Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: The Lake House (2006)

This is topic The Lake House (2006) in forum Film Handlers' Movie Reviews at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=001126

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 07-03-2006, 08:37 AM:

Well, I counted the screen width to be 16 ceiling tiles in 'scope (about 32 feet). I counted 8 surround speakers on each wall and......... oh, the movie. Well, the stuff I was counting around the auditorium was more entertaining than the movie. It moved very slowly, could have been cut by at least 1/2 hour. They were doing a pretty good job keeping with the "logic" of the separate times thing until what must have been a re-write ending. It appeared to me like there was going to be a sad ending and then the studio said to make it happy. Once the ending shifted gears, the "logic" went away and the movie went from boring and somewhat interesting, to boring and nonsensical.

It was watchable, but I wouldn't recommend paying to see it. Wait for it to be on cable or something.

1 1/2 out of 5

***SPOILER ALERT***
*******THIS SPOILER GIVES AWAY A PLOT POINT, DON'T READ IF YOU INTEND TO SEE THIS*******

I wonder if this is a coincidence. Keanu Reeves and Sandra Bullock became "stars" by riding a bus in "Speed". In "The Lake House" Sandra Bullock sees Keanu Reeves get hit by a bus. Coincidence or metaphor?

Posted by Kyle Anderson (Member # 3504) on 07-04-2006, 03:34 AM:

Aye, the "timeline" in the movie plodded along for most of the movie at about the same rate; then at the end it suddenly jumped two years... I mean, what is that!?

Posted by Christopher Meredith (Member # 3767) on 07-10-2006, 12:07 PM:

No, I get what they were doing. At the exposition, it's 2004 for Reeves and 2006 for Bullock. The bulk of the movie is this way until Bullock tells Reeves to stop writing to her. Then we get a quick montage of scenes that are supposed to bring us forward 2 years until Reeves is now in the time Bullock was in when the movie started, and Bullock is in 2008.

They intentionally show us that Reeves continues to check the magic mailbox even though Bullock has stopped writing.

Before Bullock alters the past and changes the outcome of the future (present for her in 2008), Reeves sees Bullock across the Plaza on Feb. 14, 2006 whereupon he is hit by the bus. Bullock figures out, exactly 2 years later, that it is Reeves who she sees hit by the bus and she runs to write him the letter to wait for her, not to cross the street, and to meet her at the Lake House.

So when Reeves, in 2006, sees Bullock across the Plaza, he remembers the previous letter she had written him about holding a man as he died after being hit by a bus. He goes to the Lake House, reads the old letter in the box and finds the new one from Bullock telling him to wait. Apparently, he then goes back to the Plaza in order to NOT step into the street.

2 years later, on Feb. 14, 2008, Reeves meets Bullock at the Lake House. FOr Reeves, the almost hit by a bus thing was 2 years past, but for Bullcok, the rush to the mailbox to save Reeves thing has just happened. At this point, they apparently live happily ever after.

You do have to grant the same suspension of disbelief required for any time-travel story though.

And I agree, it was a little long.

Posted by Lyle Romer (Member # 1266) on 07-10-2006, 12:54 PM:

Of course, if I ever found myself in this situation, the person in the future should write a note to themselves in the past explaining the situation. Then they wouldn't have to wait 2 years.

It just seemed to me like the orignal script was just to have the movie end with her realizing it was him hit by the bus. Of course it must have been a hell of a gruesome accident that she didn't recognize having kissed him in a very strange situation in the past.

Also, I knew from the opening scene that it was Keanu that was hit because of the way they didn't show the face.

The whole sub-plot with his father could have/should have been cut completely.

Posted by Chris Hipp (Member # 1788) on 07-11-2006, 10:27 AM:

I think someone around here has never heard of a spoiler warning.