Am I Missing Something?

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

I didn’t really have many expectations going into the movie (good or bad), but I actually really enjoyed it. I really liked the characters and the banter between them.

Joel Schumacher is a strange case- On the one hand he has made stinkers like Batman and Robin, he's also been responsible for films such as Falling Down and St. Elmo's Fire. Phonebooth falls somewhere in the middle in that it is a well-paced thriller that you can watch on an idle afternoon and even enjoy it but won't remember it again. Colin Farrell is in top form, but Whitaker and Holmes are wasted.

Oh, this was utterly boring. One great big talkie, and they talked about stuff I really didn't care about. This was stupid. Just stupid! It became repetitive and boring. I couldn't wait for this tedious slow-moving-nothing-happening talkie to end, and when the ending finally came, I was like "Oh, whatever...next!"

I could see myself watching this again, although that's mostly for Forest Whitaker's alternately balletic and swaggering performance (the best big-screen fat man since Jackie Gleason's 'Minnesota Fats?), and the dialogue that Kiefer Sutherland gets to speak, and his demonic cackle.The phone booth of the title is located in mid-town Manhattan, and it's special for being the booth that fast-talking, lying, cheating publicist (Colin Farrell) uses for making motel dates with his girlfriend, because he knows his wife checks his cell-phone bills. Kiefer's an embittered crack-shot tech-wiz ex-Vietnam vet. psycho who's set himself up as some kind of moral arbiter (versatile, isn't he?); he's privy to Farrell's work and play mis-steps, and decides he's fair game for atonement (His previous targets - ultimately, victims - were proper criminals, which would cause one to question his basis of target-selection, given small-time Farrell's inclusion on his list. But at least he claims that he's prepared to set Farrell free, if the degree of his atonement warrants it.)Given that the movie is set almost entirely in and around the phone- booth it's something of a high-wire act to maintain a viewer's interest. That's partly overcome by Kiefer's frequently hilarious demands, and the almost staggering incompetence of the small army of cops that descend on the scene, 'Dog Day Afternoon'-style. But once Forest Whitaker arrives, you know you'll not want to take your eyes off the screen for a split second.Colin Farrell's is a somewhat thankless task, given the character he portrays, and the confined space he has to operate in - in contrast to the wide open spaces available to Whitaker - but I think he pretty much wrings every last inch out of his dialogue, and his reactions to Kiefer's demands. Which frequently cut me up; credit to him for keeping a straight face, throughout. And, given that he's playing a liar and a cheat, there's always the possibility that those tears, and those cries of anguish, are fake.But despite Farrell's tour-de-force performance, Forrest Whitaker bestrides this film like a colossus, in more ways than one.Of course, once you see Larry Cohen's screenplay credit you know it's going to be chock-full of implausibilities, and no little black humour, and it didn't disappoint. But the much-maligned Mr. Schumacher must bear substantial credit for pulling all the strings together, without you seeing the joins. Watch, and enjoy - without prejudice.

Alfred Hitchcock made a number of films in which the action is confined, or virtually confined, to a limited area, such as a lifeboat in "Lifeboat" or a single flat in "Rope" or "Rear Window". In the 1960s he had the idea of making a film in an even more confined space- a phone booth(or, as we Brits would say, a telephone box) - but abandoned the project when he could not come up with a satisfactory plot. Larry Cohen, the scriptwriter who had worked with him on that project, later revived the idea, and this is the result.Stuart Shepard, a New York showbiz publicist, has just finished making a call from a phone booth on Eighth Avenue when the phone rings. Stuart foolishly answers it and finds that the caller knows his name. Worse, it turns out that the caller also knows quite a lot about Stuart's private life and business affairs, matters that he was hoping to keep secret. The caller knows that Stuart is planning to cheat on his wife Kelly with a young woman named Pam. (It was Pam whom Stuart was calling from the booth; he dare not do so from his mobile phone in case Kelly checks his phone records). The caller also knows that Stuart has been fooling his clients by pretending to have much more influence in the showbiz world than is actually the case. He wants Stuart to make a public confession of his wrongs against Kelly, against Pam (who has no idea that he is married) and against his clients. Stuart tries to hang up, but the caller warns him that if he does, or if he attempts to leave the booth, he will be shot dead.Things then go from bad to worse. A man named Leon, angry that Stuart is spending so long on the phone and refuses to get off the line, tries to force his way in and starts smashing the side of the booth. The caller, who has a high-powered rifle trained on the booth from an overlooking window in a surrounding building, shoots Leon dead. Stuart still cannot get off the line, even when the police arrive. They suspect Stuart of being Leon's murderer but are unwilling to arrest him immediately as they believe him to be armed, so a tense standoff ensues.The plot is an ingenious one, and director Joel Schumacher manages to generate a good deal of tension. (The plot unfolds in real time; this is one of the few movies which scrupulously adheres to the classical unities of time, place and action). There is a good acting performance from Forest Whitaker as the police captain in charge of the operation. Colin Farrell copes well with the difficult task of working out exactly how Stuart should be played; he cannot be entirely sympathetic, because if he did not have a guilty secret the caller would have no reason to single him out, but he must never be so unpleasant that the audience lose all sympathy with him. "Who cares whether the hero gets shot or not?" is not a good basis for a thriller.The trouble, however, is that the plot is too ingenious. I could well understand why Hitchcock became dissatisfied with the basic idea and withdrew from the project. There is no real reason why Stuart, or anyone else, should spend an hour-and-a-half in a phone booth except to satisfy the requirements of a very contrived and artificial plot.Hitch, I suspect, would also have disliked the way in which Cohen and Schumacher treat the mysterious caller. The great man was fascinated by psychology, especially the psychology of the criminal mind, but this film never explains why the caller acts in the way he does. How does he know so much about Stuart? Why is he so angered by Stuart's minor dishonesties and why does he believe that public humiliation is the only fitting punishment? There is no suggestion that he is a friend of Kelly or Pam, and laughs off Stuart's suggestion that he might be a disgruntled former client. Why does he kill Leon, who does not appear to have done him any personal harm? Why does a man so intent on enforcing the commandment "Thou shalt not commit adultery" pay so little heed to "Thou shalt not kill"? The film-makers simply brush all these questions, and others, under the carpet, hoping that the audience will not notice them.The real answer to all these questions is that the caller has to have this knowledge, and has to act in this manner, otherwise there wouldn't be a film. That, I'm afraid, is simply the lazy man's way of film-making. 6/10