Brick

OK...I have never actually commented on a movie on IMDb, but this movie was so great I really felt I had to let people know about it. When I first read the synopsis of Brick at Sundance I was immediately interested in seeing it. "Film Noir set in a high school." I started hearing really terrible reviews of it and almost did not go until the very last day I could. I am so glad I did. It is a very unique film, such a refreshing one for people who have seen it all. So if you want something new and different you will definitely enjoy this. Others may find it is too over-the top for them--it took me several minutes to understand what the characters were even saying at first, in their language that mixed old film noir slang with the new generation of slang. Its very dark and the sound design will even make a person feel uneasy. The director linked sound and image in ways I have never seen, completely enthralling me from beginning to end. This movie is not a relaxing ride. oh! but there are great comedic and ironic moments as well! I think a lot of the criticism I heard of this film was that it was too incomprehensible and unbelievable. I personally really got into the world of this film and it had me on the edge of my seat until the very end. It was so enjoyable to buy into the rules of the film noir/high school drama world and its characters. I did not even recognize the lead character as that kid from 3rd Rock until the end! I hated 3rd Rock, but I absolutely loved and believed in his character here. I loved it! One of my top picks at Sundance this year. sorry I have never written a review...I hope this reveals something about the movie. I really, really hope that it gets released soon! It is one of those interesting movies that could really be a cult classic.

I saw this film at a sneak preview the other night not knowing what to expect. To say the least I was pleasantly surprised. Film Noir being one of my favorite film genre's, "Brick" follows the same story structure, odd-ball characters, right down to the very smart and quick paced dialogue of a 30s/40s hard boiled detective thriller. The twist that lifts it above parody and even a mere homage is the presentation of these elements with high school kids in Southern California. The direction by Rian Johnson is very expert and confident in telling the story, giving the audience smooth and quick editing along with skewed and distorted camera angles. He manages to maintain suspense throughout the film, only in a couple of parts letting it drag (the scenes with the Drama Queen are some of the weakest). The actors are great, the most memorable being the "villains" Pen and Tugger. Rather than just being atypical baddies, their portrayals give them depth, sympathy, and at the same time a degree of likability. Kudos also goes to the actor who played Brain, the partner of Frye, who is nearly flawless in his somewhat small role. John Shaft himself, Richard Roundtree, shows up as the Vice Principal, but it is obvious they only had the budget to hire him for one day. I have to say this isn't a classic film by any means; I merely decided to give it such a high rating because it attempts something different and succeeds fairly successfully. I've been tired of the mundane films that get released every year, and for once this is something that is completely different; the use of archetypal characters in the setting and delivery not expected. It's a low budget film, but it is obvious to me that that this filmmaker will be heard from again. Keep an eye out.

While a touch (maybe 5-10 minutes) overlong, its clever dialogue requires absolute attention and shows how well versed in the language of noir the screenwriter is. (Terms like "yegs" and "sap" are rarely used these days but offer a direct and crtitical link to Hammett and Chandler).

It's also quite humorous, mixing David Lynch, "River's Edge", "Heathers", and any high-noir reference you care to make quite freely. And Lukas Haas' turn as an oddball kingpin is reminiscent of William Hurt's spin on the same in "A History of Violence" in that they are both highly stylized.

However, because the dialogue is so utterly complicated, discerning all the plot elements and making eventual sense of the film would probably have to be done over a period of time. The film lends itself to multiple viewings, and some people might not like that.

A life in film — if you really commit yourself to it — can leave you desperately depressed about the future. The templates are so mature that they are inescapable: without a template somewhere in the field of the thing you simply cannot "read" it, register it.

So you have only a few choices if you are a young filmmaker entering this world. You can buy into the system and play the game as the rivers flow. You can become a stylist in some way.

Or you can play with the templates and forms, usually in a self-referential way. When I see this last as the choice a young filmmaker makes, I rejoice. And it is sheer pleasure when it is done well.

This is. And its existence will make you optimistic, probably just knowing it is there.

Here's what it is: a hardboiled detective story transplanted not into high school (as it appears) but into the abstractions of high school that movies have invented. These two genres each have their own set of abstractions that flatten the world. This fellow has overlapped them. He's suppressed all irony — what is usually called irony but is actually selfawareness.

For this to work, all the characters have to be locked in their own world(s) and never glimpse anything outside the flatland. Its expertly done here, just gloriously. The editing is banal (which is a real problem) but the blocking is every bit as inspired as the placement of the thing in terms of the ordinary world of movies.

One example: our hero has been stereotypically beaten and is in a car trunk on his way to meet the local drug kingpin, who is another teen operating out of his Mom's basement. There's a game of light and darkness in this sequence: being blacked out with fists, darkness in the trunk and surreptitiously peering out. Once we are in the house down the cellar stairs there is a short hallway between the bottom of the stairs and a small basement room, the hub. This room is cheap fake wood panelling and low ceiling. Cheap lamps. But before we get there, we get a flash of light when the door opens and we see the 10 foot hallway is jammed with teen drug soldiers lined against the two walls. Its brilliant.

Kids. They own everything. They control not the future but the way we shape what we have now. When I see stuff like this, I think we might be lucky because if it.

2005 was a bad year for movies. This should be on your short list of best of 2005.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

The geography of film noir is usually a neighborhood, a city, a region ... BRICK transposes this geography onto a high school with surprisingly successful results. Watching it brought to mind not only the black & white films of the 40s and 50s, but glimmers of Gus van Sant, David Lynch and River's Edge. What gives BRICK its filmic authenticity (much different from realism) is its language -- the language of Chandler and Hammett, but re-imagined from the lips of contemporary teens.

The effect is staggering. BRICK essentially re-creates a world we thought we knew. Suddenly there are forces at work that we recognize because we knew they were there. But to see them in this noir glow is to give them an exciting new life ... "to see them again for the first time." There are plot twists and surprises aplenty here, although familiar once you realize the inspirations for the film. But familiarity is more than compensated by a superb cast and (not generally noted in these comments) excellent music. Contemporizing the soundtrack keeps us on our toes and makes a significant contribution to the tension of BRICK.

A terrific debut!