Suddenly (2013)

Memorable, crazy movie

Fantastic!

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

I saw the original 1954 "Suddenly" movie several years ago, and I thought it was pretty good. This remake, however, just doesn't cut it. There are many reasons why it doesn't work, but I think the main reason is that its tone for the most part doesn't fit what should be a hard-edged thriller. The musical score is almost comic in tone at times, characters CONSTANTLY utter "clean" swears like "frigging" and"fudge" instead of real four-letter word swears (at least in the version I saw), and the bad guys seem too disorganized and soft instead of coming across as dangerous and intelligent killers. It seems that notorious director Uwe Boll's heart wasn't in this movie. Maybe it was because this project obviously didn't have a substantial budget compared to his other movies - it has that cheap and tacky look that plague so many other (bad) Canadian films. Boll's apparent lack of enthusiasm might also explain some real continuity flubs in the movie, like why it's snowing and snow- covered in some areas, though around the house where most of the movie takes place there's no sign of snow at all. It's all capped off with an ending that feels unfinished in a number of aspects. The end credits reveal that the creation of this movie was sponsored by a Canadian pay TV network, which are forced by a government-imposed quota system to sponsor a number of (almost always bad) Canadian movies every year. Based on this and the ton of other bad Canadian movies that have come from this quota for years, I'm really glad that Canada does not have a quota system for movie theaters!

Some people on these boards really ripped this film and its directer a new orifice. And to their point, it is really not a very good film, but nor is it all that bad. It does lack a high degree of tension and that's what it needed. More tension. But I and my wife were fairly entertained and the actors did a good job. Someone said that the boy, Cole Coker, was the best part of the movie. I disagree. His performance was flat. What amused me was in the closing credits the disclaimer that "... any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental". The Obama lookalike as the president was "purely coincidental'? Really? bOb

Some movies just shouldn't be remade. I gave this film a 2 star rating because I did watch to the end. I like the actors, but they can't make up for poor script revision and direction. It also doesn't help that they took what is largely a dialog film and tried to add too much action. My advice go to YouTube and watch the original (B&W not colorized). Frank Sinatra, Sterling Hayden and James Gleason carried the movie with style. Direction by Lewis Allen was excellent. The original pulls all the pieces together better. I don't want to put any spoilers in, so I'll simply say that there was no reason to change Todds' character. And Pidge played better as a kid than a teenager.

I enjoyed watching it because it had a lot of well known actors in it as well as those I have not seen before. I thought Pidge (the boy)did a great job and made the movie especially at the end when he saved Ray Liotta. And how many can say that they "got" Dominic Purcel. The settings with snow and mountains were great. Yes, no one will win an award for their acting, I suppose, but it was enjoyable none the less. Don't know why that it did not start in the theaters. Thought the Mother and her Father did a great job. And Tyron has great. Dominic was a little freaky where as he could just be a loyal American who felt that he had a job to do for "the betterment of his country"