The Power of Few (2013) Online

The power of few is such a strange bird of a film, and as a very experienced movie watcher, I from the start felt this was different. There's so many of the usual and ordinary ways of making a film, that one often tend to get bored, or rather, is less impressed about. We've seen it all before, you could say.

However, this is a fresh breeze of a film. The film is full of little tricks and strange ways of doing things. Fresh takes, you could say, being in the wrong place. The idea of this film is things happening seen from different persons view or angles, happening just after 2 p.m. one hot afternoon in a gritty, crime ridden part if New Orleans. The film soon reveals this, but still it keeps the tension, though it starts over and over with the same time frame seen again from a different viewpoint.

It is easy to hate some of this as well, because things which happens here is the quite opposite of what you want. I can't tell more without revealing major story telling points, so I will not.

There's a bunch if great actors here, and the two biggest stars, Christopher Walken and Christian Slater are not doing the best job here. The best acting is done by one of the minor roles and the third segment of this film is letting the rest of the film down, like Devon Gearhart and Tione Johnson.

The instruction of the actors are not anything compared to the start. It looks like the actors was acting in another type of film, less serious than what the others are doing. Such a pity, but I think that this is due to different actors being able to be filming at different times, so that the feeling the actors have is different from the whole. The film also take a funnier twist than it should, according to the start. However, if you see through this, which I chose to do, due to the great start, the film is still good.

What I really love here is the cutting and editing. It's different and very interesting. The storytelling is superb. It reminds me of "Lola rennt" ("Run Lola run") by Tom Tykwer, which I loved when I saw it in the cinema back In 1998. Or you could see resemblance with great films like "Sliding doors" or "Mr. Nobody". The camera movements and the music is stylish. Many will be expecting more from the end, but I liked it.

I would recommend this to film lovers which wants something quite different from the ordinary. Storytelling, takes, techniques and originality makes this a gem! A cult movie, no doubt!

"Have you ever bit the inside of your cheek?" A stolen religious artifact, a baby who needs medicine, a delivery driver who meets a man on the run from a gang, two agents looking for someone and two homeless men all become connected in one tragic event. This is the kind of movie where a series of events connect groups of people that otherwise have nothing in common. This one event is shown from everyone's point of view and how one person can change everything. I love movies like this. Movies that show the same event from many different perspectives. No movie has done it better then Rashomon but there have been many attempts since then. Most recently movies like Crash, 11:14 and Vantage Point have all used this style of filmmaking. I have enjoyed all those movies and I enjoyed this one as well. The only problem I had with this one is that some of the stories went on a little long and started to slow the movie down, but overall the movie was enjoyable and really keeps you watching and sucked in. Overall, a fun movie done in a type of style that I really love, which may skew my opinion but I think it's very much worth watching. I give it a B.

This is a twist on the multiple interlocking stories that you've seen many, many times before, but this time it IS different. The first hour is pretty traditional, with only the vaguest hint of what is to come. I stayed with it because of the quality of the actors – Christopher Walken, Christian Slater, Anthony Anderson, Navid Negahban (Abu Nazir on "Homeland"), Moon Bloodgood (Anne on "Falling Skies"), Jordan Prentice ("In Bruges"), Derek Richardson (Nolan in "Anger Management"), etc. Normally you can't get such a good ensemble with an ordinary fare.

Writer-Director-Producer Leone Marucci uses some good visual techniques although he is a little heavy handed on the musical score, and sometimes just too shocking in some of the physical scenes. At times it has a film school look, but the marvelous detailing in the interlocking elements, slowly and surely revealed as the film goes along, compensates for the lesser moments.

This is a film you may find disappointing at first, but stay with it right up until the end. It will cause no more pain.

This is one of those films that is 'a little bit different'.

It has plot and feel aspects of 'Run Lola Run', 'Vantage Point' and 'Donnie Darko' but doesn't manage to inspire anywhere near the same excitement as the other titles.

The plot is non-lineal with the same scene being repeated multiple times from a different view point or dimension. The writing is excellent, most of the characters are interesting and engaging. There is some great casting too - especially the girl on the moped who is both incredibly beautiful, and a bit odd looking.

Great camera work, settings, lighting and performances all around, etc. etc.

