Just like everybody else, I was very excited about this movie when they first announced it: a sharp and funny cast (Danny McBride, Jeese Eisenberg) and Ruben Fleischer directing (director of Zombieland). But after I read the reviews of this movie, I became skeptical. But I needed to see this myself. And I’m not surprised that the critics were brutal. But then again, they’re critics. They’re supposed to be brutal.

Yes, there are some disadvantages to “30 Minutes or Less.” First off, Aziz Ansari’s acting in this movie came off weak compared to his co-stars like Jesse Eisenberg, Danny McBride, and Nick Swardson (not to mention the surprising cameo of Fred Ward). But it didn’t mean Aziz was, in any way, less comedic. He still brought his portion of comedic element into this film. Michael Diliberti, screenwriter for 30 Minutes or Less, did a good job for the most part. The characters he wrote out were very funny and likable but there was plenty of room to make this movie much funnier.
Ruben Fleischer’s direction in this film felt very fitting. His chemistry with Jesse Eisenberg is very golden (as it shows on the screen). He manages to squeeze in pretty shots. And after watching Zombieland, I don’t expect anything less of him.

Overall, the film is funny, ridiculous, well directed and adult-oriented (please, if you’re bringing your kids, especially your crying babies, it’s better if you wait for this on DVD). But there is the feeling that your wallet gets cheated if you paid to watch this full price. The movie has a lot of potential, but it doesn’t quite deliver, especially of those who follow the cast and crew religiously.

Rating: 2.5/5
How many times would I watch this again? Maybe 10-20 times in a lifetime.

The story behind Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About His Father is director Kurt Kuenne focusing on the murder of his best friend, Andrew Bagby; shooting one last movie together by collecting personal testimonies of all of his friends and family. Then the story takes a turn for itself when it’s revealed that the murderer of Andrew Bagby (his crazy ex-girlfriend) is pregnant with Andrew’s only baby. Now the new direction of the film is to show Zachary (Andrew’s baby) just what kind of man his father was.

One of the many things I was surprised about this film was the amount of footage and researched into this film. Kurt Kuenne’s sporadic (and often times, distracting) editing at first made me skeptical about the film as a whole. But as the film starts to unfold, the editing is done like a thriller. And it does not fail. Although the editing (and directing) of the film had more potential to be better it doesn’t hinder the driving motive and emotion behind this film. And as you watch the film, just when you think it can’t get any more crazy, it does. But that’s something you’ll have to watch to find out.

How does one summarize a man’s life into one movie? Then watch Dear Zachary. Just don’t expect to be filled with happiness and sunshine. This film will linger in your head (and for most of our hearts) for a long time.

Rating: 5 out of 5 stars
How Many Times Will I Watch This in My Life?: Probably once a year. But not in the bad way. It’s hard to watch a movie this jam packed with emotion and anger.

Of course, I don’t speak for every film goer. Who knows, maybe people loved Titanic II or Dear John (Why Richard Jenkins, why?!).

But one thing for certain, we can learn a lot from these type of films.

1) How to Write Better:
In the majority of all these films, they write everything that film schools and scholars have told us to avoid: the stereotypical characters, the cliche, & etc. Their writing reminds me of what to avoid and how to improve. Instead of describing the wealthy character with long blond hair, Gucci suits, and four “beautiful” women around his arms, why not write one that looks normal? What’s normal? Depends on what you want your rich character to be.

2) You have a Low-Budget (Deal with it!):
I understand if you want to be the next Michael Bay and  blow up half of a city with the help of excessive explosives and CGI (“it’s for the sake of art”) but, seriously, $150,000 ain’t going to take you far.  Know your budget. Comprehend where your budget can take you. Some directors think they can make an epic film with a low budget. And some actually do succeed! The Duplass Brothers’ Baghead was shot with a micro-budget and a very clever and original idea that went along with it.

3) Self-Esteem Issues:
Sometimes, watching a bad movie is needed to help boost up confidence and self-esteem (for all you film students and 50+ years aspiring filmmakers).

-Luke

Much appreciated,
CASTNREEL, Inc.

Baghead
Directed by Jay and Mark Duplass
Written by Jay and Mark Duplass
Starring Greta Gerwig, Elise Muller, Steve Zissis, and Rose Partridge.

