4 reviews
I was lucky enough to see the film and talk to the director and editor in one of my classes at UCSC, where Shaun Peterson is an alum. I felt the movie held its own as an interesting black comedy, especially for only $7,500.
Its on-screen strength comes from Ian McConnel, who plays the unsure buddy of the jerk, Ryan Johnson (played by writer/co-producer Connor Ratliff). McConnel is able to successfully propel this pathetic character into a believable protagonist which the entire film centers itself around, despite having considerably less screen time than Christina Puzzo and Connor Ratliff, who gave good performances as the other two main characters.
The dialogue fluctuates in quality, sometimes going off into tangents on entertainment trivia, creating more of an annoyance than a motif, even though I could relate to much of what was being said. There are, however, some very genuine moments of pause and revelation between the three main characters which deserve some praise.
I enjoyed the DV aesthetic in such films as 28 Days Later and Dancer in the Dark, but I really disliked the cinematography of this movie. Camera movement was hyperactive and the lack of proper focus went beyond stylistic (see Belly for this) to the realm of plain amateurishness. I felt as if the cinematographer and director, in lieu of simply comprising with the DV aesthetic, threw most of photographic theory out the window to the point where it detracted from the awesome performances.
The editing, however, was very spot on. Pacing, both structurally and within scenes, kept things at a good clip throughout, which is why I think this film was able to get to the next level of maturity, away from common amateur film and towards something more enjoyable.
For a reference, I could describe this as a mix between Election (dir. Alexander Payne) and Clerks (dir. Kevin Smith).
Its on-screen strength comes from Ian McConnel, who plays the unsure buddy of the jerk, Ryan Johnson (played by writer/co-producer Connor Ratliff). McConnel is able to successfully propel this pathetic character into a believable protagonist which the entire film centers itself around, despite having considerably less screen time than Christina Puzzo and Connor Ratliff, who gave good performances as the other two main characters.
The dialogue fluctuates in quality, sometimes going off into tangents on entertainment trivia, creating more of an annoyance than a motif, even though I could relate to much of what was being said. There are, however, some very genuine moments of pause and revelation between the three main characters which deserve some praise.
I enjoyed the DV aesthetic in such films as 28 Days Later and Dancer in the Dark, but I really disliked the cinematography of this movie. Camera movement was hyperactive and the lack of proper focus went beyond stylistic (see Belly for this) to the realm of plain amateurishness. I felt as if the cinematographer and director, in lieu of simply comprising with the DV aesthetic, threw most of photographic theory out the window to the point where it detracted from the awesome performances.
The editing, however, was very spot on. Pacing, both structurally and within scenes, kept things at a good clip throughout, which is why I think this film was able to get to the next level of maturity, away from common amateur film and towards something more enjoyable.
For a reference, I could describe this as a mix between Election (dir. Alexander Payne) and Clerks (dir. Kevin Smith).
This independent film is interesting and twisted. I watched it not knowing what I was getting into. It was surprisingly good. Addressing co-dependency in a way I haven't seen, it is frustrating to see the abuse one takes from another.
- nellaikkin
- Nov 13, 2003
- Permalink
I stumbled upon this movie a few years ago at a festival, totally by accident, and I loved it. It was one of those situations where you don't know what to expect, and I almost walked out because the short subject it was paired with was so awful. I'm glad I stayed, because it was such a good film.
This is a really entertaining movie, and I laughed a lot, but it is also really painful in places. In this respect, it sort of reminded me of THE OFFICE, which has a lot of comedy that makes me squirm. Some of the funniest parts involved Uncle Roy, played by the actor who is now better known as Donnie Darko's dad. He plays a really creepy old guy who lives in a basement, and all of his scenes really had me laughing.
At first, the movie sort of brought to mind the whole Kevin Smith thing, but I'm not really a fan of those movies, and I think there was a lot more humanity and emotion in this one. Some of it, particularly the second half, was truly heartbreaking. It's exactly the kind of surprise I've always wanted to experience at a film festival, where so often the things I see are disappointing. You always hope you'll discover something more like this. A very good film.
This is a really entertaining movie, and I laughed a lot, but it is also really painful in places. In this respect, it sort of reminded me of THE OFFICE, which has a lot of comedy that makes me squirm. Some of the funniest parts involved Uncle Roy, played by the actor who is now better known as Donnie Darko's dad. He plays a really creepy old guy who lives in a basement, and all of his scenes really had me laughing.
At first, the movie sort of brought to mind the whole Kevin Smith thing, but I'm not really a fan of those movies, and I think there was a lot more humanity and emotion in this one. Some of it, particularly the second half, was truly heartbreaking. It's exactly the kind of surprise I've always wanted to experience at a film festival, where so often the things I see are disappointing. You always hope you'll discover something more like this. A very good film.
- newyorkjerries
- Nov 22, 2004
- Permalink