Changing Lanes seemed like an interesting dramatic movie at first but quickly wore on me. It's a movie about two people who met on the FDR by accident, literally. Ben Affleck plays Gavin Banek a young, ambitious lawyer working at a prestigious Wall Street law firm who was on his way to the court house to present a case involving an estate battle. He gets into an accident with Doyle Gipson played by Samuel L. Jackson who was on his way to a divorce court to submit his proposal for the custody battle with his wife. They get into an accident and because Gavin was in a hurry, he forgot to give Doyle his insurance papers and mistakenly left a very important file behind. Because he doesn't have the file to present to the court, he's in a bit of a bind to try and get it back, but since he never exchanged any info with Doyle, what will he do? As for Doyle, because of the accident, his car is totalled and he needed to get a ride to the court house, he was late and the divorce proceedings went on without him. He lost his opportunity to speak his mind and give his proposal and lost the opportunity to be close to his two boys. But, he found out that he had a very important file that Gavin wanted badly. What ends up happening for almost the rest of the movie is this "I'll get you and you get me back" type of revengeful attacks on each other. Gavin wrecks Doyle's credit and Doyle tries to kill Gavin by sabotaging his car. Blah. Blah.

What's the movie's problem? It seemed to have too much of Hollywood tinkering. Gavin was portrayed originally as the stereotypical unethical, uncaring Wall Street lawyer. Of course, we are given hints that he wasn't like that at all before and he doesn't realize that he has changed. During the course of the movie, he starts to question his loyalty to his boss and father-in-law, his wife and of course, himself and what he has turned to be. My main problem with the character's turning point in the movie was when Gavin was strolling around and decides to go into a Catholic church. What is it with Catholic churches and what it symbolizes? That was too obvious of an escape route for the character's turning point for me. Couldn't he have instead come across an old friend or something from his past to stir up his change? I don't know. Ben Affleck tried to make his character believable and even likeable but for me, he was too pretty for me to accept him. It wasn't hard for me to accept that his character was flawed in morality and how he could live the way he did, numbed from his cold and unethical environment.

As for Doyle's character, it seemed more believable for someone who was a recovering alcoholic who struggled to stay sober in an effort to win back his wife and kids. Due to the accident, he lost the most precious 20 minutes of his life, in which he lost his ability to defend himself in front of the judge. And, his car was totalled. And this Wall Street lawyer had the guts to wreck his credit, forcing him to be turned down for a mortgage on a home for his wife and kids. Since he lost the most important things in his life, he was forced to fight back at the guy who started it all for him. Samuel L Jackson did a pretty good job of portraying his character and it was him that made me want to continue watching, even though I thought the plot was extremely unbelievable. I felt bad for him. I could almost understand his justification for fighting back and could see how he was fighting against himself to do so. He wanted to do the right thing but yet his anger propelled him to do otherwise.

The main disappointment of this movie was the absolute waste of such a talented actor as William Hurt in a supporting role as the alanon friend of Doyle and his sponsor. I kept wondering throughout the movie why he was only cast as a supporting actor with very limited scenes. He would have and could have made this movie much better if he were cast as Gavin instead of Ben Affleck. But then, I guess a lot of the younger audience wouldn't have gone to see an aging William Hurt in the starring role. In the limited scenes, William did his best and I only wished that I saw more of him. Too bad.

The events of the story to me seemed too contrived and too dramatic. Is it that easy for someone to wreck a person's credit history? Probably, but I can't see it as dramatic as it was shown in the movie, like in seconds. Just press the Enter key and it's done. Whoosh. And, as regular people, is it that likely that someone like Gavin resort to such drastic measures to force Doyle to give him the file folder? Doesn't he realize the potential consequences of peeving someone who has what he wants? Maybe to him, it was the only way as people have a tendency to have such a narrow-minded view of the world. And then, regarding Doyle for someone who's life was ruined by the action of someone he didn't know who continued to wreak havoc on him, was it plausible for him to be pushed to sabotage a car to kill?

The one part of the movie I enjoyed was the beginning opening credits when we were given an almost IMAX like perspective of the car as it goes through the freeways, streets and makes its stops and turns. That was nice. It actually reminded me of the movie, Koyaanisqatsi. Ben Affleck looks like his usual handsome self and I can tell that he tries hard but I have yet to find a great movie from him. But then again, most female viewers don't care much about acting when they're staring at a babe like Ben.

In the end, this was another disappointing movie that could have been better. Had they cast someone else other than Ben Affleck for the role of Gavin, made the events in the movie much less contrived and expanded William Hurt's role a bit more, it probably would have helped. Samuel L Jackson was the bright spot and I felt for him but even his character was stretched a bit to fit in this Hollwywood movie. I'm not sure about recommending this movie, but then it wasn't THAT bad for me to not recommend it. My view is that this is an okay movie and it probably isn't that bad. Samuel's acting could be a reason to watch it, although it wasn't superb.

Thanks for taking the time to read and rate my review.

Recommended:
Yes

Viewing Format: VHS
Video Occasion: Better than Watching TV
Suitability For Children: Suitable for Children Age 13 and Older