The Next Three Days

The Next Three Days-720P

The Next Three Days-360P

The Next Three Days-480P

This is a Hollywood remake of French movie "Pour elle" with Diane Kruger. From what I've heard the French thriller is great . This one is an almost carbon copy and it sucks . It's not strange , since it was written and directed by Paul Haggis – famous for the dreadful "Crash". This movie is perfect example how NOT to make a thriller . The movie is full of stars that are wasted . OK , Russell Crowe ("Gladiator") is nice as the main hero and he definitely tries hard. Liam Nesson ("Schindler's list") appears for less than 5 minutes in a role that could have been played by anyone . Same goes for Olivia Wilde ("House MD") who gives a bland performance , but can you really blame her since she is stuck in bland role of "the girl next door" ? Daniel Stern ("Home alone") is nice as the advocate , but has about 5 minutes of screen time . It's also sad to see veteran actor Brian Dennehy ("Rambo : First blood") in a role of father of main hero . He has like 4 lines in the whole movie ! Pretty much screen time is given to Elizabeth Banks who plays the wife and is rather awful. All the characters are sketchily written and uninteresting . Only Crowe and Dennehy give their characters an illusion of depth . Haggis also shows us some terribly clichéd FBI agents who are always one step behind our hero. It's not surprising that the smartest FBI agent is black – political correctness is s**t. The movie is 2 hours long . 2 ANNOYING hours long . Nothing really happens during that time . The movie is routine , step by step generic thriller that isn't one bit surprising or exciting. We have to sit and watch uninteresting characters talk uninteresting dialogue . Even the action scenes suck . There is also some stupidity here . The transformation of Crowe's character from teacher to action hero is laughable and completely unbelievable. His plan and the way he tricks the authorities is hardly believable. The fact that this dull imitation of good thriller has good rating (7.3) makes me think that modern generation of viewers never have seen any good thriller in their life. I wasted 2 hours of my precious time on this dull , boring and irritating movie . I give it 1/10.

Screenwriters are told that actors choose scripts by reading the first and last ten pages. If the role is any good, the character you meet in the first act evolves into someone else by the end of the film. Russell Crowe's character, John, takes that kind of journey. Most know this movie is about a community college English teacher whose wife is accused of murdering her boss and is convicted as a result. Exhausting appeals, John, who believes in his wife's innocence despite evidence to the contrary, decides to take matters into his own hands. To do so, he must navigate the netherworld of crime and become a student of you tube crime videos to become a criminal sharp enough to break his wife out of prison. Without the internet, where would we be? The first act is a highly compressed, somewhat slow set up for John's criminal development. We see how happy John and Laura are, how devoted to their baby, then suddenly the police rush into their home and swoop up his wife. Life changes instantly. We are spared the trial and move into a few years later when the last appeal -- denied-- seals Laura's fate. Her suicide attempt motivates John into action. Tutored by the man with "a highly specialized skill set," Taken star Liam Neeson, John is warned about what he's going to have to do and and the kind of man he must be to pull this off. I thought the movie was well done and quite thrilling with a lot of twists and turns. Yes, a few of the cinematic techniques are recognizable "tradecraft," that Haggis could have tried to spin a bit differently--movie buffs will instantly know what's happening during the airport chase--but still, he's done it well and the experience was no less suspenseful. My only complaint is that Crowe doesn't emote much throughout the film, so you don't see a noticeable dramatic transformation in his character--say from a Clark Kent to a Superman, or from a kid brother Michael to a Godfather Michael Corleone. Russell Crowe has been in so many action movies that we all are used to him being a character that gets the job done. If it had been my choice, I would have cast a more unlikely actor, perhaps a Ryan Gosling, an actor for whom action or superhero status has not been the norm. Doing so would have made John's character evolution more impressive. Even though the film relies on many of the standard suspense elements for this kind of film, The Next Three Days was highly entertaining and as fun to watch as The Town. For those curious about its remake status, it is based on the 2008 French film called Pour Elle, or Anything for Her, and is nearly a duplicate. I've seen the film and it's just as good as the remake.

In Pittsburgh, the family man and community college teacher John Brennan (Russell Crowe) has his life turned upside down when his beloved wife Lara Brennan (Elizabeth Banks) is arrested, accused for murdering her boss, and sent to the Allegheny County Jail. Along three years, John raises their son Luke (Ty Simpkins) alone and appeals to the court; however, the evidences against Lara are solid – the motive, since she had and argument with her boss; her fingerprints in the murder weapon, a fire extinguisher; blood stain in her coat; and a witness that saw her leaving the parking lot - and her lawyer exhausts all the possible resources in justice. John believes in the innocence of his wife and interviews a former escapee from prison to learn how to plan a prison break. Then he plots a scheme to release Lara and travel abroad with Luke and her. However, he needs documents for the family; an escape plan; and lots of money. When John is informed that Lara will be transferred to the state prison within the next three days, he needs to raise a large amount and anticipate his strategy before the transference. A couple of days ago I wrote: quote "The Next Three Days" is a good thriller that could have been excellent with minor modifications in the screenplay. The story of a family man that loves and believes that his imprisoned wife is innocent and plans to rescue her from prison is engaging. But the correct guesses and the serendipity of Lieutenant Nabulsi (Lennie James) are irritating and Lara's reckless attitude on the road is so stupid that almost destroy the plot of this good blockbuster film. I enjoyed a lot seeing Brian Dennehy again after a long period. Last but not the least, the mesmerizing beauty of Olivia Wilde is awesome. My vote is seven. unquote However, I have just watched the great French thriller "Pour Elle", which has the original story without the absurd modifications of the popcorn American remake. It is amazing the lack of creation of this former successful American industry that insists in the remake of great films. My vote is six. Title (Brazil): "72 Horas" ("72 Hours")

Russel Crowe plays John and Elizabeth Banks plays his wife.one night she is arrested for murder.after years of fighting with the legal system to try to free her,he learns she will be sent to prison for life in three days.now he must find a way to stop that from happening.this movie is full of suspense and intensity.it's tightly written(Paul Haggis wrote the screenplay)and well directed by Paul Haggis.the acting is superb from both Russel Crowe and Elizabeth Banks,who continues to show her flair as a dramatic actress.Daniel Stern had a small role,but was very impressive as well.this is a film i'd definitely watch again.for me,The Next Three Days is a 7/10

This wasn't a terrible movie, but it was so illogical it really ruined it. First off, it starts off confusing because they don't even tell us why she got arrested in the first place and then all of a sudden she is in prison and we know nothing of the evidence etc that put her there. Then, instead of trying to prove her innocence and find the mystery woman, he decides the best route is to break her out of prison! Well, let's see, he needs money so why not just go rob drug dealers! Then at the end one of the detectives in a few seconds figures out her original story is plausible and that she is probably innocent. Why couldn't he have thought of that before? Just a total mess of a movie.

First off, this movie is not bad. Not all all. The problem is, however, that I despise this kind of movie making. I can understand the scenario where you see an movie or read a book which has already been made a movie, and think - I can do this better. Or I see a different angle. Or whatever creative idea it might be. This movie though, is not that. This movie is made by accountants. It's a carbon copy of the movie "Pour Elle", only in English. Basically it's the most expensive subtitles in the world. So I strongly recommend that you see the original instead. It's even a little better since the American version forgot one crucial scene and added a scene that has no reason to be there except for looking good in the trailer. Once again - see the original (Por Elle). It's better and that way you give credit where credit's due.