Review: Carter (2009) [Reviewed By Clifford Kiyabu]

Directed by: Ryan Andrew Balas
Written by: Ryan Andrew Balas (writer) & Richard Buonagurio (co-writer) & Deirdre Herlihy (co-writer) & Julia Porter Howe (co-writer) & Mark Robert Ryan (co-writer)
Genre: Drama
MPAA: Not Rated
Released: 24 November 2009 (USA)
Starring: Julia Porter Howe, Mark Robert Ryan, Deirdre Herlihy, Ryan Andrew Balas, Joe Berardi, Richard Buonagurio.

Plot: After vowing he’d kill himself at the age of 25 if he was not married by 23. Jebadiah Sminch is in love with Carter the only woman who completes him; however he is only three days away from his 25th birthday and still unmarried. Will Jebadiah stick to vow or not?

Review: 6/10

The Story is about: When Jebadiah was 17 he vowed to kill himself when he turned 25 if he wasn't married by the time he was 23. This film takes place three days before his 25th birthday. Jeb is in love with Carter, but unmarried. Now he must make the hardest decision of his life; be with the woman he loves or carry forward with his pact.

My Thoughts: While young at heart, most people are so egger to grow up that they allow their childhood to past them by. How sad it is to see people, who spent so much time trying to grow up that they never enjoyed their childhood to the fullest. Such regrets live on with most individuals for years to come.

Have you ever made a pact? Sure you have, we’ve all made a pact of some sort in our lives, may it be a pact to lost some of that belly fat we gained over the holidays, or one at the beginning of the new year to change something about your lifestyle. Pacts are more common than most would think. But what if someone were to make a pact with themselves that would ultimately result in their own demise? That’s where the film Carter comes into play. The film is widely scaled with the overall premise of wanting to re-live that spark of the past, and feeling the awful regret of losing the dream. The film Carter centralizes itself around Jebadiah Sminch (Played by Mark Robert Ryan) a man who made a pact with himself as a teenager that if he didn’t get married by the age of 23 he was going to kill himself on his 25 birthday, the only problem is he has found someone who makes him happy. So now he’s torn between either following through with the pact or stick with the good thing he’s got going with the woman he loves. Now I know what you’re thinking; if the main character the film is surrounded around is called “Jebadiah” than where the heck did the title name “Carter” come from? Well that’s a simple question to answer, because Carter (Played by Julia Porter Howe) is the name of Jebadiah’s girlfriend who loves him so much that it’s killing her deep down inside knowing that though he loves her, he’s too honor bound to his own pact that he’s willing to throw away the love they have just so he can remain true to himself. The question is though, what will he decide in the end, will it be a happen ending or a bitter sweet one?

What can I say? For a lack of better words, the film is a bit of a mixed bag for me. Though I liked some of the aspects the film presented, there were a lot of problems there as well. As a pro, the film presented this fantastic opening which introduced the female lead in a silent, yet forth telling scene where though she had no verbal lines, her overall body language communicated her intentions very well. The relationship between the two main characters on screen works well at times but also hurts the storyline too; their unconditional love on screen definitely does not go unnoticed. However, while their unconditional love proves to be atmospheric at times and gives the viewers a sense of realism, it lacks intimacy on a grand scale. I waited and waited for something intimate to happen between the two of them to convince me that they were believably in love, but upon waiting for this to happen throughout the film’s course I was left unsold on the idea and instead keep getting the overwhelming “just friends” vibe from them. Even as I watched them kiss each other on screen it felt, in my opinion, forced. The other problem I had often at times was the dialogue. Nothing personal against the dialogue in the film, but the way it’s projected on screen comes off rather weak at times. I really wanted to enjoy this film as much as I did the last two installments in the One Way or Another Productions “Naked Series”, and to some extent I did enjoy a part of it. But in my opinion the film just didn’t quite live up to the hype I felt from the previous films.