On paper this should be an easy '9' but I can't bring myself to go higher than a '7'. With so many films now that are 'a little bit different' they are in danger of becoming all exactly the same. Maybe I have just watched too many, but by the time the end credits rolled I realised my mind was somewhere else. The punch line was weak and a bit pretentious and I had spotted the ending from about twenty minutes in.

A movie that is magnificently crafted, but fails to be magnificent.

....some very tricky film editing and direction to make the pieces fit and after the first ensemble one begins to see where it might be going and then the surprise as it concludes.

Along the lines of 'A Day In The Life' except here it's all but 20 minutes. Walken still has his chops working. Pulp Fiction compressed and in some ways a lot more indelible i.e. few excesses just decisions we can or choose not to make and the consequences when we choose the right or wrong way.

The little girl stole the film - that's all I can say w.o. divulging more.

This film is very special. Hinged to a single moment in time, it cleverly layers a variety of crimes and violent acts that Americans are growing numb to, then turns them on their head with a dose of innocent wisdom delivered by a most unlikely messenger. Turn on a news show in America and you're sure to get stories like these... Misunderstood teens and gang bangers using guns with no remorse. Elected officials debating torture laws. The motives of terrorists. There are times you'll even get a report concerning the homeless. "The Power of Few" presents an anthology of 5 short stories, that the viewer slowly discovers are taking place at the exact same time, all within a close radius in New Orleans. This film is honest about a new American culture. It's characters are raw and true and the film sugar coats nothing. The dialogue is at times absurd, but all you need to do is spend 5 minutes with a homeless man or a loving couple to find out how absurd a real conversation can really get. It uses some conventions made famous by films like Run Lola Run, Pulp Fiction, Magnolia and other non-linear/multi-perspective films. But what separates this film from all it's predecessors is that it is essentially a morality play. It's one of those films you will either love or hate, but can't deny it's truth. From all the reviews I've read, it doesn't seem like there's a clear consensus among it's viewers. When you mix so many different character types and remain true to them, you are going to get an odd mix of tone. And that may be the films only flaw, is that in staying true to each character's essence, the film seems to shift tone in an abrupt way. But that is why this is an original film and not a copy of anything I've ever viewed. If the director kept the tone consistent throughout, it might be a more steady film, but it would not be truth. Kudos to everyone involved in this gem.

Considering the cast, I expected a much more traditional movie with Christopher Walken and Christian Slater as what I thought were to be the title characters. Well that was not the case and actually these two actors really had roles that were quite irregular for their stature. The entire film was quite unique in that I have only seen one other movie that has a similar format, Vantage Point. The entire movie shows the intersecting experiences of a group of strangers who have varying impacts on each others lives during the day. They are followed to the climax of their individual events and we see how those events and their players affect the outcome of each others life's path. The overall pace and impact of the characters based on individual performances was really a bit of a disappointment until "Fueisha" or "Few" makes her appearance. This young lady is destined for great things as her performance was without question the standout performance and character of this film. I can only say that I wish we had been introduced to her earlier on in the film and that she had considerably more screen time as there is something quite endearing and almost mystical about her. This was a film I was almost ready to give up on and then it captured my attention and then my heart. It really is well worth watching.

This has just become one of my favorite all-time movies, and I have seen almost ALL of them.

I may not opt to repeat-watch this the way I do, say, "Gravity", but I highly recommend this to people who appreciate a story that examines the moments in real life under a microscope, with a bit of romantic license thrown in to keep it interesting.

After all, what is this life all about, if not a series of decisive moments, with lessons learned, replays of how it might have been, and the deep regret that we didn't always learn the lessons quite soon enough.

This movie poses the question of what an alternative life could be like if we simply practiced personal "Acts of Random Kindness" ("ARK", ala "Evan Almighty"), in the humanistic sense. In other words, should we react to situations with our brain stems (sense) or our higher intelligence (sensibility).

Wikipedia Definition: SENSIBILITY - Sensibility refers to an acute perception of or responsiveness toward something, such as the emotions of another.

BStabile

My expectations for this movie was pretty high because I had been checking in on the progress for nearly 2 years. I was a fan of Q'orianka Kilcher's from her movie The New World and wanted to see her progress made as an actress. Unfortunately, I was not crazy about this movie - though it did have some redeeming qualities.

