Reviews

8 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Gem of a first film with trend-setting technology
30 January 2007
Warning: Spoilers
I saw "Stealing Martin Lane" at a pre-release screening in NYC last night and rate it "eight stars" based on its story and technology. It is an original and entertaining comedy following an aging drummer and his band trying to Rock and Roll their way through real life. It is also the first Indie production to validate digital film for citizen-filmmakers. This is exhilarating news to the tens of thousands of Indie and YouTube producers, and ultimately terrifying news to the Hollywood production community - but more on that later.

The film is a day-in-the-life comedy of a slacker drummer and his SoHo band "Young and Fabulous." Both are hard-driving rockers but a quarter-note shy of being true stars. The film follows the band as they bounce between gigs, day jobs, drug rehab and girlfriends with tongue-in-chic and quirky-good dialog. Although their kick-ass music is usually a backdrop to an engaging story of dues and deliverance, the songs themselves are hilarious throwaways like "Daddy's Money," "Your Fifteen Minutes Are Over," and "I Get More Pussy Than Frank Sinatra." By the end of the film, we are really hoping these Glammers either get their butts signed or some Wendy from the real world shows up to rescue the boys from their Neverland lives. A twisted, non-Hollywood ending delivers neither but still tidies things up nicely.

First-Timer Jimmy Furino wrote and directed this tour de force showing a strong ear for snappy and intelligent dialog and a great eye for the noir visuals of New York nightlife. Furino, who also plays his lead character "Snarl," nails the role with the precision of someone who has lived that life. Furino has great chops and cool to spare, bringing a lot of depth to the story's floundering lead. Veteran Dylan Barker also does well as the band's harried manager, but the film's standout acting comes from Isiah Whitlock Jr. as homeless man Harold "Chopper" Jones. Whitlock turns in a knowing performance that captures the daily grind of being homeless in New York and wins us over completely.

In a film about a New York Glam Band, it is fair to expect a lot of the sound track, and the film delivers big-time in that respect. The film rocks with simple but hardcore beats and insanely funny lyrics offering a nice counterpoint to the storyline and helping to keep the film's pace up. The soundtrack boils over with a great mix of New York Glam, Raunch, Rock and even Easy Listening. If there is an unsung hero here it is one of the film's composers, James Maresca, creator of the film's band "Young and Fabulous." Maresca has been writing catchy New York underground rockers dating back to the mothers of punk, the Sick F*cks, and his work shows this spit and polish. Furino is also a veteran song-smith and coyly slips several of his jazzier compositions in as background music.

"Stealing Martin Lane" is a solid first film that plays well on the big screen and is well worth a trek to a festival or theater this year. It is also clear that the technology behind this film will turn it into a film-school classic. It is the first feature shot with two off-the-shelf, high consumer grade (pro-sumer) camcorders and edited running both video streams on a home computer. Of course pro-sumer video Indies have been around since 2000. What is different here is camcorder quality, resolution and look is very close to film with pricing so low, filmmakers can easily work two cameras with astounding results.

All this means faster shoots, zero continuity problems, jump cuts or lack of scene coverage, better sound quality and a cleaner picture that translates well to theater screens. Since these new camcorders also offer spectacular video even under low light, it means better pictures without the cumbersome and expensive lighting gear that can tie up an entire city block on a Hollywood shoot. Assuming this film will eventually make it to DVD, here's hoping the producers include a making-of short to show their camera setups and dual-view editing techniques.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Joan of Arc (2005 TV Movie)
1/10
Rip-Off
24 July 2006
This film would be acceptable as an "extra" you might find on a real Hollywood DVD but never as a 60 minute, stand-alone film in general distribution. It does come with ballpark history and a nice combination of pan and scanned artwork for its countless voice-overs and some reasonable reenactments for Joan fans. For that I would give it a three.