“What is Baghead? And who’s Greta Gerwig?” is probably what you’re thinking to yourself. Well to start off, Greta Gerwig, is becoming a rising star. Not as fast as we’d all like to see but fast enough that she’s landing roles. Star of Greenburg and the the upcoming Arthur(with Russell Brand) she has been dubbed as the “Queen of Mumblecore,” a new genre that has been created within the past decade. But before I continue on with the review of Baghead, you’re probably questioning in your head: What is Mumblecore? (Don’t worry, I did too the first time)

Mumblecore, or at least my take on it, is filmmaking with a depressingly low budget, a set of your friends (actors or not), and an improvised script (or at least 50-70% improvised). You’d think that that would be an accident gradually turning into a natural disaster, your probably right. But there are a couple of talented filmmakers that are pushing this genre forward: Andrew Bujalski, Lynn Shelton, and the Duplass Brothers.

Why am I reviewing this film? Let alone, why is this review 3 years late? (Baghead was premiered in 2008) My response? To make your aware that Mumblecore exists and, whether we like it or not, are going to make room for it. Think of Mumblecore as a cousin within the family of film genres. You will either think he’s cool for presenting himself as honest and realistic (Sleepover!) OR you will resent it for being so looking so cheap and annoying (Mom, I’m not going to share the same room as him, he looks like amateur).

You think that reviewing a Mumblecore film would be hard? It is. You can’t honestly expect me to say “Yeah, the visuals were garbage. Next time spend the extra money on it.” But what sticks out for Baghead is that The Duplass Brothers play with the cheap visual with the overall theme and storyline. Baghead is about 4 actors that decide to write a cheap horror film about a man with a bag over his head. Then things get weird when strange things are occurring around them (missing car battery, mysterious silhouette visits). It was a very interesting take on the low-budget horror films (let alone spoofing it to a dark comedy). The theme and idea for the film is great but the writing was a bit weak at times. But the “weak” writing, for all I know, is probably done on purpose to add on to the comedic tone. Great performances from Greta Gerwig (for playing her role as Michelle so naturally and true) and Elise Muller (playing Michelle: a very loquacious and jealous (ex-)girlfriend of Matt, played by Ross Partridge).

Mumblecore is here to stay. And Baghead is a shining example.

Reviewed by Luke S.

How Many Times Would I Watch This Again?: Probably 3-4 more times.

Charlie Kaufman: The script I’m starting, it’s about flowers. Nobody’s ever done a movie about flowers before. So, so there are no guidelines…
Donald Kaufman: What about “Flowers for Algernon”?
Charlie Kaufman: Well, that’s not about flowers. And it’s not a movie.
Donald Kaufman: Ok, I’m sorry, I never saw it.

“What if a pill could make you rich and powerful?”

I was a bit skeptical when I was assigned to watch this film (since this is the first Castnreel movie review ever). I was expecting to review some Paul Giamatti film surrounded by film scholars and elders that can recall smoking on planes and pay almost fifteen dollars for a ticket for a small theater. But instead I saw a stoned Bradley Cooper suckling on the success thats intended for stock brokers or people with stronger drugs. I was packed with a theater full of twentysomething year olds (and one quiet baby), paying six dollars for my ticket, while I watch Bradley Cooper and Robert De Niro dish it out on screen as I stuff my face with nachos. It was just not fair.

First off, I would like to say that the visuals are something to look for. Director Neil Burger (The Illusionist, Interview With the Assassin) has a “clear” vision of how to capture the intensity of a stoner and put it on film. The opening credit sequence is something to really look forward to. A long (and  tediously-edited) one shot of New York City gives a great foreshadowing of the visuals that are more to come. But unfortunately, the visuals are most of what’s carrying the movie along. The movie starts him as something that needed an incredible compare/contrast element; he needed an occupation that made him poor and pathetic: a writer. Then he gets a hold of a pill and next thing for him he’s ascending up the tower of success. But on the way up the rest of the film is filled up with pointless chase scenes (that had poor motives behind the action) and Cooper’s voice telling us what he “feels” and “thinks” which isn’t necessarily a bad thing since it is a drug movie. And most book-adapted films I’ve seen lately have voice-overs (probably trying to capture the true essence of the novel).

And I’m sure there are a lot of Bradley Cooper fans (and Robert De Niro fans for that matter) out there thinking to themselves: “Why would he act in the movie like this? He’s better than that! He did Hangover.” I think it must be because critically-acclaimed independent roles won’t help finance the comfort that brings to him when he rides his private jets. First class will never be the same again…

How Many Times Would I Watch This Again?: Probably one more time. On DVD. With the mute button on.
Reviewed by Luke S.

Staff’s Thought on the Movie:
-Peter: Why was he a writer? The information does not contribute to the story. (except the fact that you could compare what he becomes at the end of the movie to a writer)
Final words: Cheap Script Writing (CSW)

If some of you feel that my words don’t do the movie justice (or vice versa) tell Castnreel by using comments!