Even if he'd been only 14 at the time of the accident, no way he looked 44 in the "present day". Also a bit confusing about the current date, apparently 1994, but never overtly mentioned. Gets an overall "Eh" from me. Usually like Glover, but appeared stiff, almost overacting so often.
share[deleted]
I agree. And, I thought it was strange that in a town that small that no one knew Christopher had returned and was working at the garage. I mean NO ONE made the connection and the family of the woman and child who died (brother-in-law of the woman and the child's uncle) was part of the police (police chief maybe? - that part was never clear) in the town? The town appeared to be a pretty small place to me. Really had to suspend disbelief to watch the movie. I did like it somewhat though anyway. Have to agree about Danny Glover's acting in this role though. He didn't seem to fit the part at times in the movie.
shareI thought he looked 44. I think because he went by Kit as a teen and left soon after the accident no one remembered him when an adult Christopher returned. He'd only been there 3 months and probably stayed under the radar- working at the shop and going to AA meetings.
shareYup. It works. Kit/Christopher (Not 'Charlie') was supposed to be 13-14 when he did the joyride in '64. The movie takes place 30 years later in '94. The actor was early 40's. Good film all in all.
share