As for the acting: Julia Porter Howe was great, I loved her take on the opening very much. The opening scene with her was fantastic because she managed to express so much in her emotions and body language without so much as saying a single word, which is a great talent to have believe it or not. However, there were moments throughout the film where her performance in general was how should I say, rocky? It’s not that her performance was bad after the beginning of the, it‘s just that there were times where I felt that her potential was being held back for some reason. Mark Robert Ryan was not that impressive to me, in fact I had the hardest time following his performance in the film due to the mustache. Yep you read right, that mustache of his was just one big distraction for me. So much that I had to re-watch a few scenes over just to focus better [Laughs] but it’s because of this that I honestly could not find the compassion in me to feel for his character in his most darkest hour. Deirdre Herlihy was pretty okay, her performance was slightly better in this than when I last caught a glimpse of her acting style in the film “Uptown” earlier this year. Perhaps this means she’s making great improvements? Either way she stands to be adequate in this. Aside from directing this film Ryan Andrew Balas does a pretty decent job in his performance, though I will admit that I have yet to see any of his other works to really place a true judgment.

Final Say: Carter was a very interesting concept of a film. Something you don’t see too often in movies now days. However the concept of the film may have intrigued me, I still had a hard time following this film close to heart. I really wanted to like this film, I really did because the overall concept is very alluring and yet, the film is not. If only it had a few changes done to it perhaps this film could have lived up to the promise it presented.

Copyright 2009 TCWreviews.com
All Rights Reserved

Review: Ex Occultus: Badge of Langavat (one-shot)

Written by: Robert James Russell & Jesse Young
Art Work: Sandra Lanz
Colors: Tim McDonley
Publisher: Saint James Comics
Released: Jul 21, 2009

Plot: 1864, Scotland - Francis Wakefield and fellow occult hunter Fergus Duff find themselves investigating the disappearance of children from nearby villages. Their hunt leads them to a forgotten castle belonging to a family of undead, cursed werewolves who have nefarious plans for the taken.

Review: B+

My Thoughts: It’s a well known fact that I’m a hug fan of the graphic arts (Sophisticated Slang for Comic Book Nerd!) and have been one for as long as I could remember . Like most readers I indulged into the many timeless classic adventures of the many popular superhero titles like: SPIDER-MAN, BATMAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, THORE, and the beloved Uncanny X-MEN and so forth on a weekly bases. Many of which have become the typical starter guide for any reader willing to dive into the comic realm, and in some cases these simple titles are considered by some as the holy bible of comics. But over the last few years I have come to love the not so well known, a genre of comics that’s set for a more mature reading audience like: THE BOYS, FABLES, and THE WALKING DEAD, titles like these are not for young readers and should never ever be recommended for such.

This turn in taste of genre has also given me the aired taste for the indie side of comics, which evidently lead me to Ex Occultus: The Badge of Langavat, which is written by Robert James Russell & Jesse Young of Saint James Comics and art work by Sandra Lanz. This comic is on it’s own level of dark storytelling that proves to be breathtaking and very entertaining in it‘s own unique way to say the least. The plot is based on a real legend from Scotland and follows two Victorian era investigators, Fergus Duff and Francis Wakefield traveling to the Island of Benbecula in the Outer Hebrides to find out if the legendary werewolves are responsible for the kidnapping of children in the local area. As the story goes on the pair finds the werewolves’ hideout, hoping to have the upper hand over them by catching them off their guard Fergus and Wakefield is quickly mistaken and falls into a trap which immediately thrown into the fight head on against an entire clan of blood thirsty werewolves looking to both Fergus and Wakefield as their next meal. armed to the teeth with pistils filed with silver bullets, a pair of silver chainmail and the usage of a couple of fairy-like creatures. Have the werewolves finally met their match, or could this easily become the last adventure that both Fergus and Wakefield will have?

I at first didn’t hold much stock in the comic, mainly because the story is told as a one shot issue, and usually one shots mostly work only after the readers have learned a little bit about the characters in question (I mean you wouldn’t dive into a Fantastic Four one shot issue without having some basic knowledge of Victor Von Doom’s hatred for Reed Richards right?) most tales like this are usually set in a mini series event with the story unfolding over the course of multiple issues so that the individual characters are given room for development so that there‘s a more three dimensional sense to them, with that said I was a little worried at first that the story would be cut short due to it’s length, however this was not the case as the story was fairly decent which clearly shows that Robert James Russell & Jesse Young did their home work which I commend them for, for bringing their own original uniqueness, and for deciding to write about one of the less popular folklores.

