User Reviews

Worst film i have seen in a long time throughly disappointed, i understand that they were being experimental in making this film but was dirt on the camera lens really for effect? They should of at least got the basics right in one car scene you can clearly see the camera man in the rear view mirror! To top all of that off its got a poor weak story line that doesn't deliver like it should. The main problem with the story is that it tries to be to big and to clever and relies on the narrative and when the actors only memorise the scene just before they act it, the narrative just cant hold the film up. I recommend you save your money and watch another film. If you want a good gangster film then watch pulp fiction.

I would like to call this movie the worst ever, except that this implies that it's actually a movie. Here's what it is: a character recites, in detail, what the plot is supposed to be (some crime plot, I believe it's a drug deal gone wrong - I barely remember). Then you see clips(READ: not actual SCENES, just clips) that pertain to what's just been described to you, set to music. This pattern continues throughout the "film" until it concludes. That's it. Looks like it might have cost $500 to make, assuming the filmmaker actually sprung for craft services or something.

Here is why this matters: I know someone who knows the filmmaker. He made $40,000 on this. How? A B distributor was trying to sell a crime film. Wal-Mart or Target or whoever the retailer was (I forget, again) felt the price was too high, so the distributor offered to make it a package deal - several crime films for that price. They agreed, so now the distributor needed to acquire some crime films to throw into the pot. He found this one, paid the filmmaker $40G's for the rights to his film, and that was it. The filmmaker turned a HUGE profit for garbage that involved almost no work.

If there was ever a good argument to become a B filmmaker, this is it.