First: the bad. Many of the shots were gimmicky and served no real purpose other than trying to appear artistic - which didn't quite work. The dialogue was extremely poor for 50% of the movie, and regardless of whether Q'orianka is a talented actress or not - it's impossible to tell when she is forced to deliver cliché lines and behave as a character whose archetype is so obvious that it's nearly painful to watch. Of the 4 different story arches, 2 were unbelievable and agonizingly forced. Technology is exaggerated and some circumstances are so one in a million that it makes you suddenly aware that you are watching a movie. Lastly, the multiple stories in a non-linear fashion is not original - so to truly go above and beyond in this format you need to have a coherent ultimate story which has an ending profound enough to make the journey worth-while. I'm not sure this movie delivered on this last point.

The positives: There are several shots and scenes that are truly beautifully shot. Some are so clever that you are willing to forgive the poor ones. Secondly, the acting from Christian Slater and Christopher Walken are so brilliant and believable that it sucks you back into the movie that some of the story arches destroy. Truthfully, at the half-way point I was extremely disappointed, but the movie's final act really improved my overall experience. When the movie focused less on creative angles and focused more on story-telling and acting, the movie was enjoyable - it's just a shame it took 45 minutes to get there.

To sum this movie up, I can say for sure this movie, which I don't expect to get much attention, will have a torn audience over the genius or folly of this film. As a viewer reasonably aware of story telling, acting, and the aesthetic aspect of film - I believe there are both positive and negative aspects of the film and I believe it's judgment relies on how much the message of the film affects you.

I have no idea why I chose to watch this, but in the end of the day I was glad that I saw it. One of the critically failed movie of the years and who care what critics says, especially definitely not me. But you have to ask movie buffs because they loved it, probably except Chris Nolan fans. It was not made by a popular filmmaker, though it was almost perfect to be a masterpiece. He missed the big opportunity due to the inexperience to sculpt such a scoped script and failed to get best cast except Christopher Walken. Still the movie was at its best and I enjoyed it thoroughly.

A story presentation in the multiple perspective is not a new to us. I am sure you had seen plenty. Well, it is the subject and the characters all that matters in the concept like this. This movie had those at its best and so original. Each character and their stories were developed awesomely in a short period of time. Remember, there's no going back, all of them brought together in the last quarter at the story's vanishing point. In which it's going to reveal the sensational twist.

In some way its better the movie is not so popular. The main reason is that the some of the contents were too sensitive based on religion. It could have ended in a controversy like the movie 'The Da Vinci Code'. In the movie they are not trying to explain those, in fact you have to find it yourself or you are going to miss them without knowing like everyone else. But I liked it because it carried a worthy message about the non-violence. No matter what materials they used to deliver it though it was the right thing as I believe.

You get no time to draw your stat on each story. They come and go before you presume something. One thing that makes us urge towards prediction is that how all the story networks are going to join together. Pretty nicely welded end, more importantly indulges. If it does not meet your expectation, then you should try second viewing otherwise forget it is not for you.

This is a movie with different story lines and different characters. You know where this is going ... or do you? What is really nice to watch, is how it all unfolds and while it seems that the last story might be the one that is the least intriguing, it might surprise you. There is a reason for some things happening and there is a reason for some looks/camera angles/scenes/inserts.

We have some really good actors at hand here and you might enjoy watching Daffoe doing his thing, being philosophical and all that. But every story has some point to it, even though you may think that in the end, there might not have been a point at all. But the movie is trying to tell us something ... and the clue is right there in the title! Nicely done then

I have to admit the title along with the super short description of the story here on IMDb had me fooled big time, but on the other hand, what to Think when you add Christian Slater to the Word "crime"? Usually it means not so good, but watchable.

Plot: Well, there is no plot. This Movie is a Grand Canyon (1991) kind of Movie or why not say Pulp Fiction which has no real storyline either. However, you might say the Movie is ABOUT moral, ethics, good versus evil set in a run down neighborhood with cops searching for terrorists, kids trying to do what is right and normal folks going about their Daily business. all done in Tarantino, Rodriguez and Mcdonagh style.

The best part is the scene with the girl talking about biting the inside of your cheek, it reminds me of the Jake Gyllenhaal character talking about smurfs in Donnie Darko - although not as good. And it is Always a pleasure watching Anthony Anderson and Christpoher Walken. Last Words: like I said, the title fooled me, but it is a good and clever one, you'll see!!

