The Ron’s review published on Letterboxd:
Film 10 on my Re-watch Wednesday list.
"As I was going up the stairs, I met a man who wasn't there. He wasn't there again today. I wish, I wish he'd go away."
-Malcolm Rivers
When I first saw James Mangold's Identity back in 2003 I absolutely loved it. It's full of twists and misdirections that kept me guessing until the very end and I thought it was fantastic. When I joined Letterboxd I added it and rated it based on my memories of that initial viewing and gave it five stars. I've changed a lot since 2003, and I had a feeling once I watched this film again my rating would likely drop. It's a film that's twists and turns are everything. The guessing game and not knowing what was going on are the main reasons I rated it so highly. I knew going into this re-watch that knowing the films secrets wouldn't lend themselves favorably to repeat viewings. That turned out to be correct and costs the film a full star. That wasn't all though. I was a lot dumber back in 2003 so I missed some clues early on in this film the first time that make it a little more predictable than I remembered. So that cost it another half star. I still really like it but it's nowhere near a five star film.
Identity is the story of ten strangers who find themselves trapped at the same motel during an intense rainstorm. The way they end up there is all interconnected. It's not until they start getting killed off one by one that they realize they're connected in a way that's much more than a coincidence.
This is one of those films that just works so much better the first time you see it. The twists and turns are fantastic, but they lose their punch when you watch it again. The same goes for the ending. I loved the ending the first time I saw it, but it just doesn't have the same impact now. It's still pretty damn cool, just not as much as it was in 2003. I like how Director James Mangold uses misdirections throughout the film in an attempt to keep the viewer guessing until the big reveal in the last act. The problem with this second viewing was there's actually clues that give the whole thing away if you pay close enough attention. I missed them back in 2003, but I picked them up immediately this time. I think Mangold actually gives too much away in the opening scenes, and it hurts what is an otherwise clever thriller.
The cast that includes names like John Cusack, Ray Liotta, Amanda Peet, and Alfred Molina is interesting for a couple of reasons, but the main one is thinking about who the best out of them is now. Liotta has had a decent career as has John Cusack, but it's the unknown (at the time) John Hawkes who has had the most recent success. With roles in films like Winter's Bone, Martha Marcy May Marlene, The Sessions, and Lincoln Hawkes has had quite a run. Cusack and Liotta haven't done much of note lately and as for Amanda Peet who the hell knows what she's doing these days. They're all fine in this film, but I just find it interesting how Hawkes has surpassed his co-stars in a lot of ways.
Along with Cujo this films suffered the biggest rating drop since I started my Re-watch Wednesday list. Unlike Cujo though I still really liked this film, I just realized I was a little over zealous with my rating the first time I saw it.
Ron's recommendation: Must see, but only the first time.