Upon doing my own little research on such before writing this review I barely could find any literature at my disposal online except for a few mentions here and there, meaning some heavy research was done on their part while trading nether action over story and viscera. Though I will say that the story doesn’t go without problems, the biggest problem I had laid with the development of the main character’s Fergus and Wakefield, because the story is 100% devoted to the comic’s plot there simply isn’t much background for the readers to appreciate the main characters, which I blame on the length of the comic, but to an extent this is in fact forgivable on the motion that it‘s better to have one problem with any story than to have two or three problems, am I right or what? The art work which is done by Sandra Lanz was pretty decent from where I‘m standing. The lovely blend of gray-tones in black and white which gives it this noir setting that works beautifully. Though there are some rough edges to some of her art work, but all that can easily be forgiven and forgotten when you stand back for a moment and see that her art work really does paint this story into a visual reality that is satisfactory.

Final Say: Ex Occultus: The Badge of Langavat is defiantly something worth checking out even if you’re not all that into comics, and though it has it‘s rough edges here and there, there’s a lot of promise here and room for improvement in the near future that shows this is a comic that’s here to stay.

Copyright 2009 TCWreviews.com
All Rights Reserved

Review: 2012 (2009) [Reviewed By Clifford Kiyabu]

Directed by: Roland Emmerich
Written by: Roland Emmerich (written by) & Harald Kloser (written by)
Genre: Action / Drama / Sci-Fi
MPAA: Rated PG-13 for intense disaster sequences and some language.
Released: 13 November 2009 (USA)
Starring: John Cusack, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Amanda Peet, Oliver Platt, Thandie Newton, Danny Glover and Woody Harrelson

Plot: An epic adventure about a global cataclysm that brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.

Review: 5/10

The Story is about: Centuries ago, the Mayans left us their calendar, with a clear end date and all that it implies. By 2012, we'll know -- we were warned. Never before has a date in history been so significant to so many cultures, so many religions, scientists, and governments. A global cataclysm brings an end to the world and tells of the heroic struggle of the survivors.

My Thoughts: Why are people so infatuated with the idea of the end of the world? Better yet, why are people always contemplating if the end may or may not be in their lifetime? Perhaps it’s because people want the answers to what cannot be so easily answered, or perhaps the majority in this world (even if they won‘t admit it) is as wickedly cynical as I (yes folks I too wonder when the end will be!) It does however baffles me sometimes when I hear people bring up the conversation of whether or not they’d be alive to see the world come to an end. I have no problem with talking about such, as it does in fact amuse me quite a bit and arouses my imagination with the infinite possibilities of how the dramatic end will be like, and if man will go out loudly with a bang or silently drift off into the quiet slumber of history, but what interests me is that the majority of people in the world would prefer not knowing when exactly they’d meet their maker (provided they have a spiritual based faith) compared to the small minority of people out there who would most certainly want to know when their own time was approaching, yet this same majority of people who prefer to live life impaired from the knowledge of how many years they have left is in usually the most curious of the bunch as to wanting to know when all life as we know it was coming to it’s end. *cough, cough!* Hypocrisy! *cough, cough!*

Seriously though, I don’t know how or when the end will happen, I just know that history has shown everything has both a beginning and an end, and though the discussion over our beginning has been debated upon for as long as man was able to count the number of fingers and toes on his hands and feet, it’s only a matter of time before our species bears witnesses to it’s inevitable end, and I, however, believe that when humanity’s chapter comes to a close life will go on without us and the world will continue to spin around the sun without us on it’s back.

