Well, where do I start? Myself and many of my friends (all of whom work in film/TV/theatre with a fair bit of low/medium budget experience between us in terms of acting and crew) have learned more from this film than any other. Obviously what we've learned is what not to do, on every level of film-making. This film fails completely in every way. It's hard to summon up the energy to list why this film is such an unmitigated disaster, but here goes:
1. Terrible, terrible script. The concept could make an interesting film, but it's the concept only, none of the dialogue. The execution of this concept is genuinely appalling.
2. Terrible, terrible acting. Yes there's a couple of minor 'names' in it, but it seems that no-one acting in this film has been given the slightest bit of direction. Wooden delivery, bizarre facial reactions, rushed takes etc.
3. Terrible, terrible set dressing/locations. There is no sense that any of the office/studio locations are genuine working environments. It makes much of the film look like a bad student production. Not a limitation of budget, a limitation of talent and skill.
4. Terrible, terrible camera-work and lighting. No, I'm not missing the point that it's hand-held for 'realism'. I'm just saying that it's rubbish. It really is rubbish.
5. Terrible, terrible continuity. There's no excuse no matter how low your budget is. Just pay attention.
6. Terrible, terrible sound and music. Dodgy adr that's badly synced, over the top fx, cheap music that never fits the mood and sounds like it's done on a cheap yamaha sound module. Trust me, I've owned a few.
7. Terrible, terrible editing. The editing in this film is in fact so bad that a friend had to explain to me what was happening while we watched it. This film taught me so much about what you can do with editing, and how much you can screw things up. Truly opened my eyes.
8. Terrible, terrible special effects. It looks like someone's just bought a copy of premiere/aftereffects and spent half an hour learning how to use them.
9. Director's friends and family (and himself I suspect, under a number of pseudonyms) leaving reviews and trying to get people to watch this unbelievable piece of rubbish. Some of these complain of a vendetta against him. Some of them compare the film to Altman (or even Godard, from what I remember) THESE ARE ALL LIES. THIS FILM IS RUBBISH. If you want to check, just have a look at what other films these people have reviewed - surprise surprise, most of them are just films by the same director.
It's this dishonest use of IMDb that's caused me to write my first review. To be honest, everyone should see this. It's so funny due to its complete ineptitude that it's actually somewhat entertaining (if you're in the right mood and in the company of people who know anything about low budget film-making). Read some of the other reviews and see the director's and his friends excuses as to why the film doesn't work. Believe them if you want. Excuses are irrelevant, it's the final product that counts. And for someone that's actually made films before, AND GOT FUNDING FOR MORE, this is simply shocking.
1. Terrible, terrible script. The concept could make an interesting film, but it's the concept only, none of the dialogue. The execution of this concept is genuinely appalling.
2. Terrible, terrible acting. Yes there's a couple of minor 'names' in it, but it seems that no-one acting in this film has been given the slightest bit of direction. Wooden delivery, bizarre facial reactions, rushed takes etc.
3. Terrible, terrible set dressing/locations. There is no sense that any of the office/studio locations are genuine working environments. It makes much of the film look like a bad student production. Not a limitation of budget, a limitation of talent and skill.
4. Terrible, terrible camera-work and lighting. No, I'm not missing the point that it's hand-held for 'realism'. I'm just saying that it's rubbish. It really is rubbish.
5. Terrible, terrible continuity. There's no excuse no matter how low your budget is. Just pay attention.
6. Terrible, terrible sound and music. Dodgy adr that's badly synced, over the top fx, cheap music that never fits the mood and sounds like it's done on a cheap yamaha sound module. Trust me, I've owned a few.
7. Terrible, terrible editing. The editing in this film is in fact so bad that a friend had to explain to me what was happening while we watched it. This film taught me so much about what you can do with editing, and how much you can screw things up. Truly opened my eyes.
8. Terrible, terrible special effects. It looks like someone's just bought a copy of premiere/aftereffects and spent half an hour learning how to use them.
9. Director's friends and family (and himself I suspect, under a number of pseudonyms) leaving reviews and trying to get people to watch this unbelievable piece of rubbish. Some of these complain of a vendetta against him. Some of them compare the film to Altman (or even Godard, from what I remember) THESE ARE ALL LIES. THIS FILM IS RUBBISH. If you want to check, just have a look at what other films these people have reviewed - surprise surprise, most of them are just films by the same director.
It's this dishonest use of IMDb that's caused me to write my first review. To be honest, everyone should see this. It's so funny due to its complete ineptitude that it's actually somewhat entertaining (if you're in the right mood and in the company of people who know anything about low budget film-making). Read some of the other reviews and see the director's and his friends excuses as to why the film doesn't work. Believe them if you want. Excuses are irrelevant, it's the final product that counts. And for someone that's actually made films before, AND GOT FUNDING FOR MORE, this is simply shocking.