This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

This story has more twists and turns than a second-rate soap opera.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

I watched this film at the recent Niagara Falls Comic Con. I was instantly drawn into the strange world of Flamingo/Gwen. I don't want to give away the story but it was very engrossing and with enough twists and turns for a top notch ending. The beginning is not the beginning the end is not the end but the beginning. The acting was topnotch with Catherine Isabelle and Christopher Lloyd in a challenging roles. Beautifully filmed in the Niagara area of Ontario on a short film schedule. There is nothing unnecessary in this film. No filler no fluff. I have to commend the filmmakers and creative team for making and I hope they make many more films like this.

Hated it - just because I really didWell, no, not really. The lead is quite believable, but I have to give it 1 star just to offset the incredible amount of people who think this is a 10. It's more like a 4-5 movie, straight-to-video I would imagine.The only reason I am writing this is because I forced myself to finishing watching until 2 in the morning and it just wasn't that good. Yay! Katharine Isabelle! - Nice job, crappy movie.Action was decent, but laughable. This may be a great movie for law enforcement. I'm not in law enforcement, and I don't own any firearms, but I'm fairly certain that if I did I wouldn't be in a fire-fight in any manner of how these individuals acted with a gun in their hand. Totally laughable!Story line was convoluted at best. Some flashbacks, dark scenes, it seemed like there were two or three timeless, but they were not effective in anyway except to account for lack of plot.Speaking of a lack of plot, there were too many songs which were supposed to bridge over lulls in the plot. (Always a bad thing in any movie, music can enhance, songs are used in lieu of a plot). (It can be done, it's just very difficult)So, after all that, I changed my mind 3/10, but still 1/10 to add balance to the rating.oh, one more thing; I have no idea what Christopher Lloyd was saying most of the time (bad sound or he just mumbled a lot, I'm not sure).

The classic "individual with amnesia reconstructing his/her past" formula can work as a good start to build an unpredictable thriller, where part of the pleasure consists on discovering, at the same time of the main character, the unexpected circumstances which lead to his/her current situation. Unfortunately, the film 88 takes the concept to the point of incoherence with confusing flashbacks, an abundance of characters who arbitrarily enter and leave the story, and contradictory information which is explained with hallucinations associated to the "fugue state" suffered by the main character. Speaking of which, the reason I was interested in watching 88 was its main actress, Katharine Isabelle, whose work I have liked since I saw her in the extraordinary Ginger Snaps. And in 88, Isabelle brings another solid performance, being equally credible as the damsel in distress we meet on the beginning of the film and the femme fatale the flashbacks reveal. In the supporting cast, we find good actors who bring conviction and personality to disposable roles which would have otherwise gone unnoticed; I'm talking about Christopher Lloyd, Michael Ironside, Lynne Griffin and Alan C. Peterson, who, along with Isabelle, are the main reason why this movie is moderately entertaining despite its mediocrity. I lost the thread of the story in various occasions, and I didn't know whether I was watching a scene of the past, the present or a main character's hallucination; however, the dynamic rhythm and competent performances compensate on some way the holes and redundancy of the screenplay. In conclusion, I don't think 88 is a very good film, but I can give a slight recommendation to it, because at least, it didn't bore and it didn't make me feel like I wasted my time.

88 starts with our main character lost and confused in a diner, and through multiple story threads we find out how she got there and where she is going. That's all I want to say about the story, because the less you know the more I think you'll enjoy the movie.I thought 88 had a very "Memento-ish" feel to it, in that by design the viewer is very disoriented and along the way you gather information along with the main character until the inevitable "aha" moment and climax. I thought the pacing was great, the actors did a terrific job, and while I have no idea what the budget was for 88 it felt like a major feature film. Speaking of the actors, Katherine Isabelle OWNS this movie. I want to go back and re-watch, but if I'm not mistaken she is in essentially every scene in the movie. Plain and simple, 88 doesn't work if she doesn't nail her role(s), and she plays it to perfection. Bottom line, 88 isn't The Godfather or Apocalypse Now, it's not going to win any Oscars or make billions of dollars. But if you're looking for an exciting movie with several WTF moments and a great performance from an under-appreciated star I strongly recommend it.