1 Buck

1 buck is a great 1st feature film with a very good cast. The movie doesn't pretend to be perfect or tend to go on this direction.

It's very rare to have a low budget indi movie with this quality (frames, shots, the light and the acting). Some big studios should take example.

Those bunch of idiots who wrote awful and stupid critics are just haters, they doesn't even know what is a good or bad movie.

Anyway, 1 buck is a good thriller to watch and the 28 awards won are well deserved !

This movie is terrible except the first scene when the small boat carrying the deadbeat detective to where the corpse dumped. After that, just a dreary, dragged pathetic process without any interesting thing worth your time and brain to hang on tight. It's like the script writer(s) didn't know how to move the story forward, didn't have anything worth saying. So what we got is a detective with broken heart, relied on drugs and drinking to kill his depression. A cop drinking on the job? This is a slow motion movie got nothing to tell but had to use one dollar to expand the nothingness. I have to give up this pathetic movie after wasted 25 minutes, man.

It's okay. I was excited because it's a neat concept about following a dollar. But, it is a very dark and dramatic film. Now I gotta watch something to flush the depression out.

Okay, so maybe the rating is too generous/exaggerated, it is still a good movie to watch. Not amazing, not unique, but definitely watchable.

My only objection would be the name ... 1 Buck. It may be catchy but the movie is not about that one dollar bill. How it changes hands is also completely irrelevant to the 'actual' story. Almost as an after thought did the movie makers try to add a good-luck-charm twist to it, and of course that did not work either.

The movie is still worth watching.

This film has a great idea: following a dollar bill as it changes hands, through a cast of mostly dysfunctional gritty characters, through a tale of murder, alcohol, sex, redneck racism, and drugs in Louisiana. What's not to like?

Only a few things:

1. The script

2. The acting

3. Wiggle-cam (not enough to induce nausea, but definitely enough to be annoying, intrusive, and an affectation).

This is one of those films where it's hard to tell what's worse, the acting or the script.

I think it's a tie.

The cinematography is well crafted at times, if you can see through the wiggle-cam, but not enough to redeem the rest.

I sat through the whole thing, but it was difficult.