Startup.com

I myself worked in one of the ubiquitous .com's in the late 90's and this movie is frightening realistic, from the long hours and technical glitches right down to the embarrassingly lame cheers.

I read on the web the filmmakers set out to document their friends impending wealth and business fortune with this documentary, but what they got was the complete opposite. I think that speaks volumes for expectations during this era.

I feel like some of the other IMDb reviews are off the mark. Yes, the movie is sometimes hard to follow. But it was shot in the Cinéma-vérité genre and that is to be expected. It is an uncompromising real life look, and it is up to the viewer to decipher; sometimes this works sometimes not. Some previous reviews wondered how the company folded. Honestly its a movie about an internet company, why do you think it failed? Having said this, I think more could have been shown of why Tom got the axe and the love relationships of Kaliel could have been better developed.

According to the DVD the producers cut some realistic (and boringly technical) scenes to focus more on the relationship between Tom and Kaleil. This is where they succeeded. They are trying to tell the story of the company downfall through the interplay of these two characters. It is fascinating because it is real. The most compelling part is the coorelation between their relationship eroding as does the company. Viewed from that point of view this movie is really not a documentary. Nevertheless it is entertaining and gripping. What amazed me was the unfettered greed and their enormous hubris which prevented them from acknowledge their role in this sinking ship.

Those who are commenting on the mediocrity of the craftmanship of this movie are missing the point. The rise and fall of the dot-coms have become a meaningful part of American history and lore. Stock tickers, balance sheets and bankruptcy sales tell part of the story, but there's a difference between arriving at the scene of a train wreck and actually watching it happen.

The value of this movie is that, in spite of all of its flaws, you get to watch the train wreck knowing full well what's going to come, you can see why the principals didn't see the things that seem so obvious to us watching the film now, and you can see how their hubris, lack of technical understanding and lack of focus lead to their downfall.

I'm sure that it could been a better movie, but it's the only behind the scenes account we have of what must have happened hundreds of times all over the country. Like the Zapruder film and Hanlon & Naudet's account of 9/11, it's value comes from the fact that the cameras were there, catching history as it happened.

This movie should be required viewing for all B-School students, sort of like making student drivers watch Red Asphalt.

Actually, to correct the plot outline above this movie does NOT "trace the birth and success...of new media company govWorks.com." Rather, it douments the rise and fall of a company whose fortunes seem to accurately reflect the demise of 1000s of similar dotcom start-ups. I saw the video on tape and not in a theater and thought the lack of art and panache in the news-like cinema verite photography was disappointing, but the story does deliver. The relationship between the protagonists--then antagonists--who founded and ran govWorks.com makes for compelling viewing and substantial response even weeks after the story-telling. The docu relies on the screen-filling charisma and intelligence of Kaleil Tuzman, CEO of the start-up company guarantees to drive the narrative. His former roommate Jehane Noujaim produced, directed and shot the feature doc with veteran Chris Hegedus, but it would not have been possible w/out Noujaim's access to the primary subject, Tuzman.

Interestingly, feature stories and reviews in the NY media describe Tuzmnan as both Hindu and as a "Latino Jew." It's exactly the type of detail missing in a doc that does not rely on narration to fill in the blanks.

On the whole, a solid, respectable fairly fulfilling though uninsightful piece of journalism.

Startup.com is not a movie about the dot-com boom. It's not a movie about building a business; it's not a movie about technology and new industries.

It's a movie about greed and ego.

The two founders start off with the idea that they want to create a "dot com" -- they bounce around a bunch of goofy ideas like virtual cemetaries and eventually settle on a portal for government-related services. The fact that they wanted to document the startup of this venture from day one is another testimonial to their ego, greed and lack of focus.

I agree with most of the comments others have said about the movie. It's fragmented, and has gaping holes in it relating to explaining what's going on. The viewer ends up really not having a clue as to why the venture failed, which is another testimonial to the principals in that apparently the nature of what went wrong wasn't nearly as important to them as the fact that it did go wrong and their dreams weren't realized. Boo hoo.

After seeing the movie and not having much additional information on the project, I am left with my own thoughts as to some of the blanks that the film left open. Specifically, these guys failed because they were more interested in the fruits of their labor, than the labor itself, which was a means to an end. That's why they failed. The only reason they got as far as they did is they ran into others, greedy employees, greedy financiers who were just like them and had no passion for the job, just the brass ring that was promised at the end.

They might have had "good people" working for them, but I'd bet that there wasn't a single person in the company who actually had innate passion for the application and industry they were in. If you ask any successful businessman what's the secret, the first thing they'll likely tell you is, "Do something you enjoy doing." I'm sure Kalil enjoyed hob-nobbing with rich people, but that wasn't the purpose of his company, though it looks like his subsequent career involves that.

We're left to try to figure out exactly how things went wrong.

The one thing that I'm left with is, the tech end of the project never worked right. I'd bet good money the whole foundation was built on Windows technology and was never very flexible or manageable. And Tom is probably responsible for dropping the ball there, but then again like I said, these guys didn't really care about the business... they just wanted to be successful.

If anything, the movie doesn't really teach us lessons about startups. It is a tale of two misguided, self-absorbed guys who find other self-absorbed people with more money and get a free ride for a little while.

At the time of the dot.com boom, Kaleil Tuzman and Tom Herman start up their own internet company seeking to offer a platform to enable activities carried out at the local Government level, such as the payment of parking tickets, applying for licenses and so on. We join them at the very start of this journey as they gather funding, grow the employee base and begin developing their product and compete for business and investment. However, in business as in life, things do not always go to plan.

I was quite looking forward to this film, not least because it was one of the documentaries screened as part of the ten year anniversary of the BBC's Storyville stable – Storyville being known for the quality of the documentaries. Secondly I did also think the film sounded fascinating on many levels due to the subject matter but also the amount of access it had to the top people in the company throughout the entire process. I'll get to what I think of the film in a minute but firstly let stress that my focus will be what I thought of the film and NOT simply personal views on the people. Reading reviews here, I was surprised by the number that said little on the film but seemed to be reviewing Kaleil and Tom – several with opinions and insinuations that I personally would call offensive at best, racist at worst.

Many have commented on the way Kaleil and Tom delivered (or failed to deliver) their product but again the concern for me as a viewer is how the makers of the film have failed to deliver. I'm not sure where the failing occurred but how it appears is that they thought the battle had been won simply because of their great access and that simply being there would be enough to make this fascinating viewing. They are wrong. I'm sure it must have been tough to edit the film down from two years into this running time but it feels like all they have done is cut together bits that are important, without really packaging it together or helping the audience understand anything beyond what we are seeing. As a result it really fails to portray much of value in regards business or the dot.com era – hell, even the closing captions seem brief and disinterested.

Without a focus from the makers we are left to find our own and of course we end up on the individuals of Kaleil and Tom. This makes the film more of a fly-on-the-wall reality TV show, relying on personal tensions etc to drive the story forward; but you know what? It isn't that good. Both men are interesting to a point but neither individually or together do they justify a film to share this with the world. It is a shame because the film is not terrible by any means but without any sort of focus and a real lack of vision from the makers, we are left with very little of interest to work with and annoyingly it becomes increasingly apparent as you watch.