Director Roland Emmerich, the man behind such notable big-budget popcorn flicks such as: 10,000 BC (2008), The Day After Tomorrow (2004), Godzilla (1998) and Independence Day (1996), brings us his latest film, 2012 (2009). A disaster flick to end all disaster flicks, and at the same time, becomes it’s own disaster! The film’s plot is loosely structured around the premise of the end of the 13th baktun cycle of the ancient Mesoamerican (Mayan) long count calendar, the film explores the idea of “What if” the Mayans and other past civilizations really did foresee this day coming thousands of years ahead of their time. The film is without a doubt an orgasmic spectacle for these viewing eyes, with gorgeous cinematography and pulse pounding adrenaline fueled scenes being thrown at you almost nonstop leaving you almost breathless, one would normally argue that this modern-day Noah’s ark tale would no doubt be the blockbuster popcorn film of the year. However I cannot stress enough how much this fails on a grand scale. For one thing it’s logic should not be taken to heart, because the illogical conclusions this film runs on not only undermines the original Mayan prophecy, but also blast’s viewers with false incoherent and somewhat laughable scare tactics of how the world will come to an end on 2012! and how there is little next to nothing we can do to prevent it, if you ask me it reminds me a heck of a lot like the Y2K incident (Speak up folks, who here overstocked their homes with useless survival supplies for that humiliating event?) when you take into account all the mindless action and needless awkward comedic moments thrown around in 2012, you can’t help but feel that Michael Bay’s Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009) was a masterpiece plot-wise compared to this, and believe me that’s saying a lot coming from me.

But to be fair, 2012 does have it’s fair share of redeeming moment, I’ll give it that much, the film manages to capture it’s audiences at quite a few tear-jerking points that will no doubt have you overwhelmed with emotions. One of these emotional wrecking scenes in particular revolved around the characters Harry Helmsley (Mankuma) and Tony Delgatto (Segal), these two men are your typical odd couple-like characters who are enjoying their twilight years lounging aboard a cruise liner as jazz performers, keep in mind that their storyline plays no significant role to the film’s overall plot, but rather a side story that is only a fraction of what’s going on in the film, however their screen time manages to manipulate the audiences into feeling a great deal of empathy for them from the get-go, meanly because it shows that their chance of survival in the film is next to zero, leaving them S.O.L. and J.W.F. (S*** Out of Luck and Jolly-Well F*****). To make matters worst, their only connection in the film is that Harry is the father of American geologist Adrian Helmsmen (Ejiofor). Other than that I felt no sympathy for the majority of the characters that bite the big one, meanly because it’s hard to feel anything for them when they are so poorly developed as two dimensional characters. To be honest, what I found most disappointing with 2012 is the fact I (FYI, not socking one bit, but I was not the only one in the theater reacting to the film like this) ended up finding myself rolling my eyes with despair at every sad attempt at humor and chuckling my butt off at the more serous of moments in the film.

As for the acting: Well what can I say, despite the slew of A-Listers, acting isn’t this film’s strong point, in fact it often plays out as it’s weakest. John Cusack has always been a favorite of mine, and often at times I’ve been a bit bias towards his films, and yet his presence couldn’t even win me over in this than alone save the film. However he does mange to pull off a somewhat okay performance, however don’t hold your breath because it’s defiantly not him at his best. Generally I like Amanda Peet because she’s a fairly talented actress that can make you easily laugh or cry and no matter what role she’s in she always has that gentle sweetheart look on her face that easily wins people over, and it saddens me to see that the chemistry between her and Cusack was greatly absent in this film, which is even more so disappointing because Peet and Cusack have don very well together in the chemistry department in past films like: Identity (2003) and Martian Child (2007) just to name a few, but it seems that this was not the case with 2012. Chiwetel Ejiofor was fantastic in his performance despite my displease with the acting in general, though I will say I felt the romantic courting that was being set up between Ejiofor and Thandie Newton characters in the film was not only rushed, but did not at all feel the slightest bit believable.

