Marco Zero

I was left speechless after watching Day Zero, and may have to watch it again to fully grasp the full range of lunacy it presents. The film took me through every emotion I believe I am capable of feeling, from fear and laughter to that sneaking sort of anti-nationalism felt by most Americans today: I love my country, but I hate when its government pulls such ridiculous stunts.

Day Zero poses a very valid question: Is it right for a democratic nation to draft its citizens to fight a war for quote-unquote freedom? The film leaves the question open-ended, but definitely casts its vote in favor of yes. Day Zero reminds us that freedom has never been free, and the time may come again that men and women will have to fight for, in the words of Dixon, "Choice... our way of life." I will now admit my bias toward Elijah Wood. I rented this movie solely to see what my beloved Frodo has been up to. I was horrified that Wood was not only regularly sized, but also indulging in mad fantasies of prostitutes and shaven heads. My disturbedness aside, I must say that his performance was really very excellent. However, I must add that the conclusion of his character's story was less than satisfying, despite the fact that it was logical.

Day Zero is an interesting study of three somewhat bland and normal people caught up in modern political mayhem. It would have been more appropriate in, say, 2003 or 4, while the Bush era was at its height, as were fears of the draft returning. History has now rendered the film largely obsolete. However, mediocre script writing rendered the film obsolete almost immediately. It is worth a watch, definitely, but I firmly believe this film will not have real value until we use it to teach the next generation about this time in our nation.

Day Zero is worth watching precisely because it so accurately captures the spirit of fear and independence present in our nation today. It is not the best movie ever made, but it will do.

There seems to be a continuing trend(?) to produce (promising) movies these days with (B) Unfinished scripts...where they makeup the last half as they go along to get a 'finished movie'. (B) Lame scripts (that somebody's brother-in-law wrote) and then get embellished to get a 'finished movie'. (C) Indy scripts that get edited (down to the quick) to save time and money and get passed off as a 'finished movie'...

Day Zero...Is a small movie that could have been much more...I left unsatisfied when the movie 'just ended'...I don't expect or need a 'Rings Trilogy' to be satisfied, but would have enjoyed the effort 'a great deal more' with only 'a bit more story'....Otherwise, I'd say 'Zero' is well-written, cast, art directed, shot, etc, etc. But - considering the magnitude of the questions it raises, a bit more storyline would have made this a much better movie effort. The large selection of Vietnam movies from the eighties run the gamut of poor efforts to great movies, but the main difference is that storyline(s) are generally 'more complete'...This movie would have been much better had the storyline (A) been more in-depth concerning the 30 days and the 3 friends...or (B) been more in-depth concerning where and what takes place - after the 30 days...It would also have been much more satisfying from a storyline point of view...Either way, the result we are left with has an incomplete feel and leaves one wanting to see the rest of the story...Possibly there might be a trilogy in the works (or at least a chapter-2)...Sir Vertual

First of all, I was made aware of this movie by friends. And while I was quite an Elijah Wood fan some years ago, I must admit my expectations weren't really that high.

But then I started reading something about the plot and thought, "Hmmm, this *could* be a film worth watching." So, I got myself tickets for the Monday screening at the Tribeca Film Festival. And I don't regret it a bit! So many questions that I have asked myself many, many times were picked up by this movie. Is the war the world is fighting just? Will it help us? Will it make things worse? Why do we feel we must (not) fight? How to justify that? And by having very controversial characters as the main players, you have no problem at all seeing things from both (or rather multiple) sides. Plus, no answers are forced down your throat.

Naturally, there still is a message, but, at least to me, it wasn't, "That's not worth fighting for." but, and that's a message hardly heard, "Suffering doesn't only come from being hurt, but also from (possibly) having to hurt." All in all, I can but recommend this film. A wonderful starting point for having a discussion with your friends (and, even more so, with those you consider do *not* share your opinion on this matter!) So, 10 out of 10 is really what this movie deserves.

