Stuart Bliss

This movie starts out with plot developments that are completely random, Stuart's wife leaving him, his coworkers behaving in obviously strange ways, the televangelist talking to him, etc. It then proceeds to make you think that there might be some strange mystery that will be revealed, only to leave you in confusion as to what actually happened. The acting in this film assures its place in a USA Up All Night marathon someday, with wooden and bizarre performances given by all. Stuart becomes paranoid about really normal things,ie getting mail and watching tv, but shows no response to the really odd events going on around him, such as people in lab coats walking around the neighborhood and his coworkers turning into survivalists. It dissolves into a non-coherent mess, and leaves you totally unsatisfied. Avoid the hour and half that this movie takes from your life.

STUART BLISS is a black comedy about paranoia. After Stuart's wife leaves him unexpectedly, seemingly coincidental events begin to converge in his life leaving him believing that the world is coming to an end.

SB is extremely funny and at the same time very touching. The screen writers, Neil Grieve and Michael Zelniker have walked that fine line required to successfully pull off a black comedy.

The performances are all exquisitely realized...especially Michael Zelniker as Stuart, Dea Lawrence in the dual role of Janet and Katerina, Mark Fite as Reverend Walmsley, Derek McGrath as Ted, Ania Suli as the Grandmother, and Charlotte Booker and Ken Earl as the Jehovah's Unite couple.

Neil Grieve's direction is organic and inobtrusive, in that he creates with camera the ambience that supports what Stuart is feeling. Very deftly executed.

The music and sound design by John Jones adds immeasurably to the atmosphere.

I'd recommend STUART BLISS highly.

I enjoyed the feel of the opening few minutes, but 20-minutes in I was liberally applying the fast-forward button. Far too many shots of Stewart (Michael Zelniker) walking from room to room, down hallways, through doors and down the street, and as many shots of him looking pensive and confused. Gave me the impression that the story had originally been meant as a short (20-30 minutes), and then stretched into a feature as a labour of love between director Grieve and star Zelniker (they co-wrote the screenplay).

It might have been more entertaining if any of the characters had anything to say that I hadn't heard said in many other films before, or if the ending wasn't - disappointingly - the one I had predicted three minutes into the film (atypical for an independent/smaller studio film). At least its heart was in the right place - it wasn't your standard formulaic Hollywood manipulative nonsense.

To keep it short this movie is one of those 'you've seen it, you can't unsee it' type movies. A marvel of modern movie-making. I saw it a few years back and again yesterday and it's as fresh as it was when I first saw it. I find the surreal world is created by it's words, it's ideas and it's ideals. Strange and haunted but no more so than a dream. If you are the kind of person who can't understand James Bond movies, this is not for you. On the other hand, if you are smart intellectual and sexy, this movie will give you feverish dreams for Months. Listen to my advice, see this movie. If you don't like it, meh. But if you understand it, it will stay with you and influence you like Hollywood films never do. Everything I write, essays, novels, etc. Everything I say, has been effected by seeing this movie. Now what are you waiting for, go! Watch this movie!

This is one of the strangest films I have ever watched, but the strangeness is something completely different from, say, "Donnie Darko" or "Abre los ojos." The strangeness lies not in a man in a rabbit suit or a man who lives in a dream, but rather in everyday occurrences. Perception is the key to "Stuart Bliss," whether it be time, chance occurrences that seem to be linked, perhaps even mental derangement. No answer to any question asked by the film or the audience should be expected. Like Stuart says of time, how it is able to move backwards and forwards, this film seems to present a portrait, a snapshot, of something that is blurry and cannot be entirely distinguished. Watching the film more than once, however, allows for the viewer to notice details that went by unnoticed the first time. For example, anyone watching this film should pay attention to the pink notices Stuart keeps receiving, as they play a keep part in understanding the film, at least as much as it can be understood. This is a film that is difficult to describe or dissect, as it could be about any number of things. Details of a larger picture manifest themselves throughout the whole, but they never come into focus. One can only guess from the outline at what is being presented, and this must be seen through his or her own subjective perception. "Stuart Bliss" is not a filmmaker's film, despite the fact that the director and primary actor also performed most of the other key production tasks. Rather, it is more of a philosophical and/or psychological work, something even movie buffs might not be able appreciate. Incidentally, I found Michael Zelniker's acting to be more than competent, especially in the way his character slowly degenerates throughout the course of the film, which "ends" in a perfect circle. I only recommend this film to those who actually have the ability to notice and appreciate subtlety and mentality that lies outside the norm. "Stuart Bliss" has given me a new influence and means of perception, not just in film, but in all art, and even life itself.