I saw the movie just because I generally like the subject: Ripple Effect. I mean, it's appealing... the idea of unpredictable chains of events.
But I have to admit this movie was horrible. Not because it is a low budget movie, but because they completely ignored the audience. The main character is so unattaching that you cannot really relate to him (worsened by the really poor acting of Mr. Calland). Furthermore, the story is so abstract it becomes meaningless. Then there is nothing to attach to than vague monologues (not even particularly mentally stimulating) of Forest Whitaker (which, together with Virginia Madsen, may be the only two that do the minimum in this movie to deserve the title of actor).
This movie might be interesting as an exercise for some directing class in the University, but not for release as a commercial title. The movie is so self-centered in its futile exercise of movie-making that it completely obliterates the viewer... and when that happens... there's just no turning back. Fast forward... really fast.
But I have to admit this movie was horrible. Not because it is a low budget movie, but because they completely ignored the audience. The main character is so unattaching that you cannot really relate to him (worsened by the really poor acting of Mr. Calland). Furthermore, the story is so abstract it becomes meaningless. Then there is nothing to attach to than vague monologues (not even particularly mentally stimulating) of Forest Whitaker (which, together with Virginia Madsen, may be the only two that do the minimum in this movie to deserve the title of actor).
This movie might be interesting as an exercise for some directing class in the University, but not for release as a commercial title. The movie is so self-centered in its futile exercise of movie-making that it completely obliterates the viewer... and when that happens... there's just no turning back. Fast forward... really fast.