close to him could be killed in a horrible way, and he's basically fine with it all. Pacino stars a a forensic psychologist/professor who apparently became a multi millionaire like... convicting people of stuff. He's super famous, as far as psychologists or professors go, with everyone seeming to know his resume.Confronted with a bombardment of harassments from a mysterious source on the day a man he helped get convicted stands for execution, Pacino just deals with it all as it comes, not too worried about it really.With the exception of his not approving of another character's carrying a firearm she has a permit to carry, nothing seems to really rattle the guy. He keeps getting calls from a scary voice that updates him on how long he has to live and says, "tick toc doc". Yep. That's what the bad guy says.It's funny too because half the time the calls are from the bad guy - just checking in to be a dick and update him on his upcoming demise (which never even really pays off now that I think about it) and half the time it's one of his employees or someone else it's good to hear from.Pacino's character shrugs everything off and take it in stride, as if dealing with complex webs of murder conspiracies targeted at him are usual occurrences. His career is extremely glamorized and makes no sense - with him having his own office the size of a big law firm in a skyscraper that has James Bond vault status filing cabinets. His apartment is also outrageously badass - the ultimate bachelor pad of the future.Oh, and there are like 15 beautiful women in the movie too (all of which do a good job with their roles if you ask me). Each of them seem to have a sizzling crush on Pacino's character. There's literally even a scene where an attractive lesbian kisses him on the lips. He's quite the ladies man and he also enjoys drinking. As an FBI character puts it at one point in the film, "Everyone knows you're quite the ladies man and that you have a drinking problem!"It's kind of a bummer this thing sucked so much because the premise for the movie is actually fairly solid. You've got a guy on death row with a few tricks up his sleeve trying to cast doubt that he was the right guy by having someone on the outside mimic his crimes. Good premise! If substantially rewritten and executed under different direction this might have made for a great thriller. The cast was great and there's no reason it couldn't be. But oh well. The whole movie's just 10% thriller territory and 90% silly fun time zone, with Pacino himself often seeming like he's only half paying attention to the shoot - looking forward to going home and watching THE GODFATHER.Yeah, there's just a ton of really... weird stuff in this movie. I figured out who was behind it pretty early on, just going with my gut. There's so much exposition and forced twists and so many characters and so much back story that it all just becomes a tangled web of whatever and you stop caring and just take a guess. My guess turned out to be right. I didn't guess the motivation behind their involvement though because well, how could you? It was ridiculous. I've never seen anything like 88 MINUTES in my life. I give it six stars because it made me laugh out loud multiple times. There were just some moments so cheesy and some bits so outrageous that you can't help but laugh.It feels more dated than it is and it's one of those movies that's so bad it's good.
k-sakthivel
88 minutes a thriller and psychological crime film.. After 20 minutes into the film you will assume everyone is a suspect behind all the murders. Its a good role for Al Pacino making him a psychiatrist of forensic technology. The movie moves in a really fast pace and find it more thrilling in the end. Its a typical Jon Avnet's film.Movie starts with Jack (Al Pacino's character) receives a call saying he has a hour and a more to live. So Jack goes in search of all clues of the murders committed. while searching he suspects everyone around him and he makes us believe that they might also be involved.Finally at the end Jack solves the case and keeps up his name. I gave a 7 only because of Al Pacino's acting and a little for the story...
