Firecracker

One review said "all style and no substance". I used the same words with my friend only 3 minutes before. Not a coincidence. This is the biggest rip-off(or pointless homage at least) of Blue Velvet(and Twin Peaks) ever created. Which really enrages me cause David Lynch is my favorite director. The acting in this is atrocious. Some of you will be allured by the indie style it's shot or the quirky/dark subject matter and I suppose you'd like David Lynch too. Or perhaps you just dig the shock value of this type of movie. I hope you see one of his films and see how it takes more than just bizarre imagery to make something brilliant. What he does is brilliant and distinctly him. Yea i know maybe i didn't do my research, it could be an homage which is a sweet gesture. Regardless, this movie is clowshoes drizzled in failsauce.

the film was a big disappointment. i found it irrelevant, easy, badly scripted, badly directed and when I met with the producer, couldn't answer the simplest questions. Fortunately I got to meet with Selene who was super nice!

The only good thing in the film is Karen Black's acting. Who thought of getting Mike Patton to play a part? He sucked! The carnival was not pertinent to the story, i felt it was there just to "look cool".

The "chorus" aka Pearl looked misplaced. She had a definite 1970s look to her and she really didn't need to be in the film.

My thoughts:

• it's VERY HARD to be a good actor with a bad script - what is with the red cape? Little Riding Hood imagery... i don't get it. - the b&w / colour concept was interesting yet badly done technically - it's unclear when this takes place. it's supposed to be 1950s but there is tons of anachronisms (white Nike running shoes being the most common one). - sometimes we hear the camera motor running... that's just BAD film-making - one car scene with the camera on hood while the actors are driving on a dirt road = IMAGE SHAKING, didn't the director ever hear of a backdrop? - too much details is worse than not enough, Jimmy's ticks are just annoying... one facial tick, fine. two, fine. three, fine. 25 at the same time = BAD! The actors didn't seem to be getting any direction. Which denotes a bad filmmaker. - Frank is a big stereotype - Is Jimmy gay? If he isn't, he sure was portrayed as such. Why? Is this hidden gay bashing? - they should have had a French-language consultant because frankly the "French" guy's accent sucked so bad and Karen Black couldn't pronounce "coeur" in her song.

Yeah... i really didn't like it. This is some self-indulgent film, i really don't get what the fuss is about.

"Firecracker" is a film that I can't stop thinking about. Maybe I'm over analyzing it. The film is based on true events of a murder that took place in Kansas in the early 1960's. Jimmy is a shy and sensitive musician who is constantly abused by his older alcoholic brother and misunderstood by his religious fanatic mother. He meets a carnival singer, Sandra who also faces sexual abuse by Frank,the leader of the carnival freak show. After Jimmy commits a murder, which is more of an act of self defense; he dreams of running away to join the carnival with Sandra. Jimmy's world is filmed in black and white and Sandra's in eye-popping "Wizard of Oz" like color. Actress Karen Black gives an amazing performance as both Sandra and Jimmy's mom. Mike Patton of the band "Faith no More" plays both Jimmy's abusive brother David and the villainous carnival leader. Since Mike Patton plays the abuser in both roles, Jimmy and Sandra's lives are a mirror reflection of each other. Both Jimmy and Sandra dream of escaping their own personal prison. Jimmy dreams of the carnival and Sandra dreams of regular society. There is no escape for either of them, since both environments are as equally cruel. They feel trapped, and their lives seem to be a metaphor for sexual abuse.

Some parts of the film are left unexplained. Example is the mysterious schizophrenic girl who lives under a tree with glass bottles that hang from the branches. She seems to be a psychic in some manners. I've never seen a bottle tree in an American film before, it looks like something straight out of a Czech film or Easter European magic realist drama. Although some very small flaws, the film still works as a bleak and haunting surrealist portrait of middle America, Not to mention all the cool circus freaks like "the Enigma", with his body covered in blue tattooed puzzle pieces. This is definitely not a film for everyone, but for those who enjoy bizarre and challenging directors like David Lynch, Todd Solondz, Fellini and Jodorowsky. Even if you can't get into the sad story, it's still visually breathtaking. Just don't forget to have a box of tissues ready for this film to help soak up all the tears. I'm still haunted by the films strong and sometimes disturbing imagery.

I saw this film at one of its first showings and am constantly checking for a DVD release of it. I choose to review now because there is a lack of good information on it.

Firecracker stars Mike Patton, in his first actual acting role, for those of you that know Patton and his music, I don't think I need to tell you he's a very talented man that never fails to both enlighten and entertain.

Back to the movie, it is actually set in the very town that the story takes place. It takes place about 50 years ago and judging by the town's decor, it hasn't changed much since then. The plot is based on a true story and is very emotional, Jak Kendall and Mike Patton work great together and as you will see that is crucial for this movie to work so well.

Despite a low budget this movie contains really great visuals through the dynamic use of colour for different scenes. The camera-work is something you really need to see, especially if you're sick of the ADD-inspired-camera-angle-onslaught film-making of today.

Whether you're a Mike Patton fan that just wants to see if you're favourite front-man can act, or if you're in the mood for a solid movie with both a great story and visual; you'll be happy you saw Firecracker.

Hopefully, we'll get a DVD release soon. :)

Co-stars Karen Black and the magnificent Mike Patton, playing dual roles, give what are without question the best performances of their respective careers (plus this is Patton's first role): deftly played, their roles provide emotionally overwhelming impacts more powerful than anything glimpsed in the film. Susan Traylor is also superb but I thought Jak Kendall's performance as Jimmy was poor. I didn't feel anything for him. Patton and Black make up for it, with strong integrity. Their battle with true evil becomes the focus in which all four characters (David, Frank and Elenor, Sandra) confront their various demons, battling for both victory and personal salvation. The screen play is itself a masterwork with intricate twists. And, finally, the composer's exquisite score is a minor classic, a requiem to lost souls.