inspectorbob
I don't think this is my wife's kind of movie. I watched it alone, and I think it would have been a little agonizing for her to watch it because she hates stories where things go wrong and it's tense, and even worse when people MAKE things go wrong for others. So I'm not going to give anything away; no more than the movie's poster's byline, because I want you to see this movie - if you are not in the same category as my wife - and I am assuming that you are like me and don't want the whole thing given away before you get to see it: rather let it unfold and go on the intended journey with it; not knowing what's around he next bend. So why do rate it so highly? It is one of those movies that when it reaches its conclusion, makes you appreciate the journey and revel in how you got to where you did. This movie went far deeper than I expected: it probes and challenges as we live through the character's respective struggles, torment, anguish, and just generally, EMOTION! Not quite fully identifiable personally, but extreme, high level, and wholly the thing that one should "enjoy" experiencing as the viewer, being able to identify with as it strokes chords, without it feeling like they are talking about you (which crosses the boundary from entertainment and goes into something more like psychology or sermonising). A good ride!
kieranclark-94350
This film could all be completely solved if two people just picked up the phone and spoke to each other.Firstly, you spend the whole film waiting for Samuel L Jackson to say M**********r; this does not happen and then Ben Affleck says it; this makes the movie worse!Anyway thinking of becoming a Lawyer should watch this film to realise that know day in their life will be exciting (not even their most 'exciting' one).The only reason for 2 stars instead of 1 is due to the presence of Samuel L Jackson, which doubles the score of any movie!Everyone loses their head after a minor traffic accident, drive safely people!
jacabiya
Anyone with knowledge of courts and the law will find the initial plot device absurd. If the original power of appointment was such an important and irreplaceable document, the firm partners should have had Atty. Gavin Banek go to court to file the document escorted with security guards. More realistically, they would have filed a motion with a certified copy of the document, and later file the original if necessary. That Gavin, knowing the document was irreplaceable nonetheless brings it out of the car to be inadvertently dropped is also quite silly. The other nonsense is that Gavin had to be on time at the hearing, or else, even after suffering the traffic accident. Having Gavin do other things on such a precarious day, like interview job candidates, makes no sense. That Gavin is one of the partners son-in-law further piles on the absurdity.Meanwhile, Doyle Gibson, while no lawyer, does some very stupid things of his own, like not cashing on the opportunity and picking up a computer in a bank and throwing it down to the floor (with no consequences). Later Gavin very tensely confronts the same officer, who seemingly not having learned his lesson, continues to behave like a jerk. I was expecting Gavin to throw down to the floor his newly installed computer too.Then we have Master Hacker, who can with just a name enter a man's banking and credit accounts and delete them all and declare him bankrupt, and later undo all these things, all in just minutes. He is a useful, convenient but totally unreal device. Why use him instead of hiring some goons to force Doyle to return the document, well, I guess the reason was that Gavin did not know any goons, only Master Hacker.Gavin gets panicky and activates the sprinklers in the office in order to access a file. Water flows in buckets for minutes while people are forced to evacuate and firemen rush in. Gavin returns later in the evening and the office seems OK, no signs of the deluge. Hell, even one of the interview boys is still around.Why then the 5 stars you may ask? The film seemed good intended. And contrary to others, I liked the denouement. A lot.
wandereramor
Changing Lanes is fundamentally about two men who do bad things but are trying to do better. The main difference is that one is endorsed by society -- Ben Affleck's wall street banker -- and one isn't -- Samuel L. Jackson's alcoholic deadbeat dad. This difference in their social stations drives them into a conflict that causes both of them to revert to their worst impulses.As much as it offers ordinary revenge thrills, Changing Lanes is notable for recognizing the complexity and inequality of our social structure, which dominates even the most powerful of the characters in the film. Even the most obvious villains have reasons for their actions, and one can see how they're pushed into playing out their social roles. At the same time, it's not entirely deterministic -- there are right things to do, but they're difficult, usually involving hurting someone or giving up on some principle or another.Affleck acquits himself relatively well, although he's still Ben Affleck. Jackson is predictably great, as this is back when he still sometimes cared, and Amanda Peet is fantastic in a brief but memorable role as Affleck's amoral wife. Of course, the film is more than a bit melodramatic, with things escalating to a ridiculous extent over the course of one day, and the attempt at reforming Affleck's character towards the end feels a bit forced. It's still a mainstream Hollywood drama, and never really deviates from that style. But it's better than most such dramas, and is in the end a nice film that's been already forgotten as part of the ebb and flow of popular cinema. That forgetting is kind of justified -- it certainly won't go on anyone's best-ever list, resting as it does in the realm of the merely above-average -- but it's still worth a couple hours of your time.
AD
