The first major flaw lies in the writer's own misguided assumption-that the backlash is due to his depiction of society's ugly realities. With brazen arrogance, he dismisses critics as if they simply cannot handle the truth. But the actual critique aimed at him is far more fundamental: it concerns the squandering of an incredibly original premise through shallow humor and an overinflated sense of seriousness.
The screenplay broaches highly provocative themes-religion, death, poverty, and the role of morality in contemporary life. Yet despite the gravity of these subjects, the film unfolds through some of the dullest and most uninspired dialogue imaginable, ultimately failing to live up to the boldness of its own ideas.
The cast makes an almost unbelievably desperate effort to inject charm into an incomplete screenplay, and in a few scattered scenes, their attempts briefly succeed. However, this modest success owes nothing to the director. In fact, his handling of shot composition and direction of background actors reveals a startling level of amateurism disguised as confidence. This shortcoming is only amplified by the film's cheap editing style, which merely connects shots without rhythm, intention, or cinematic cohesion.
Setting aside these fundamental flaws, there is one unintentionally hilarious element that deserves mention: the producer's opening logo. A low-budget imitation of the Universal Pictures intro-complete with a dramatic orchestral score-it's so earnestly over-the-top that it becomes a highlight in itself. (I'll refrain from elaborating further, lest I diminish its comedic effect.)