Oliver Platt was not so bad, though at times I did feel a bit disappointed in his performance because here‘s an actor that normally co-stars in films that are somewhat decent, and even though he at times star in films that are just down right embarrassing to watch (can somebody please explain to me why the film “Year One”? (2009)) than alone acting in it, he still manages to pull his charm into what ever role he‘s in, however this was not the case with 2012 as I found his classy charm was gravely absent. Woody Harrelson is well known for playing controversial roles in past which for better or worse I’ve always found very amusing to see, his role in 2012 is yet another one of those head turning roles yet, which doesn’t cease to amaze me, because it seems the man love to be “that” guy in every film I see him in, is his performance good? Well that debatable, if you were to ask me it seemed like he was just being himself in the film [Insert pun here]. Last but certainly not least, actor Danny Glover, the man who graced the big-screen with his signature phrase “I'm too old for this shit!” was the biggest of all disappointment, why? Because he gave such a dull performance in the role of President Thomas Wilson that he left me unsold, and believe me, being a hug fan of his work over the years I was very disappointed. George Segal and Blu Mankuma were among the few in this film who I enjoyed performance-wise. I could go on and on about the rest of the cast but I won’t dare bore everyone who reads this to death.

Final Say: Despite my feelings toward this film not having much a chance of being a major critical success among film critics like myself long before it’s realest, I took the high road and withheld my Judgement and went into the film with hope and optimism, I hate to play devil's advocate here, but sadly I told you so, the film was just as much as it was expected of itself, a mindless disaster film that’s only purpose is to serve one’s fears and nothing else and believe me it more often than it should it fails at that too! If one is still curious to see this disaster of a film than I recommend you do the courteous thing and check your brain at the door first. Watch at your own risk!

Copyright 2009 TCWreviews.com
All Rights Reserved

Review: Law Abiding Citizen (2009) [Reviewed By Clifford Kiyabu]

Directed by: F. Gary Gray
Written by: Kurt Wimmer (written by)
Genre: Crime / Drama / Thriller
MPAA: Rated R for strong bloody brutal violence and torture, a scene of rape, and pervasive language.
Released: 16 October 2009
Starring: Jamie Foxx, Gerard Butler, Colm Meaney, Bruce McGill, Leslie Bibb, Michael Irby, Gregory Itzin, Regina Hall, Emerald-Angel Young, Christian Stolte, Annie Corley, Richard Portnow, Viola Davis, Michael Kelly, Josh Stewart, Brooke Stacy Mills, Ksenia Hulayev.

Plot: A frustrated man decides to take justice into his own hands after a plea bargain sets one of his family's killers free. He targets not only the killer but also the district attorney and others involved in the deal.

Review: 8/10

The Story is about: Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler) a brilliant inventor orchestrates a series of high-profile murders that grip the city of Philadelphia - all from inside his jail cell. The prosecutor assigned to his case Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) realizes he is the only one who can end the reign of terror.

My Thoughts: There’s a saying in show business; “it's not what you know, it's who you know!” which sadly is at times the inconvenient truth that is the business. Is it fair? No, but what are you going to do about it, business is business right? Well how about a different saying that is used in the legal system but with the same meaning behind it that is a frightening one to hear “It’s not what you know, it what you can prove in court.” This is a very sobering thing to hear, because the thought that an innocent person may take the rap for something they were not really at fault while the guilty party walks free is something no one in this great country wants to hear. But just like the industry, business is business and what are you going to do about it?

As depressing as that may sound to some I sat down to watch a film in which someone actually does something about this easily corruptible legal system. From director F. Gary Gray (director of The Italian Job (2003) and The Negotiator (1998)) and Writer/Producer Kurt Wimmer (Writer of Street Kings (2008) and Equilibrium (2002)) comes Law Abiding Citizen, a film that dives deep into more than your average revenge flick, but proves to be a rollercoaster ride into the mind of psychological mastermind that packs more punches than a bare brawl! Clyde Shelton (Played by Gerard Butler) was a mild mannered husband and loving father who had it all, but on one unfortunate night everything he ever loved was taken from him in a moment of despicable violence. After surviving a horrific home invasion which brought him close to death and witnessing his wife and daughter raped and murdered in front of him, all he desired was to see these men tried for the crimes they committed, and even though they may be a chance they could walk free due to a lack of evidence he would still be happy knowing they got put through the system accordingly. However when you’ve got a power-hungry attorney who is more out for his own personal gain by trying to maintain a high conviction rate. The odds of getting what you want are most likely not going to be in the cards. After one of the men who killed his family walks free from the death penalty, Shelton feels he’s been wronged by the system that was built to bring justice to those who seek it, and now seeks to avenge his family by killing the one who got away, as well as all those in the legal system who allowed it to happen. What I most liked about the film is the fact it blurs the lines between good and evil and straight-out anarchy. It’s unforgiving and never lets up for a single moment.

