zimbean-4

This wannabe film noir is dreadful. First and foremost, there is WAY too much narration. Apparently the writer/ director worried that the audience wouldn't understand his derivative stab at a story, so in most scenes points are made visually while the narrator explains what we're seeing .. it's insulting to an audience and just plain awful filmmaking. At the Phoenix Film Festival the director introduced the movie (shot on DV), clearly proud of its "225 visual effects shots" -- which obviously took precedence over an actual story. Yes, guys, digital toys are fun, but don't make a movie just so you can play with them. Yuck.

Easily the best feature I saw at the Phoenix Film Festival, it deserved the best film award it received. The story is original. The writing is clever, funny and dark, and has a ring of veracity thanks to the writers' experience in the industry. The story structure is right on, with a satisfying climax. The acting was mostly terrific, especially Jennifer Beals -- I've never witnessed a better performance from her. John Cassini is right on the money, and the always great Molly Parker is great yet again. It's very well cast. My only complaint is that the psychedelic Shakespeare scene went on for far too long. Thanks for brightening an otherwise dreary Phoenix Film Festival.

I don't see this movie getting wide distribution, not because there are no big names attached but because it's just not interesting enough, uses too many recycled elements, from characters to cinematography to plot points. The acting is competent, the technical side is fine, but these can't make up for the script, which really does need some doctoring, and a fresh set of eyes, sorry guys. I think the filmmakers have become too close to the work to see its problems. I do respect the time and effort put into this movie, though.