The Sentinel - Wem kannst du trauen?

Ein angenehmer Thriller. Ich hatte den Eindruck, als ob er aus einer ganz anderen Zeit gekommen wäre – ungefähr aus dem Jahr 1980. Damals hätte sein Thema noch originell und frisch sein können. Das ist nämlich der größte Nachteil von The Sentinel - Wem kannst du trauen? – alles, was er zeigt, hat man schon irgendwo gesehen. Aus handwerklicher Sicht haben die Filmemacher aber eine gute Arbeit geleistet. Zu der Wirkung des Films haben maßgeblich die ausgezeichneten Schauspieler*innen beigetragen. Ein überdurchschnittlicher Streifen. (21.07.2010)

Cold turkey from a lack of Jack Bauer began to kick in sooner than I expected. That’s why I even bothered to dig up The Sentinel from the abyss of history. I must say that Kiefer Sutherland didn’t disappoint me in this respect, he’s just great in this sort of role and Michael Douglas also has a lot of punch in him for his age (both in terms of acting and his fists). The biggest downside of the movie is the screenplay, which is rather strange when they has such a quality topic in their hands. But otherwise it’s a fairly tasty snack for a dreary afternoon. 60% (02.04.2008)

Unfortunately, the brisk start, when a promisingly convoluted plot is outlined and sympathetic characters are introduced (Douglas and Sutherland were perhaps born for these roles), loses out with the arrival of a plot twist in the middle, which kicks off the millionth variation on The Fugitive with all the clichés, implausible forgiveness, and a bland finale as a bonus. It's no wonder that the hundred minutes, and a few on top, evaporate with the closing credits. (02.04.2010)

What does Michael Douglas get out of guarding the American presidential couple? The First Lady will... But it's not about whether the President can't fit through the doors of Air Force One due to having antlers. We're looking for a rat who wants to bite, Classic! What starts as a relatively interesting setup turns into another Fugitive, where only Kiefer Sutherland's Samuel Gerard's professional arrogance seems to work. The desperate attempt at dynamism fails due to disgusting panning and confusing editing, and the Toronto finale would make Frank Horrigan cry with laughter. Another Frank, Farmer, would shed tears of emotion at the very last scene. This wouldn’t have happened to him. (26.04.2024)

Michael Douglas must have been born wearing a suit, I would have never believed that he could be such a cool guy. It has been a long time since we have seen such a well-played spy role. Unfortunately, though, Douglas's performance is probably the best thing about this film. The beginning is quite decent and even without flashy and expensive action scenes, it is a very fast-paced and clever thriller. However, towards the end, everything is basically already said and the situation rushes into an action cliché. The ending is downright silly and the whole film ends up being average. Nevertheless, the unbiased insight into the practices of secret services is sometimes surprisingly impressive and the film is enjoyable to watch. The sober performances of all those involved are not surprising. The duo of Kiefer Sutherland and Douglas is incredibly cool. (15.08.2006)