ÉVALUATION IMDb
5,8/10
1,1 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA comic western about a cowboy who seeks a wanted and evil man who caused for the death of his beloved horse Easy.A comic western about a cowboy who seeks a wanted and evil man who caused for the death of his beloved horse Easy.A comic western about a cowboy who seeks a wanted and evil man who caused for the death of his beloved horse Easy.
Oli van der Vijver
- The Squint
- (as Oliver Evans)
Avis en vedette
PROS:
CONS:
- It is a fun watch knowing that is the directorial debut of Edgar Wright.
- You could really see their was passion behind this and it is very self-aware. Overall it's a fun, low budget parody from Edgar Wright.
- I did find myself laughing at how over the top it was quite a bit.
- Given a minuscule budget the set, costume, etc. Look quite good.
CONS:
- Understandably it lacks much professionalism and the acting isn't fantastic as it pretty much is a student made film.
"The greatest western ever made...in Somerset"
Edgar Wright's official directorial debut, because for some mysterious reason his high school "Dead Right" doesn't count, is a parody of the spaghetti westerns, with an obvious emphasis on Leone, Eastwood, and even Morricone's music. The film is low(no)budget and the actors are amateur kids, as is the author himself, but you can already see all the elements that characterize his future masterpieces. From his trademark parody stories, through completely wacky characters and silly dialogues, to specific directing and editing, and refined sense of rhythm and detail. The humor is very reminiscent of Monty Python and, although it has some good and original jokes, it is mostly worn out and forced, but when you take into account the age, (in)experience and budget of the author, this film is astonishingly good.
7/10
Edgar Wright's official directorial debut, because for some mysterious reason his high school "Dead Right" doesn't count, is a parody of the spaghetti westerns, with an obvious emphasis on Leone, Eastwood, and even Morricone's music. The film is low(no)budget and the actors are amateur kids, as is the author himself, but you can already see all the elements that characterize his future masterpieces. From his trademark parody stories, through completely wacky characters and silly dialogues, to specific directing and editing, and refined sense of rhythm and detail. The humor is very reminiscent of Monty Python and, although it has some good and original jokes, it is mostly worn out and forced, but when you take into account the age, (in)experience and budget of the author, this film is astonishingly good.
7/10
Before spoofing zombie movies and action flicks, Edgar Wright took a stab at the spaghetti western. It's an understandably amateurish production with zero budget and baby-faced actors. Rather than the character-driven homage format of his later films, here Wright takes more of a rapid-fire gag approach, with echoes of Mel Brooks, Looney Tunes, Monty Python and Zucker/Abrahams/Zucker. It's a style that demands to be judged on the quality of its jokes. And there are some pretty good ones... I especially liked the final showdown that starts with a debate about the end of BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID. However, a lot more gags fail than succeed. I'd say roughly 1 in 4 find their mark. It's not a very impressive ratio, but it could be a whole lot worse. If it's not exactly a comic masterpiece, at least it's generally watchable and supplies a few good laughs.
Graham Low is the Man With No Name and Oli van der Vijver is the Lee Van Cleef character in Edgar Low's first feature film.
As you might guess from the title, it's a burlesque of the Sergio Leone/Clint Eastwood westerns, with a sketch of a pot and a lot of actors of whom you've never heard doing a mediocre job. There are plenty of juvenile gags, and it gives the impression of a bunch of amateurs who really liked MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL and figured they could do the same for westerns.
I was disappointed, in part because, while the flow of gags never stopped, each one was offered as if it was hilarious. When you've got that rat-a-tat pacing, you need to offer a gag and then move on to the next.
As you might guess from the title, it's a burlesque of the Sergio Leone/Clint Eastwood westerns, with a sketch of a pot and a lot of actors of whom you've never heard doing a mediocre job. There are plenty of juvenile gags, and it gives the impression of a bunch of amateurs who really liked MONTY PYTHON AND THE HOLY GRAIL and figured they could do the same for westerns.
I was disappointed, in part because, while the flow of gags never stopped, each one was offered as if it was hilarious. When you've got that rat-a-tat pacing, you need to offer a gag and then move on to the next.
Edgar Wright's directorial debut is a no-budget western comedy that's crafted purely out of passion by the then-new filmmaker and makes for a decent parody of spaghetti westerns. A Fistful of Fingers is goofy, dorky & untidy, and is too amateurish an effort to be considered a proper debut feature.
Also written by Wright, this 78 mins story with zero production values & irreverent humour is devoid of all the charm, wit or energy that are now best associated with his works and lacks even an attempt from him to carve out his original style & trademarks. Instead, the film feels more like a hobby pursued in spare time.
While there are amusing bits & clever comedic touches every now n then, much of it is a tad too silly & campy to be enjoyed wholeheartedly. Wright spoofs the genre with nothing held back but has no idea when n where to pull the brakes & gets carried away too often, thus leading to several good scenes getting undone by being overdone.
Overall, A Fistful of Fingers has all the qualities of a student film shot on a shoestring budget and absolutely none of the stylistic flourishes that now defines an Edgar Wright presentation. It is funny in small doses and its over-the-top ridiculousness also works but it lacks restraint. Fans of the filmmaker may find it enjoyable to an extent but one isn't missing out much if they skip it.
Also written by Wright, this 78 mins story with zero production values & irreverent humour is devoid of all the charm, wit or energy that are now best associated with his works and lacks even an attempt from him to carve out his original style & trademarks. Instead, the film feels more like a hobby pursued in spare time.
While there are amusing bits & clever comedic touches every now n then, much of it is a tad too silly & campy to be enjoyed wholeheartedly. Wright spoofs the genre with nothing held back but has no idea when n where to pull the brakes & gets carried away too often, thus leading to several good scenes getting undone by being overdone.
Overall, A Fistful of Fingers has all the qualities of a student film shot on a shoestring budget and absolutely none of the stylistic flourishes that now defines an Edgar Wright presentation. It is funny in small doses and its over-the-top ridiculousness also works but it lacks restraint. Fans of the filmmaker may find it enjoyable to an extent but one isn't missing out much if they skip it.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAmy Bowles, a guitarist in multiple Toronto bands, was the inspiration for Envy Adams in the Scott Pilgrim comic series. While meeting for Scott Pilgrim vs le monde (2010), Bowles happened to ride her bicycle near Edgar Wright and Bryan Lee O'Malley, and said hello. O'Malley was speechless, and only later explained his stupefaction at Wright knowing him.
- Générique farfeluNo Animals Were Harmed In The Making Of This Film, They Were All Killed
- Autres versionsAn earlier version exists in which Jeremy Beadle does not appear. Additionally, alternate takes for the underwear-shooting-off scene, spitting sequence and removing the bullet entry wound gag are all used.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The Hour: Episode #7.34 (2010)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et surveiller les recommandations personnalisées
- How long is A Fistful of Fingers?Propulsé par Alexa
Détails
- Durée1 heure 18 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.33 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant