A film that polarised its audience

Rating: Null/10 (8 August 2004)

SPOILERS Having read a number of the comments about this film, and also scanned the message boards, one thing is clear: This is a film that has completely polarised its viewers. There doesn't appear to be an inbetween on this one, the audience either thought it was garbage, or thought it was the best film of 2004. I'm one of the latter. I spent the entire film on the edge of my seat, completely engrossed not only in the characters but in the desire for justice for that little girl. And I hate children. I didn't even realize how long the movie went for, I walked out of the theatre and was shocked to see how much later it was.
For those people who feel they picked holes in the plot, clearly you weren't paying attention.
Q: How could Denzel turn into this one man army?
A: There's your mistake right there. Confusing Creasy, 16 year veteran of US Army special forces, counter terrorist, assassin you name it, with a talented actor. If you can't see past the actor and into the character, then this movie is lost on you
Q: Why did the "baddie" keep the girl alive?
A: He answers this questions himself, when he offers her life for Creasy's, and Creasy doesn't believe him. "She's worth nothing to me dead," implying that she's worth something to him alive. OK the ransom drop was screwed up, but a cute little blonde would be very valuable to the underground world that trades in cute little blondes. Child prostitution anyone?
Q: What was the point in Creasy dying at the end?
A: Because a happily ever after Hollywood ending really would have ruined this film. Creasy spends the first half of the film learning to live again, only to have the reason for his redemption stripped away. He spends the second half of the film quite determined to die, but to take the authors of Pita's kidnapping with him. The deal was "Your life for hers." He was quite prepared to die to save her life, the ultimate redemption, and having done that he quite peacefully slipped away, hence the bit with the St Jude medal in the car. His job was done. It was a 2004 version of Shane riding off into the sunset.
Q: The editing and MTV style of the camera work really annoyed me
A: I'm not going to speak for Tony Scott, but my interpretation of the film's style was to provide an insight into Creasy's state of mind (hence the surreality of the camera work) and also to cushion the audience from the violence. Same way Kill Bill was filmed in an almost cartoon-like fashion. Scott wanted this film to actually be released, and making the violence truly realistic would never have made it past the censors.
I think one of the reasons why this film annoyed so many people is that it cannot be pigeonholed into a Schwarzenegger/Stallone/Willis popcorn action flick. It requires the audience to become engaged, to go down the rabbit hole along with the camera. I suspect those people who hated it were the ones expecting a formulaic action flick, and were disappointed. An "action" flick with a brain, who would've thought?