Though Gerard Butler’s character, Clyde Shelton, is seen as the film’s antagonist while Jamie Foxx’s character, Nick Rice, is considerably seen as the protagonist of the story, anyone with a single bit of a conscience can see that its complete nonsense to chose a side in this film, nor can you truly categorize either of them as such. Though Nick Rice is considered the “good guy,” his actions in the beginning of the film as well as throughout can be deemed as questionable due to the fact he’d rather take a small win and let one of the criminals walk free than nothing at all, which serves his hunger for power and personal gain within the system. But as the film goes you begin to feel remorse for him as he witnesses his friends and colleagues start dying one by one. Shelton, a man who is considered the villain of the story can’t really be seen as a full fledged “Bad guy” because you feel a great deal for him after he loses his family, and thus you sympathize for him. Overall the film’s two main characters can be seen more as couple of unfortunate people who was thrown into a predicament that neither really deserved. Does the film have problems? Sure it does. One of the main problems I had dealt mostly with the editing with the film. The scene in which Shelton is escorted outside the prison to have a privet conversation with Rice was great scene, but a poorly edited one at that, in the beginning of the scene we see Shelton getting roughed up by Rice, and he’s got blood coming out of his mouth and on his face. However in the very next moment he doesn’t have a single drop of blood on him at all. This was very frustrating for me, and I wished they’d have never edited it that why. Aside from that I didn’t have any real problems with the film.

As for the acting: Gerard Butler was fantastic, he’s manage to prove his worth as an actor time and time again with films like “RocknRolla,” Nim's Island,” “P.S. I Love You” and “300”. His performance is nothing sort of brilliance! And he continues to show this in Law Abiding Citizen. Jamie Foxx is an actor that has gained great respect from me over the years. It wasn’t long ago I used to see him as a C-List comedian and a hack in the acting department. However that has seriously change for me over the years, after watching him give stellar performances one after another in films like “Collateral,” “Ray,” “Jarhead,” “Dreamgirls,” “The Kingdom” and “The Soloist”. It’s intriguing to think it wasn’t long ago he was such a terrible actor, and now today it’s very much the opposite. I was never a Regina Hall fan, mainly because I didn’t care for her lackluster performance in the “Scary Movie” films, as well as her inability to be humorous in them. However I got my chance to see her act in a serious role for a change. And believe me when I say: not only was it great, but it was the first time I saw her put hard effort into her performance. Emerald-Angel Young did a pretty decent and adequate job in her performance. Acting alongside Foxx and Hall as their daughter in the film worked fantastically. Christian Stolte and Josh Stewart did a fine job in their brief roles as the film’s real villains. From the get-go the viewers are put in a situation of wanting to just hate these two in the most unforgiving manner, that when their grizzly demise comes to pass you’ll be cheering it on. Stolte and Stewart were outstanding. Other notable mentions in the film go to Colm Meaney, Bruce McGill and Leslie Bibb who are magnificent in this.

Final Say: Law Abiding Citizen was a fantastic film from start to finish. Though the film has its faults, and mild plot holes, you can’t help but appreciate this film’s fine quality for being blunt and unforgiving. I highly recommend!

Copyright 2009 TCWreviews.com
All Rights Reserved

Review: Zorg and Andy (2009) [Reviewed By Clifford Kiyabu]

Directed by: Guy Davis
Written by: V.Z. Montengo (Screenplay)
Genre: Comedy / Horror
MPAA: Not Rated
Released: 2009 (USA)
Starring: Scott Ganyo, Kate Rudd , Jennifer Wilkens, Sally Weatherston, Trevor Fanning, Ben Ayres, Nick Kraynak.

