30 Miles (2005)

Best movie ever!

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

Choreography opens by following the characters as they drive thru some beautiful country, but most of the movie is filmed at night from inside of a S.U.V. Camera use was very well done within this limited setting.Score had a 1980's movie of the week sound to it, but unlike many B movies, the sound and editing was very well done.The script was often simplistic and unrealistic exacerbated during scenes when the acting was stiff and sub par, oddly alternating between times when the script was serious/meaningful and the acting was melodramatic. There were glimpses from both actors of genuine talent, especially from Lawrence-Hilton Jacobs, but neither was consistent.The pace is slow. The story is presented by these two characters talking with each other as they are travelling. The only "tension" and/or build up comes from the oddity of one of the characters. At first it is an innocent oddity, and so the tension is minimal. Although it attempts to "escalate" tension by introducing a gun and other character behaviors to make us question whether that oddity is dangerous, it is never punched thru strongly enough so there remains very minimal tension. (until the last 15 minutes)An hour into the movie (the film is only an hour and 20 minutes long) I still had no idea what the meaning of the movie was, where it was going or why. The last 15 minutes, what I thought the purpose was, is revealed.Then the twist. Which was the smartest part of the movie, but it takes up about 2 minutes of the film. It wasn't a bad idea, and it is unique. But after an hour spent with these two characters and still not able to feel genuinely connected or caring towards them, the ending fell flat for me.

30 Miles is a film that has clearly been made on a tiny budget, but the evidence isn't found in poor acting or cheap sets, but more from the fact that 90% of the action takes place in the front seat of an SUV. And most of that takes place at night, so most of the film could have been shot in someone's garage for all we know. This isn't a bad thing: the claustrophobic feel of the set adds to the uneasiness that weaves in and out of Cliff Gober's script. The actors are of an acceptable quality, although both were prone to over-emoting at times, and the film's twist, while going a long way towards explaining the behaviour of one of the characters is effective until you start thinking about it – poor Ernie/Paul could have died of thirst in the desert (which would have achieved his objective when you think about it) before he found a suitable accomplice. Given it's two-man and largely one-set scenario, this is probably more suited to a one-hour TV play format than a movie – even given its relatively short running time. The readiness of both characters to bare their souls so readily also grates a little. This is still worth a look though, and shows how a reasonably intelligent and well-written script can make up for lack of budget.

30 Miles is a movie based entirely on two characters: 'Ernie' {Rusty Gray} and Anthony {Lawrence-Hilton Jacobs}. Two complete strangers meet in the not so common circumstances where Ernie's car breaks up and waits all day to get a lift. This is where Anthony comes in, as a kind and caring person decides to help poor Ernie.Other than that 90% of the movie is based in Anthony's SUV where they are having a deep conversation (really deep in fact). Talking from experience this was pretty boring and seemed irrelevant but I advise that you should pay attention to almost every detail specified (even if you don't pay attention you'll still be able to follow up just great) but it's better if you try to understand the dialog especially Ernie's persistent questioning.Believe me, the ending was just great and it compensates for all the possibly dull moments. You will than understand Paul's (who's Paul?) masterpiece plan. I would recommend this movie for anyone (exluding those that only seek to watch action movies).In my opinion this was a great movie even though to it's complete simplicity. Contrary to a sci-fi movie leaving viewers awed with the wonderful editing and content, this will amuse the viewers with it's quality and moral.

I am not in the habit of writing a review for a film that I don't like but I was honestly shocked at how horrible this movie was.I couldn't tell what was more atrocious. The horrible acting or the laughable script. I love the idea that Lawrence Hilton-Jacobs is finally getting a starring vehicle but his performance here made me see why he never took off in Hollywood. It was truly THAT bad.The writing was wooden and incredible. Normal people don't speak like these guys did. They go from laughing to crying to anger in minutes. Why would you beg a hitchhiker to get back in your car after 20 minutes of driving? Why would you reveal such incriminating details of your life story after knowing someone for an hour? Why would you allow a stranger with a gun in your car?Horrible. And the camera work didn't help, either. I'm no expert but here's a tip: when showing a gritty, close up scene, try taking the camera off sticks and going hand-held to get an edgier, more nervous feel. I felt like I was watching public access theater for a while there.Overall, this is a good concept for a film. The execution, however, drowned the story in a sea of amateurish and obvious mistakes that kids in their second month of film school are warned against.I wish the actors and crew of this film long, fruitful careers in the entertainment industry but you'll need to bury the masters of this stinker for that to occur. Two words: Alan Smithee.