It's 30 days before DAY ZERO, when three friends are to be drafted into the army during the raging war in Iraq. They react to the news and somehow come to terms with reality. On this simple (even thin) premise, Brian Cole crafts a well balanced 90 minutes, which manages to cloud a specific or biased point-of-view. Sure, there's anti-war clambering and patriotic posturing. There's plenty of flag waving and flag burning, but this film is not about the draft or serving one's country. As a reviewer who has already been drafted to face a war (in Viet-nam) and had to grapple with decisions that would ultimately shape the remainder of my life, I know this film is about "the inner self"—the draft being the catalyst and the reactions mere symptoms to the rumbling of the human spirit or the lack there of.

The three stars carry the film a long way and beyond. Chris Klein as George Rifkin represents the majority view, that the draft is a life interrupter. One never gets the impression that George is a coward. He just wants to continue his law practice, enjoy his family and wife; and ultimately, his anti-draft stance festers from resentment to anger. Jon Bernthal as James Dixon represents the patriotic view, that "it had to happen sooner or later," and everyone should stand up and fight terrorism. He is a violent and disturbed man, short fused and drives a taxi for a living, quite a contrast from George. He imprints his views on his friends without hesitation, but when he meets a girl, his views are somewhat tempered. Elijah Wood, in his best performance on screen to date (yes, even better than Mr. Baggins), plays Aaron Feller, a naïve, fragile man, who has just published his first novel and is working on the second. He is thrown into a panic by the draft notice. He looks for help in all the right places, and doesn't find it. He then looks in all the wrong places, and does. He manages to face his inner demon and takes the appropriate corrective action.

The three friends interact with great chemistry. While Wood carries the film's main theme and presents it with pathos and comedy, the more political and preachy messages come from Klein and Bernthal. Bernthal's raging approach to life is engaging. He is always there for his friends, but not without cost. He chews up the scenery. Klein, on the other hand, gets the more conventional row to hoe, with everything from draft dodger to conscientious objector. He whines and bleats and tears his hair out (figuratively. Wood loses his, literally). Between Bernthal and Klein, we have Macbeth and King Lear, so it is up to Wood to bring the real interest. He crafts his character from thin air, as his scenes are mostly interspersed vignettes that are visually appealing and pathetically comic. In fact, Wood's sense of comedic timing matches the great stars of cinema, like Chaplin. He takes us from entertaining comic relief to riveting drama as Aaron takes a roller coaster ride from naïve to psychosis in 30 days to Day Zero.

This film has only been screened at the Tribeca Film Festival, where I am sure it will win awards and be picked up by a distributor (if not, the film industry is blind). It demonstrates that in the hands of a thinking director, three strong actors can create storms in tea cups. It also provides the viewing audience with Elijah Wood's best of many great performances on celluloid, and for an actor nearing his 40th film, it is a landmark. A

Edward C. Patterson

I find myself out of alignment with previous commenters on this one. Let's see: "A perfect study of those who share this fate given by wonderful cast and crew" Perfect? No flaws? Come on.

"A powerful film about friendship and relations" I wish it had been. The script failed to draw us in and make us care about the characters.

"A Powerful and Thought-Provoking Character Study" No it wasn't. It could have been. Each character was a cliché. And worse, instead of letting the viewer make their minds up, the script is busy telling us, in case we missed it.

The above comments were taken from people who gave this movie 10 out of 10. That's a PERFECT score. A flawless movie. Had they rated it an 8 or 9, then you could expect there to be a difference in taste, in expectation.

The acting isn't bad, as much as the script allows it, and the story has a decent premise, but the story relies to much on the audience being American, and the feelings that come with drafts, wars, Duty to country.

In the end, this movie attempt to set a mood results in it being too slow and too shallow. It is presented by formula driven characters. A character study it is not. It leaves huge holes in the characters at the same time as it is spoon feeding us the obvious.

5 out of 10 because the acting is good, the cinematography is good, but it gets dragged down by the script.