SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Not even bad in a good way

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

This DVD was gifted to me by a friend a couple of years ago. It is a keeper. I do not watch it obsessively but pulled it out for a second watch after watching Woman in Gold.Changing Lanes may be fiction but it is honest to the corruption that is in our 'legal profession'. I say this as someone who has been battling partisan lawyers since 2002.Changing Lanes accurately portrays how lawyers have fallen out of their role of protecting the truth and justice, into making the money all that counts.The movie is fast paced, full of twists and turns and moral themes that are challenging. A rich lawyer dealing with an accidental encounter with a down and out man who is trying to return to having personal dignity becomes a good story about how the rich lawyer learns a lesson in what justice really is.This movie may be fiction but it is more honest to what 'the system' has created. I am hopeful that a movie like this might move citizens away from what the writers suggest in the clip provided with additional features. We need to move away from 'acting better when in vehicle accidents' to really challenging the corruption that starts with our legal professionals inside our nations.I remain skeptical about society's possibilities in rising up from the couch after watching this movie, that ends up with a good message for 'our highest'. Oh, Google my name below to understand why I like this fictional portrayal of the realities that apply to 'lawyers', all but know that the motives of 'getting rich', as portrayed in the Woman In Gold, have overwhelmed our social responsibilities.Changing Lanes, being made when 9/11 happened, becomes a better portrayal of what our personal responsibilities should be... rich lawyer or not... A movie that will remain in my collection for this reason alone, even if I never watch it again.Don MacAlpine, Wolseley, Saskatchewan, Canada

Changing Lanes has high aspirations. Can a single film both reveal the profound corruption of top-level corporate lawyers, and give us hope that the members of this secret "club" retain post-induction the ability to change their ways? The story presents a series of mistakes made by the two primary protagonists, played by Ben Affleck and Samuel Jackson, over the course of a day. More happens in that single day than happens in an entire year of most people's lives! So, yes, the plot is fast paced. I did not find the acting poor, as some reviewers have complained. I actually found that it was pretty good, not only the Affleck and Jackson roles, but also the portrayal of the father-in-law by Sydney Pollack. But the Ben Affleck character was just too pure to be true! After marrying into his super-wealthy father-in-law's firm, he then seems to believe that he can transform the whole corrupt machine into a shining pillar of altruism! I hate to be this cynical, but I must say that if any real corporate lawyer attempted what the Affleck character claims that he will do at the end of the film, he would be found dead in the not-too-distant future of either a stroke, a heart attack, an apparent suicide, or a single-car accident. That is the reality of how ruthless the people in this arena really are. Saints do not fall into such commerce by mistake.

Changing Lanes is a fascinating thriller, all the more because it constantly makes you question what would've happened if a character said something in a different way, executed a plan differently, or if a character wasn't at the wrong place at the wrong time. It's held together by strong performances from two actors we already know always live up to their potential, and is often suspenseful thanks to the way the plot allows each character pretty much equal screen time.The film stars Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson. Affleck is Gavin Banek, an affluent New York City attorney, who is racing down the highway to file a power of appointment document to assure that he now owns the assets to a dead man's foundation because the man signed it over to Banek's firm before he died. Jackson is Doyle Gipson, a recovering alcoholic in a rush to attend the custody hearing of his two young children so his wife doesn't take them and move to Oregon. Banek and Gipson get into a small accident, resulting in Gipson bearing the most damages, with a bent bumper and a flat tire. Banek doesn't have time for the insurance card exchange game and writes Gipson a blank check. Gipson asks for a lift, but Banek tells him that he needs to be somewhere, never stopping to ask Gipson where exactly he needs to go. Banek drives away before telling Gipson, "better luck next time!" This exchange and accident is really no one's fault. Both men are in a hurry, both men have opposite but equally serious lives to attend to, and, had this been a normal day where they were each driving to work or to lunch even, the meet wouldn't have been as hectic or as rushed. When Banek arrives at the law firm, he is missing a crucial file in his power of appointment case that he believes he left with Gipson, and when Gipson arrives at his hearing - after walking in the rain - his twenty minute tardiness results in his wife getting the custody of the kids. Both men are now frustrated and angry at the circumstances and at each other. What follows is a game of one-upmanship between the two men, as Banek tries to get his file back, which Gipson now has possession of, and as Gipson tries to overcome urges to drink again and the fact that he just lost his two sons.This story wouldn't be half as good if Affleck and Jackson weren't such great screen actors. Both men portray stressed and conflicted to a great level of believability as they do not become overcome with petty revenge motives and senseless actions that are nothing but minor annoyances or ill-conceived, overdramatic kneejerks. The acts of revenge both men commit on each other are realistic and have the ability to scar each other the most, but never do they stretch the realms of believability. Affleck, who has spent years working with thrillers and action films, knows what he is doing in terms of allowing character to bleed through a caricature. Jackson does as well, and together, both men illustrate a biting rivalry that is underrated in contemporary thriller cinema as far as I'm concerned.Changing Lanes was directed by Roger Michell, who amplifies the stress in various scenes of the film. Consider when Banek and Gipson are racing down FDR Drive, trying to get to their desired destinations. Michell is careful to show the hectic qualities of the scene, the bumper-to-bumper traffic, the last-minute lane changes the may shave thirty seconds off your commute, etc. Michell captures it all and thus makes Changing Lanes an active viewing from a directorial standpoint. As if he didn't have enough strong talent to portray on screen with Jackson and Affleck occupying it, Michell works to make the film riveting in terms of camera shots and tension creation, while writers Chap Taylor and Michael Tolkin work on giving the film a realistic tone to the project.Starring: Ben Affleck and Samuel L. Jackson. Directed by: Roger Michell.

Changing Lanes is fundamentally about two men who do bad things but are trying to do better. The main difference is that one is endorsed by society -- Ben Affleck's wall street banker -- and one isn't -- Samuel L. Jackson's alcoholic deadbeat dad. This difference in their social stations drives them into a conflict that causes both of them to revert to their worst impulses.As much as it offers ordinary revenge thrills, Changing Lanes is notable for recognizing the complexity and inequality of our social structure, which dominates even the most powerful of the characters in the film. Even the most obvious villains have reasons for their actions, and one can see how they're pushed into playing out their social roles. At the same time, it's not entirely deterministic -- there are right things to do, but they're difficult, usually involving hurting someone or giving up on some principle or another.Affleck acquits himself relatively well, although he's still Ben Affleck. Jackson is predictably great, as this is back when he still sometimes cared, and Amanda Peet is fantastic in a brief but memorable role as Affleck's amoral wife. Of course, the film is more than a bit melodramatic, with things escalating to a ridiculous extent over the course of one day, and the attempt at reforming Affleck's character towards the end feels a bit forced. It's still a mainstream Hollywood drama, and never really deviates from that style. But it's better than most such dramas, and is in the end a nice film that's been already forgotten as part of the ebb and flow of popular cinema. That forgetting is kind of justified -- it certainly won't go on anyone's best-ever list, resting as it does in the realm of the merely above-average -- but it's still worth a couple hours of your time.