I'll give 6 out of 10, it is good but it lacks that real cleverness, intrigue, good casting and a deeper story.

The Power of Few immediately draws you in with a score you wish was the soundtrack to your life.Each story is better than the last and raises more questions on life and chance and fate; the ideas of "what if.." Great movies make you laugh, make you cry, and, in the instance of this great movie, you'll even cringe a little!

I feel I always expect a certain thing from Christopher Walken but was reminded yet again he isn't just an entertainer but a brilliant actor who you can believe.

The best part of the film is feeling like I'm with each character throughout. I empathized with every one, even opposing characters. I was completely satisfied yet was left wanting more but in the best possible way. The movie was so realistic it could definitely go on. Maybe a sequel? :)

Before I start; this is one of the most unfairly rated movies ever. If you are looking for something different from Hollywood rubbish, then this movie is a must see. PROS:Great video and camera use. great script with some smart or eccentric conversations. actors all are talented. background music and songs well chosen. story plot is genius. The director is one of a kind, a talent that makes Hollywood directors look incompetent and stupid. Costumes are sniper picked to suit the movie. Camera focus is just amazing. CONS:I did not find any cons on this movie. Judgement: It is funny, mysterious, and intriguing. The way events are scrambled is superior to many other movies that adopted this technique. And a cherry on the cake:It is the genuinely crazy but talented star Christopher Walken playing in this movie.

In New Orleans, several dramatic and weird situations are entwined with a surprising conclusion.

The intriguing "The Power of Few" is a pretentious and pointless mess. The viewer sees deaths and accidents originated from multiple stories, most of them absolutely boring. Christopher Walken and Christian Slater, for example, are completely wasted with awful segments. When all the stories are finished, with a fatal ending, a girl named Few changes all the lives in a senseless and pointless conclusion. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "O Poder de Alguns" ("The Power of Few")

This is a must see for any fans of non-linear storytelling... right up there with Run Lola Run. The choreography of intersecting story lines is a marvel to experience. The performances from this incredible ensemble are enjoyable and Mike Simpson's score is powerful.

As a young girl, Q'orianka Kilcher delivered in THE NEW WORLD years ago... In THE POWER OF FEW, she shows a chameleon's skill of doing a 180 in this role, while remain captivating on screen...

And this film delivers another young talent that should have everyone buzzing... Tione Johnson's performance as a most pivotal character in this film is both chilling and inspiring.

It's a thought provoker that explores lots of topical issues... gun control, torture, negligence, poverty... and still somehow managed to send me away with a strong feeling of hope.

Enjoy the ride!

Why would a talented and seasoned actor such as the 70 year old Christopher Walken agree to star in a movie directed and written by someone like Leone Marucci who has not had any proved body of work and/or track record to speak of? Why would a first rate action star such as Christian Slater also be convinced to join the cast? I can only surmise that they read the script and shared a common vision that with the writer/director Leone Marucci they could somehow recreate the powerful cinema experience of 2004's Crash.

Unfortunately this movie was a mad scramble of vignettes that I found to be boring and lacking any significant artistic value. From my own point of view, it would appear that the movie was originally filmed in the proper sequence of events, then spliced in to 3-5 minute intervals, thrown in to a covered box, shaken thoroughly, then re-spliced, in an effort to add some artistic value(?) and then additional alternating scenes of the "what if the power of few intervened" were filmed, and also thrown in to the covered box, re-spliced in to the film, and the revealing final scenes were then completed to somehow magically complete the writer/directors tapestry (Leone Marucci would probably say tapestry, and I would say travesty).

I am a big fan of Christopher Walken's work and a seasonal fan of Christian Slater. Both were disappointing in the roles they were asked to play, and I am sure that even they would agree that the final result was not what they were expecting.

Don't waste your time with this director's attempt to copy the 2006 Best Picture Oscar success of the 2004 movie Crash (starring Sandra Bullock, Don Cheadle, Matt Dillon, Thandie Newton 'et al), instead pick up the movie Crash, and even if you have already seen it, it is a much better watch a second time around, than "The Power Of Few" was for me to watch the first time (and last time) I watched it.

Intriguing plot. Very unique and thought provoking.

