A Fistful of Fingers

This is very funny in parts and a send up of the great 'Spaghetti Westerns'.'Fingers' is high spirited, low budget production but i'm sure all involved, had a passion for the wonderful subject matter. You can't help but get sucked into some very silly situations and a film you can have a few beers before hand (no doubt).

This is a funny film that parodies westerns . Most, if not all of the cast are probably still in their teens and still in school. Even though it is low budget, it looks very professional. More professional than a lot of other low budget British films. The writing is very funny, a lot of monty python, Airplane, and Naked Gun kind of humour. It feels a bit slow at times, but is still a very enjoyable film. It's a bit more over the top and surreal than Blazing Saddles. One of the funniest western parody I've ever seen.

Edgar Wright's first film is... not good, pretty bad in fact.

'A Fistful of Fingers' does work in small doses, though all in all it's rather limp. The early stages, the opening 25 minutes or so, are solid if hit-and-miss, unfortunately the rest is heavy in the miss department. There are some mildly amusing bits, the Clint Eastwood/'A Fistful of Dollars' schtick is decent but quickly runs dry.

There isn't much to talk about regarding the cast, they give alright performances I guess - Graham Low sticks out most, as you'd expect. The film coulda done without the Native American stuff, which is not only lazy and rather unsavoury. The, unexpected, animated bit was cool though.

The best part of this film? The poster. Noice.

I find this so much funnier than a lot of other people seem to give it credit for. If you want a Zucker/Abrahams-style comedy spoofing spaghetti westerns, but made with pretty much no money, that's exactly what Fistful of Fingers offers.

I've spent a few years lamenting how Edgar Wright has moved away from comedy, too, all the while ignoring what could well be his silliest movie. It's made on such a budget that some might not even consider it a proper movie, but I don't care. It's funny. It made me laugh more than I was expecting.

Wright's wheelhouse is comedy, so much so I'd say this might well be a better film (or at least a more satisfying watch) than either Baby Driver or Last Night in Soho. The last 10 years has been grim for anyone who likes this filmmaker's sense of humour. At least his Sparks documentary was pretty funny, but that was mostly because Sparks are a funny duo.

Edgar, just make comedies again. You're funny. You bring out the best in Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. The Cornetto trilogy movies are still ones I think about often. I haven't seen Scott Pilgrim from ages, but I reckon I'd still enjoy it if watched again today. The guy is helming a more serious/accurate adaptation of Stephen King's The Running Man next (purportedly more in line with the book than the Schwarzenegger film that very loosely adapted it), and I just have to ask... why. Why, why, why.

Wright ignoring the comedy genre would be like David Lean deciding to stop making epics, or David Lynch moving away from surrealism, or Scorsese suddenly making nothing but sci-fi/fantasy movies for no good reason. This filmmaker has moved so far out of his wheelhouse and I'm just baffled why he's apparently got no desire to go back.

Got off-topic there. I'll just reiterate: if you like Wright's other parodies, and you enjoy spaghetti westerns, and you don't mind films with low budgets, watch Fistful of Fingers.

PROS:

• 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.