CHANGING LANES Rating: ZERO STARS Director: Roger Michell Producer: Scott Rudin Writers: Chap Taylor, Michael Tolkin Director of Photography: Salvatore Totino Cast: Ben Affleck, Samuel L. Jackson, Toni Collette, Amanda Peet

Review by: Dan Tester
4/14/02

I left the theater angry. I realize it is necessary these days to take a submissive stance to the Hollywood slaughter of great ideas, but one can only be asked so much, and I left the theater sad and angry. But it doesn't happen that often to this extent. I remember it happened after Independence Day. It happened after U-Turn, U-571, and Death To Smoochy. And it happened after Changing Lanes. I don't know what to say. The initial concept is great. Two men have a freak accident on the freeway, causing a delay that creates traumatic consequences in their personal lives, and begins a systematic war of revenge. That was the movie the previews would have you expect, but it is not the movie that is delivered. The movie that is delivered is complete Hollywood stinkeroo.

I won't bother with the story, beyond that it is about two guys who get in this accident and, as a result, continually try to destroy each others lives... but wait, it isn't even really about that. I don't think. I'm not sure. I think it was REALLY about the "innocent" Ben Affleck realizing his law firm is crooked. I think. Maybe it is MORE about Sam Jackson realizing the system is too reliant on computers than people. I think. Maybe. I'm still not sure. The film offers a lot of possible themes, but isn't too committed to any of them. Changing Lanes investigates the tiresome storylines mentioned above and then, once in a while, remembers these two guys don't like each other, and throws in a revenge scene.

My favorite revenge scene involves Affleck and a "mysteriously evil," never defined character, played by Dylan Baker (the pedophile from Happiness, finding a niche) who is able to sign onto a computer and, within seconds, destroy an individual's credit rating, financial status and literal existence. Who is this guy? How does he have this incredible access? Who knows? You see, it doesn't matter! A movie like this doesn't care. Just know that the law firm knows whom he is, so eat your popcorn and hot dog, and enjoy the magical colors swirling before you.

This movie is a horrible mess of missed opportunities. It reminded me of Falling Down (which I didn't care for, but looks like The Godfather II compared to this slop). Both films feature male characters dealing with tangible obstacles such as big city traffic and the court system, and intangible objects such as marital discord and masculine pride. But while Falling Down was able to focus on the societal implications of its lead character's motives, Changing Lanes can't focus at all, consistently unable to decide if it is a story about morality, trust, respect, or animal instinct. So it tries them all, with stunning failure.

Ben Affleck is a bad actor. There, I said it. Sue me. Quite frankly, I am ashamed to use the word "actor" in that sentence. I have to give him credit though. For darn near five years, he has consistently hit two solid dimensions, seemingly without effort... "BEN" and "AFFLECK". His puffy face, "trademark" smirk, and lack of depth put him squarely near the end of the list of the top 1,000,000 actors of all time, nestled snuggly between number 999,034, Edith Massey (a John Waters favorite) and number 999,036, the Stay-Puff Marshmallow Man from Ghostbusters.

Samuel L. Jackson is a great actor, but doesn't seem to be seeking the multi-dimensional roles that Pulp Fiction and Jungle Fever have proven he can pull off. He seems, lately, to choose his roles based more on the opportunity to wear goofy glasses than the challenge to do something different. His character here reminded me somewhat of his character in Die Hard: With a Vengeance, with more to lose.

As a footnote, I never read any reviews of the films I am going to review, but was unfortunately told beforehand that Roger Ebert gave Changing Lanes four stars. I love Roger Ebert, and have consistently been entertained and enlightened by his style of film criticism. But I can only imagine that after some thirty years of film review, he has been so beaten down by the Hollywood cesspool, that he has decided to review some of these "star-studded" blockbusters with a specific appeal to the brain dead masses. I have not yet read the review, but can't wait. Schindler's List got four stars. Saving Private Ryan, Casablanca and Citizen Kane all got four stars. And now Changing Lanes. I understand star ratings are all relative, but four stars is reserved for innovation, creativity and beauty. Changing Lanes offers car chases, forced love subplots, and hideous happy endings. HIDEOUS happy endings. Imagine at the end of Kane, Orson Welles winds up finding his sled, and happily slides down a hill singing "Happy Days Are Here Again." That's how bad this movie ends.

This is a hateful, mass-produced piece of garbage. GARBAGE. I challenge, I dare anyone to respond to the message board, and defend ANY aspect of this film. ANY aspect. Please, put me in my place, and reassure me that I am completely out of my mind, and this was a quality, provocative insight into the American male psyche in the '00's... or insight into anything. Please pick out any aspect, no matter how obscure. You can even rave about the way the end credits roll. They are nothing special, and quite typical really. But honestly, I have never found myself so enamored with the soft, gentle flow of the words that scroll during the end theme song, assuring me the diarrhea has stopped flowing.

And Ben, please lose the smirk. I realize that you have signed an acting pact with the devil, but that stupid smile you wear on your face while you are actually performing on screen is beginning to clue in everyone else as well.

Agree? Disagree? Talk about it in the forums.

Home

More Reviews

Articles

IndieSpeak