wxray1

First scene is all stereotype and politics, and it keeps on coming through the movie. Of course mankind created this problem, as we apparently have the power to do so with every ill of both the earth and society.

Sloppy dialog include bad pronunciations, but the one that got me was that the governor of Missouri can declare a national emergency. Sloppy. I guess the producers didn't want to step on the USA government's toes for fear of alienating their favorite political party.

Technically, the filming is muddled -- as if filmed in constant fog -- and unnecessarily claustrophobic. A wide shot every now and then could allow us to breathe. The actors have knit caps (tuques) glued to their heads to the point of distraction, without a wisp of cold air visible.

I added 1 star just because an occasional SFX shot was OK.

Summary: intriguing story that delightfully goes in weird directions, yet all makes sense if you pay attention. The problem is, the production is so uneven, it distracts you from paying attention, and tempts you to turn it off. Nice effort to self-fund a movie produced over 20 years, but that doesn't forgive the fact some of it is nearly unwatchable. I have to take off some stars for that. Maybe Grion can sell this as a TV series and get proper funding.

Longer: I was immediately confused and distracted because I wasn't sure what character I was watching. He seemed to age and regenerate at will. Or it was the best makeup ever. I paused the movie and read here that it was filmed over 20 years. Congrats to Grion for pulling this off, even if by desperation. The great Kubrick wanted to do that and failed.

The two main leads do a fine job. Vasconcellos is good, and even brilliant in the final surprising main sequence. Most supporting actors have issues.

Production distractions are everywhere. Some of the scenes have fireflies. Why? And why are there right hand drive vehicles with Maine license plates in Italy? Why is the setup shot of the villa in Italy taken by camera with resolution not seen since 1870? Who blocked and framed the green-screen scenes? It was not, uh, good.

I won't bore you much more except to say I ultimately enjoyed the movie once I ignored the defects present due to budgets. I even watched it a second time. I particularly enjoyed the surprise sequence at the end, obviously shot recently since the skill level of production was higher all around, and Vasconcellos was excellent, despite gaining weight, losing hair and getting deeper wrinkles. His aging actually fits with the story too, and he embraces it.

Obviously shot on a shoestring budget, this little movie won't wow you with special effects or big stars.

Instead, you'll feel uncomfortable, maybe confused, and that's intentional. While the story is in 3rd person, those confusing scenes put you in the shoes of the protagonist of the movie, a blackout alcoholic. I read one critique (that is linked from the official movie site) which complained about the poor transitions... well to me, that was the point.

Why is there a green woman? That's best left for you to discover, instead of spoiling it for you. Even after watching it, you may not get the answer you are looking for.

The movie does meander more than necessary. It plods along at times. I was distracted by some obvious issues with sound which didn't seem intentional to me. The small budget comes through in a few too many places. The actor playing the green woman got on my nerves. I'm not sure if that was the point or not. The director and editor chose to reuse the same location establishing shot about 5 too many times. The music is great and redeems the problems with the organic sound.

Overall, I found the idea of the story engaging, if not a bit predictable.