I'll start by stating that I have not seen the original 1971 "Vanishing Point", yet. I only picked this movie up from the library because the title stood out after I had remembered it mentioned several times in "Quentin Tarantino's Death Proof", and it was the only copy there. No original. So I took a look.First off the whole religion/spirituality theme underlying the whole movie was very unnecessary and forced. Several people are seen performing the signs of the cross, Kowalski's conversion to Catholicism is very prevalent, and even the doctor he contacts at the hospital his wife is at, is named Nazren. Sounds a lot like Nazarene or Nazareth. So the whole religious side of the film was unnecessary.The Flashback/Dream sequences were edited very poorly. It takes a second before you realize it's really a flashback/dream because they are edited into the current scene like it's similar scene or parallel moment somewhere else.And finally the action. I love car chases in film. Movies like Death Proof and Gone in 60 Seconds have amazing car chases, with lots of crashes, side by side collisions, all the fun stuff. This film has some decent car chase sequences but they are split apart too many times to make way for the drama that it really tarnishes the adrenaline rush they should be evoking. Not only that but they are not spectacular. The first few are a bit of a rush because you he has his "mission" and he means to fulfill it. But after a while, with all the stops and drama, the action not only feels less engaging or tense but the action itself feels a little tired, as in the stunts and speedy feeling become less and less powerful and amazing.The story was simple but with all the "hero" messages and religion "advertising" it started to feel too contrived and mixed up. Finish it off with a poorly written and COMPLETELY unnecessarily ambiguous ending and you get 1997 "Vanishing Point".Again I have not seen the original (something I will get on top of ASAP), so I can't decided for myself how it holds up but my experience with this film has strengthened my powers of clairvoyance and they say: "It doesn't..."

Pictures that usually glorify a hero have meaning. As an example, Bonnie and Clyde glorified the dynamic bank robbers and you actually felt sympathy for them despite their evil deeds. Why? They were two people caught up in the depression when people were desperate to survive.This film has absolutely no substance. The Viggo Mortensen character soon emerges as a folk hero. Why? He speeds along an Idaho highway on the way to the hospital where his stricken wife has been taking. No one bothers to understand why he is trying to flee everyone. Even worse, when the realization becomes apparent that he is not a red-neck terrorist, no one in government wants to help him as they try to save their rear ends.Jason Priestley co-stars as a radio emcee who builds upon the story in support of our hero.The ending is absolutely unbelievable.

I have to say, I loved Vanishing Point. I've seen the original, and this is a pretty good remake of it. Even though it didn't follow the original storyline (that's why I gave it 8 out of 10), it was still pretty good and this is probably a better storyline.As for the car, well the DJ's comment at the end about the Challenger going 185 mph into the bulldozers is pretty improbable (And if you look, the speedometer needle was wobbling at 145-150), but even though I didn't see one on the engine in one of the beginning scenes where they show the engine, the original storyline had a supercharged Hemi, so it's possible. For those of you who say aerodynamics wouldn't allow it, the normally aspirated Chrysler 300C of today can go 168 mph, and if you look at that thing, going on a highway with it it's like pushing a brick wall through the wind at 70 mph. Plus, in a wind tunnel test if you put an air dam on the Challenger it would probably be more aerodynamic.

SPOILERS THROUGH: I really am in the minority on this one but I liked this movie. It's not a classic but it's definitely involving and quite an adrenalin fueled ride. I definitely thought it was worth at least a 7 rating.Perhaps the reason I liked it is because I haven't seen the original.Something tells me that with a movie like this it's strongest fans will be the people who have not seen the original version and thus, have little to compare it to. This was not a masterpiece but I did get into it quite a lot and it actually made me want to see the original.There were a few things I liked about it. One was the casting of Kowalkski. Viggo Mortenson was superb and really brought a lot of charisma to the role. Since the bulk of the movie fell on his shoulders, he really needed to be excellent and he was. This was a great role for him.Another interesting thing about Vansishing Point was the fact that it's made for television. I had no idea this was the case when watching it. It sure seemed like a major motion picture and I would never have guessed this was not a big screen release.I also found the story to be very absorbing. I'm not one for action movies but I got sucked into this. Plus it was a lot more then an action movie in that there was drama, mysticism, a love story, quirky people every which way you turned. (I didn't even recognize Priestly.) And it was touching. This was not a great movie but it is watchable.And then there's the ending. It packs a strong punch and if one's been involved in the story up to that point, it's very difficult not to be transfixed at the very end. I am not sure how I feel about the ending. The implication was that Kowalkski survived and though I'm highly skeptical of HOW that would be possible, it is a movie and realism isn't an ingredient that's always in the mix when making a movie.So I'd have to say I found the end incredibly unrealistic but very touching in a manipulative kind of way, which I don't usually like but for some reason, is almost forgivable in this movie. Admittedly, a lot of things were just props for the plot(could the villains have been anymore stereotypical?) But the makers got a lot right even if they got many things wrong as well. However, having said that, I will admit I can understand why someone who's a major fan of the original would hate this version because, though I have not seen the original, I have seen many original movies I loved being remade with terrible results. (My big dislike is actually sequels.) But I can understand the low ratings if the original is of that high a quality.People have compared this to Smoky and the Bandit. How about a road version of "Legends Of The Fall" meets "Thelma and Louese" as well? I sure felt touches of both films(both of which I'm a fan of.) I do not think however, that this was a great film. It was better then average to me but far from great. But it was an absorbing, adrenalin fueled, touching movie with excellent casting of the main character. My vote is 7 of 10.