Loved the cloning Jesus aspect… wanted to see even more about it.

Although non-linear films are not my cup of tea, this one really captivated me.

Really makes you think about problems, actions, and consequences.

Great cast.

Walken should change his name to "Runnin"... he was amazing as always.

Kilcher really has a presence and shows she has a wide range.

Slater is really engrossing.

Anderson makes you want to be afraid, be very afraid.

Want to see it again.

One of those circling stories destined to connect different characters from different situations, surrounded by strange events where the small of movements might cause the butterfly effect, changing their lives forever. The hyperlink is a terrific formula when presented in many films but it only works with brilliancy when the speech and the message are truly important, when the cast is fantastic, and when all the elements put together makes total sense, even in its wildest absurdity. Altman, Iñarritú, P.T. Anderson and many others have tasted from this source and made remarkable masterpieces with the hyperlink. "The Power of Few" goes to show that the power of making such movies is really in the hands of few. The cast was good, the situations given to the characters went from relatively good to miserably dull. The message at the ending almost saves the film, after many bumps and pointless conversations and scenes.

It revolves around the robbery of the decade happened in Vatican (plot given so little detail and almost irrelevant to the rest of the movie) and a crime drama involving drug dealers, inexperienced thieves, a delivery messenger, two hobos, some secret agents and one smart kid. They're all gathered in one impactant moment, played repeated times each time new characters are introduced in the plot, very similar to the presentation given in "Vantage Point". That's when the movie started to become predictable. Those encounters always to revolve around deaths, accidents and unbelievable schemes. There's no time to care for the characters because they're so brief on the screen, so when they start to get killed, you don't feel anything for them. I only liked the kid (Devon Gearhart) who was trying to rob a drugstore to get medicine for his young brother. All the others were plain annoying, slowing down the movie with their gibberish and small talk.

Respect and importance could be given to this project if treated as a serious drama instead of an action flick filled of thrilling moments with a defining purpose only given in the ending. By that time it's so shallow, pretense and hollow. It tries to show how powerful we are (or can be) in moments of weakness and despair, and how everything changes with just one small step, one small action, one mistake. The plot twist comes when it finally uses a retroactive mode to show how things could be for those characters. The tragedy goes off, the good possibilities walks in. So simplistic that hurts. To name a similar (and better) experience I suggest "Blind Chance" (1981), which focus on a man whose life is presented three times to us, with one turning point repeated to us several times, altering a few things. It was a great philosophical film about how small things can affect everyone's lives and how sometimes there's no greater change on the other side, it all leads to catastrophe. Comparing both films is ridiculous since it's not the same kind of audiences who watch them, but I insist you to watch it, and skip "The Power of Few".

To quote the smart kid, this is about biting your cheek really hard and having to live with the pain. There's no turning back, you wish it didn't happen but now you're gonna have to live with it. Yes, the pain of having seen this and endure the great Christopher Walken acting in a movie that doesn't deserve his talent. 4/10

This, by now, could be Called a Genre or at Least a Format. The Telling of an Incident Revealed from Different Perspectives all Occurring at the Same Time. It is a sort of a Pulp Fiction (1994) way of Blending Different Characters Experiences Culminating in a Single Event All having Significance to the Event and Themselves.

It's an Ambitious and Complicated way to Make a Movie and Requires More Thought than a Standard Indie Film Might Want to Take On. But Newbie Director Leone Marucci gives it a Shot and by Darn the Thing Turns Out to be an Above Average Experiment.

The Intertwining Story of the Shroud of Turin is Different and the Reason for the Theft is Even More Audacious. There is some Cleverness Here and Artistic Talent Behind the Camera and while the Movie does Look Amateurish at Times, it Looks Equally Highly Professional at Others.

It Takes about a Third of the Movie to Find its Intriguing Legs and the Beginning is so Slow and Uninteresting You Might Want to Give Up, but the Wait is Well Worth the Stick-To-It-Ness. The Acting Ranges from Pretty Bad (Christian Slater's sidekick and the Bag Woman) to Mediocre (the Snitch, the Pharmacy Owners, and the Scooter Lady), to Very Good (Everyone Else).

Overall, it is a Story that's Worth a Watch. There is a bit of Clunk and Things aren't Ultra-Smooth, but it is a Good Try with a Good-Heart.