Plot: Andy (Ganyo) an undergraduate who’ll must recover an idol that was stolen from him after it was placed with him to be cleaned, he’ll go up against a mysterious woman killing anyone and everyone who knows about the idol, a cult that wants it for themselves, and if that wasn't enough already, trying to win the girl. Can Andy pull it all off?

Review: 5/10

The Story is about: Perpetual undergraduate Andy has one last chance to keep his financial aid: a work-study job at the mysterious Kungsbaden Museum. After a beautiful stranger steals an ancient fertility idol in his care, Andy sets out into the night to recover it. In the process, he discovers that his idyllic campus is home to a network of bloodthirsty pagan cults, all of whom are fighting over the idol.

My thoughts: Today’s modern moviegoer will spend their time looking for the next best thing in film. The ever so Oscar worthy film or the next big popcorn flick to see, because anything less is just icing on the cake. This of course is where I stand at odds with my own generation, because they don’t know how to appreciate the fine quality of a classy B-Movie. Then again most of the modern movie going community didn’t spend their nights staying up into the wee early morning hour watching marathons of cheesy B-films like I did growing up. Which of course is why you could say that it’s because of this that I’ve learned to see pass the simple qualities of visual filmmaking that is only skin deep.

Zorg and Andy is a film that purposely sets itself up as a B-style movie. Because it’s not trying to be the next big hit, but rather a cheap check your brain at the door thrill! This is a form of moviemaking that is at times forgotten and unappreciated. The film follows Andy, a perpetual undergraduate who screws up time and time again and never seems to get a break. And when he’s down to just one last chance to keep his financial aid he gets a job working for the Kungsbaden Museum where his first assignment is to clean and prepare a small idol that just arrived, however little is known of the idol, other than the fact a mysterious woman is killing anyone and everyone who comes in contact with it, and to make matters worst an on campus cult has stolen it. Now it’s up to Andy to recover the idol and uncover the secrets behind it. As cheesy as it may sound, it’s actually kind of entertaining for those looking to checkout a film that doesn’t require much out of you but a set of eyes and an hour of your time.

Where I appreciated the film for its cheesiness, it does however have a lot of problems that I had with it. The big problem I had with the film was that, though the film’s premise is to be as much a B-movie as it can be, it overdoes itself at times with over the top jokes that instead of being delivered in a humorous manner instead hits the viewing audience as being rushed and amateurish which serves more as a weakness to the film rather than keeping with the theme of the genre. But the biggest weak point stands to be the film’s runtime, which is only 62 minutes from start to finish. Though I have fairly enjoyed short films in recent history, Zorg and Andy’s Achilles’ heel seems to be the fact it lacks character development. Because the film does not allow the character’s to be more three dimensional we are left unable to have any compassion or will for these characters. Though I will admit that despite me being displeased with the film in general I will say that the film does have its moments of enjoyment. Sadly though, these moments of enjoyment never expand into becoming anything more than just moments. And because of this, no matter how much I tried, it simply was not my cup of tea.

As for the acting: Well what can I say, the acting was very problematic for me. First there is Scott Ganyo, who I could not get into liking his character, nor could I find an ounce of myself to enjoy his performance. Kate Rudd was probably one of the only performances I fairly enjoyed, though there are times in the film where I felt she could have done much better. Jennifer Wilkens was okay, except for the part where her character annoyed the heck out of me. If it was meant to be like that than she did a good job, otherwise I was not enjoying her on-screen time. I was not at all thrilled with Sally Weatherston performance, mainly because she didn’t sale me on the character’s attitude all that much. Last but certainly not least there’s Nick Kraynak, who plays “The Pig” was probably the most interesting thing about the film, because the actors spend the whole course of the film with a pig’s mask on. Sadly though as much as I thought it was fascinating I found it rather weak on the fact there is no explanation as to why this person where’s the mask or a punch line to it assuming it was meant to be a joke that is.

Final Say: Zorg and Andy was an interesting film with a lot of promise to become a cult hit but ends up missing it’s target half the time due to it’s failed attempts at trying to be funny. Nothing personal against the film or filmmaker, but a comedy not being humorous is in my opinion, a deal breaker.

Copyright 2009 TCWreviews.com
All Rights Reserved