A failed suspense film with an awful plot

Rating: 1/10 (31 March 2011)

A good suspense film is supposed to keep to you guessing till the end. And when the explanation comes, you're supposed to remember several clues and go "Ohhhhhh. I can't believe I didn't notice that", as was done very well in The Sixth Sense. Unknown failed on both counts.
After a short while into the film it becomes abundantly clear that Neeson's character isn't Martin Harris and his wife isn't who she claims to be either. Not only does the other guy have documents with photos proving his identity, his wife - under no coercion - also denies knowing him. But we are shown at the beginning of the film that Liz is his wife. These two facts made it obvious that neither person was who they claimed to be. If Neeson's character was Martin Harris, why would the other guy have photos and why would Liz - his wife of 5 years - deny knowing him? If Liz were his wife, why would she deny him under no coercion, even after we are shown that she's his wife in the beginning? Neeson's character's tired line "I am Martin Harris!!" re-used for over an hour only succeed in provoking a groaning in the audience - "We already know that you're not Martin Harris. Move on, please". That really should not happen in a suspense film - the audience should not have a better understanding of the world than the characters themselves.
As for the ending, they could have pretty much substituted anything else, and the movie would have been the same. I didn't feel that there was any buildup of clues culminating in the ending. It was completely separate from the rest of the movie.
The plot was also weird and many of the characters did the exact opposite of what you would realistically expect. Take the ex-secret's service agent Bruno, for example. Knowing that an assassin was coming for him, why didn't he lay a trap for him? He didn't have to run (that was such a lame excuse). He could have simply fired 6 bullets through the door the moment the assassin rang the bell. Is that so hard to think of, Mr. experienced know-it-all ex-spy??
Gina's character also didn't seem plausible. She's supposed to be a semi-literate illegal immigrant. Yet she acts like a veteran secret agent or commando. She kills two notorious assassins by just knocking them off a bridge with a car, in a scene that appeared to have been ripped off from a Laurel and Hardy comedy.
What about the deadly assassin - invented in the last few minutes of the film? Sure, he might have thought that he was just a professor, but even if he were not psychologically confident in combat, he should have been in incredible physical shape. I would have expected him to kick those guys' ass in such an efficient manner that it surprised him. I would have also expected flashbacks of his having killed people before while he was defending himself.
I thought it was a very weak plot device that he could only get flashbacks of those false memories and not a single true memory of having been an assassin.
Sure, there were some great actors in the film - especially Neeson and Jurgen. But having good actors can't save a movie that has a very bad script like this one. Disappointing 1/10.