As we all know, movies come in all shapes and sizes. Within those shapes and sizes is an even wider range of variations. It is pretty safe to say every movie will have someone who likes it and someone who will hate it. 88 Minutes is no different than any other movie in that regard.

It is a thriller that tries so hard to be smart it cannot help but be dumb. It is a movie that plays it straight when it should have been tongue in cheek. Simply put, 88 Minutes zigged when it should have zagged. The end result is a movie that is bad, the kind of movie that will one day have a glorious commentary, courtesy of Riff Trax.

It will have you rolling your eyes while watching it and shaking your head while exiting the theater. Want to know the strangest thing about this movie? It is still watchable. Yes, you read that right. Not that I would want to put myself through the experience again, mind you (unless I had that Riff Trax).

There is something mesmerizing in the goofy, over-the-top fashion in which the plot plays itself out. I cannot put my finger on it, but no matter how dumb and far-flung it gets, I could not tear my eyes off the screen.

Perhaps it was how everyone (well, everyone save for that cabbie) is a suspect; perhaps it is how people keep trying to kill our "hero" before the 88 minutes are up; maybe it is how the "hero's" back story is told through repetitive flashbacks; or maybe it is just Al Pacino's gravity-defying/transforming hair. However you want to look at it, there is something that holds the attention. Whatever that something is, I am sure it will make for a great drinking game.

Going into the film, there was an immediate sign of trouble - the tag line. This promotional poster-tag just does not make much sense: "He has 88 minutes to solve a murder. His own." Do you see the problem here? It implies he is already dead and must go back and solve it. What do they think this movie is - another Crow sequel? There was a movie last year with a similar tag line and a high concept that made sense. That movie was The Invisible and it bore the line, "How do you solve a murder when the victim is you?"

The concept of the film is simple enough. A forensic psychiatry professor's testimony played a key part in giving an accused murderer a death sentence in lieu of any real evidence. On the day of his execution, a copycat style murder is committed and the blame placed on the psychiatrist. The psychiatrist must then figure out the truth before he ends up imprisoned or dead. This movie takes it a step further by adding on the 88 minutes part.