Lost in London

Even after watching the Q and A for the film I still can't figure out why someone would have their directorial debut be the most challenging project I can imagine undertaking. Even without the single shot, live elements, the film is written and performed hilariously. I had more laugh out loud moments in the theater with this film than I can remember in recent history. After the film, the cast and crew presented a Q and A that really makes you feel like you are part of the process, which I guess we were. Willie Nelson was a surreal fantasy for both Woody and the audience. Owen Wilson was a great as usual and the self deprecating humor Woody Nelson threw in about his career as well as Wilsons, was lovingly harsh and very funny. There were some inconsistencies with the cultural and film references being post 2002 when the film supposedly takes place, but they didn't really place it in that time period until the end of the film so it wasn't distracting or obvious and didn't detract. It was fantastic as an experience and was a genuinely delightful film.

I didn't know this was a "one shot" live movie. For what it is, it's well executed and deserving of praise, however, it falls short if you expect it to stand its own ground. Maybe if we were rating single take live films, this could be an 8,9 or 10.

The dialogue is painfully intense, there is hardly any space to breathe. Camera is shaky, sometimes blurry... Some of the jokes are witty but they are few and far in between. Also you cannot really laugh as you are trying to understand what the heck is going on and what everyone is talking about. The British accents don't help. Overall interesting try but dont be fooled by the positive reviews, this will eventually become a 5 start movie on IMDB

Woody made a fantastic accomplishment with this movie. Even though we scrape the story from the surface, we are able to submerge into the protagonist life and experience some of his emotions. They way it was filmed makes you feel present in the screen, and as an expectator, a succession of events contained in this kind of chronological order can make you lose your attention. However, I believe is part of the narrative itself.

Fantastic and innovate work!

Harrelson directs and stars in this experimental film where the whole thing was shot live in one night and screened into cinemas. The story, such as it is, features Harrelson playing 'himself' falling out with his wife and get into various mishaps as he tries to get back to her.

As a film, it's pretty slight, although Harrelson is very good as the witty, lost, selfish and naive film star lost in the big city. There are some fun scenes and some dull bits - Harrelson's row with Owen Wilson where they rip each other's films apart is wonderful. All this though takes a back seat to appreciating the quite incredible skills in pulling this together, as far as I can tell, without a mistake, whilst keeping pace and solid performances going.

If you have any basic knowledge of film making, acting, lighting, sound engineering and broadcasting, after watching this film you might agree it was an incredible achievement given the limited budget and schedule and all the obstacles and circumstances in which it was put together. When judging all the elements in the film, but particularly acting, it is fair to consider the EXTREME emotional and physical endurance all the actors and crew needed in order to materialize this (crazy) project, specially Woody who also served as director and, as he later explained during the QA session at the end of the movie, couldn't stop thinking about all the details while the camera was rolling. Remember, this movie was broadcast LIVE in one camera shot with no opportunity for screwing up, with the constant threat of technical glitches in sound (150 microphones) and video streaming, bad timing of actors and scenes, falls (the cameraman was running up and down staircases and other obstacles) and even bad weather, given that in London it can rain at any time and great part of the movie was shot outdoors. If you factor all these elements in, then Woody's performance was Academy Award ( or Tony? or both? ) winner. So for this reason, I am giving this movie a solid 10. What Woody and the rest of the crew have achieved is short of impossible. The plot and dialogues were good and entertaining, not a deep and thoughtful story, just a fun and silly comedy based on Woody's mostly-true recount of an awkward night in London. If you didn't have the opportunity to watch it live and would like to watch it now, please do so with an open mind and remember, this was an experimental project with incredible odds of not going well at all, and yet somehow it did!.