Just watched this movie and thought it was done rather well. The story takes place in Seattle and I believe that UNW (the university used in this movie) would’ve actually been UW, however I can’t really confirm since I haven’t really been onto campus before. The story is revolves around a psycho-analyst (Al Pacino) and how he is able to assess people based on the environment, their actions, their movement, their clothing, etc. It reminds me of Mindhunters in that aspect. Anyway, he’s help recreate a crime scene for a serial murderer and has help convicted a man. However, someone is out to hurt him and warns that he only has 88 minutes to live.
No Official Site found
IMDb: 6.4/10 (1,014 votes)
Yahoo! Movies: The Critics: n/a / Yahoo! Users: B
Rotten Tomatoes: n/a
Trailer
MY RATING: 7/10
Spoilers: (Show)
I have to say, I guessed the wrong culprit. Throughout the movie is a very long guessing game, quite similar to Mindhunters, where they give you little pieces of information about each character, and as the story builds up, you try to figure out who’s really behind all this. My final guess was Jack’s company partner as she seemed like the person who would have all the information to set this up, and I still think there are things that only she would’ve known and not the real culprit.
So the overall story is about Jack recreating the crime scene and telling his story to the jury, which helped convicted this man to be the serial murderer. There were no hard evidence, as everything was circumstantial. He also teaches a class a the university on criminal forensics or something like that and gets into debates with student on what is the correct thing to do.
Anyway, this guy was given the death sentence and then these serial murders resumed. Jack’s guess was that a copycat was committing these new crimes, but the public opinion began to sway.
He also receives a phone call saying that he has 88 minutes to live. The whole story about his sister’s horrible encounter is significant, but not really that important in describing this movie.
He goes from place to place trying to figure out who was behind this and the story reveals bit by bit.
I did question that student that claimed that she got attacked immediately as she was screaming for help for quite some time without really moving. But I decided later that she didn’t really have enough information to really be the culprit.
One key issue here was the fact that Jack broke his phone and had to borrow Kim’s. I never really figured out how she realized he was using a new phone. She mentioned that all the calls were pre-programmed. One could assume she had gotten to Kim before the incident, but how would she have known Jack would request to borrow her phone or even the fact that Jack was going to break his.
Another interesting tidbit was that it was obvious Jack’s testimony was given under pressure, and something like that would never be admitted as evidence. She had force Jack to confess to committing perjury under a gun and was even going to kill him. I guess if there’s even the slightest doubt, her client would not be given the death penalty, but this was still somewhat weird.