The movie takes the story of an eventful New Orleans afternoon from five different point of views. The first is a robbery at a small drug store. The second has Dom (Jesse Bradford) on the run and Alexa (Q'orianka Kilcher) rescues him with her moped. The third has agents Marti (Nicky Whelan) and Clyde (Christian Slater) hunting down a mark who may be transporting lethal material. The fourth is two homeless guys Doke (Christopher Walken) and Brown (Jordan Prentice). The fifth is a black girl named Few (Tione Johnson). She rides along with Junkshow (Anthony Anderson) and Shamu (Juvenile) as they hunt down Dom.

The first 2 stories are a slow start to the movie. The third story with Whelan and Slater takes a turn into the ridiculous. The tone is completely different. It left me scratching my head. The fourth one has Walken trying hard to be quirky especially with a midget sidekick. It's more stupid than funny. The fifth story is much more connected to the second story. It's the best one of the lot.

I was intrigue about the talented actors in this movie. Writer/director Leone Marucci is a relative novice. This movie is maybe too ambitious for this guy. The message in the end is effective, but most of the rest of the movie isn't up to snuff.

Great cast & acting. Interesting and unique plot. Idea to interlink various stories, backgrounds, and cloning story was great.

I think Walken's character was a good way for the movie to tell the overall story.

I loved Slater's acting - he's always great. In fact, all of the acting was very good.

The location in Louisiana was great after all the troubles they've seen down there.

My wife and a few friends saw this as well and they had similar thoughts.

I personally would have liked to see even more about the Shroud of Turin and how it was stolen.

A good idea executed in a bad, bad way... With the exception of 3 actors the whole cast seriously need to go back (or just go for the fist time) to the acting school - bad, fake, forced emotions, just terrible. The basis of the story is there, but told in a really bad way. Mistakes, things that make no sense.. Just a bad movie. You keep on watching hoping it gets better, but it doesn't. Clichés. Predictable. And very poor casting skills. It just makes no sense, just like the fact of this site forcing you to write at least 10 lines about a bad movie, that it is just that - a bad movie. There are no 10 lines to be written about this, it is a waste of ciber ink and this movie is not worth it.

TPOF is an attempt in its cinematography, editing, sound, characterization and overall direction to be different - and it partially succeeds - you come away remembering the images and characterizations - the real problem though is the script has words but lacks the same rhythm the same bebop sensibilities, and so jars constantly with the multi-layered multifaceted story lines as they interweave.

For this reviewer the Macguffin of what has being stolen should have been a kicking off point for lots of great banter or ideas and instead seems to just be wasted; in addition, both Christian Slater and Christoffer Walken are given their parts and then woefully under directed.

All in all, this is sub-Tarantino, with some interesting ideas about multistory lines and some film school ideas on use of angles, grading of film etc; that are designed to make it look sloppy and cheap - which are the positives - the negatives are a script that needed editing for its sound - it's just too prosaic for this piece - and performances that though OK could have been workshopped more: I would say that Leone Marucci has a ton of good ideas, but needs to allow his actors less freedom, and needs the script to zing in rhythm with the camera.

Review: What the hell was going on in this film. The different stories that intertwine together, are quite appalling and I didn't see the point of Christopher Walken's character. The whole look and feel of the movie seemed pretty cheap and none of the different stories actually end up going anywhere. As I hadn't heard of this movie before, I wasn't expecting that much, but they could have made some use of Walken, who seems to be chatting rubbish throughout the movie. The whole Christian Slater storyline went nowhere fast and the little black girl seemed to be the only one who made any sense, even though she was just wondering around doing nothing. In the end of the day, it was a total waste of time and money, if they spent that much.

Round-Up: Man, what has happened to Christian Slater. He seems to have a phobia against making good movies. His role in this film was a bit sketchy and all over the place, which was the fault of the directors. It was good to see Anthony Anderson back on the big screen, but this movie didn't do his career any justice. As for Walken, this is definitely one of his bad performances which didn't make that much sense. The only person that understood what he was going on about throughout the movie was his midget sidekick who just seemed hungry all of the time. You don't have to be a genius to know that I didn't really think that much of this movie and that I wasn't impressed with the performances.

I recommend this movie to people who are into there movies that have intertwining storyline's that join together in the end, but don't expect much. 2/10