What brings that to a one for me is using coy packaging to make the product seem like something it is not even in the ballpark with. Just think - this quickie production is probably in the under $50 thousand range, yet you get to pay the same for it as for Hollywood's latest $50 million epic when you rent it or (God forbid) buy it. This is not to put down indie or foreign filmmakers who put blood and soul into their work, or even some of the better television releases, but rather to remind us all that a fool and his money are soon parted.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Back To Manhattan - A Great First Film!
2 October 2004
Take a shot of Seinfield and Chapelle, throw in some Rat Pack and Godfather and you have newcomer Rob Reilly's comedy film 'Back To Manhattan.' The film is a very funny day-in-the-lives-of two loan sharks, Frankie and Paulie. They are genuine tough guys. Their repartee blisters paint and their hair is perfect. But bodies? Bullets? Moles? Hot Cars? Not in this film! And that is what makes this comedy of errors such fun.

Our anti-heroes take their sweet time waltzing through an ensemble film that twists and turns from Jersey and Queens to Manhattan. They are out to collect a late loan payment but in this film, it is not the destination that is important but the very funny trip along the way. Barely coasting along in a half-dead, gas-guzzling 1992 Dodge Spirit, they get burrito bombed, chased by a rabid pit bull, dissed by a retired hit-man, flummoxed by a wired Mets fan, hosed by car thieves, and where are their guns? In short, these guys get no respect but they don't seem worried. And that is where the easy fun and laughs are throughout this what-could- possibly-go-wrong-next film.

Frankie and Paulie, played to perfection by Eddie Sicoli and Paul Dunleavy, hold the film together with their comfortable performances and strong screen chemistry. They have an easy relationship that seems to be a perfect match for the film. You have seen guys like this in Brooklyn and Queens, slicking their hair and chasing the girls, but never on the screen with this kind panache. Michael MacKewice, Lora Pfeiffer, Justin Allen and Steve DeVito also do well with their roles as a wired Mets fan, his girlfriend and two petty crooks.

As far as the writing and directing, Rob Reilly is a gifted filmmaker. Rob has a great ear for dialogue and his script always rings true. His staging, details and understatement also payoff with some very funny material. Frankie's fifteen-minute blind date with a giant is priceless comedy, all done with dialog and reaction shots. There are also many times when other directors with less restraint would have played the comedy with broader strokes, but then the film wouldn't have its easy-going fun and charm that make it work so well.

And then there's the film's rocking sound track. It is clear this director feels music is just as important as his visuals. He uses it skillfully to weave transitions and punchlines together as well as reinforce the good time feeling of the film. The film uses the work of half a dozen Indie artists from New York to LA for a more raw feel.

According to the director who spoke at the NY International Independent Film and Video Festival, this film was done for $18,000. All I can say is WOW - I can't wait for Reilly's next film!

8 / 10
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Time Changer (2002)
1/10
PS
18 September 2004
Forgot, the director bemoans the fact he only had $800,000 to spend on "Time Changer." As a matter of fact that is about average for a TV movie and most low budget filmmakers are probably crying at the wasted effort. In the hands of a seasoned Indie filmmaker that money is enough for a dozen films. OK, part of this one was period so let's bring that down to half a dozen Indie films. And how about 1890? Notice Professors Carlisle and Anderson enter the barn with the time machine using a kerosene lantern and then turn up all of those beautiful electric lights? Lighting systems like that were still way in the future. And how about those four groovy plastic, servo controlled ray guns? The only way I can figure those anachronisms is that Professor Anderson probably did some shopping at Costco and Radio Shack while he was in the 21st century. My guess is he couldn't resist picking up a few generators, Quartz Iodide lights and of course the extruded plastic and servos he used to beef up the time machine. Sigh...
7 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Time Changer (2002)
1/10
Preacher Feature!
18 September 2004
Warning, this is not a "Film" but a poorly made "Christian Teleplay." How it got on the SciFi shelves of my local video store I will never know. I am sure that the people the film was made for will treasure it for its Sunday School didactics. For the unsuspecting though, this is a big shock. The same level of shock congregations would feel if Black Sabbath kicked the local minister out of his pulpit and performed an hour of slash and burn songs in a church. As far as the quality of the film itself, aside from wooden performances, woolly-headed writing and zero direction, how about 19th century theology scholars with a touch of the old Brooklyn accent!? Suffice it to say that this film is ONLY for the Christian youth market it was produced for. All others should look elsewhere for a well-crafted and entertaining 95 minutes.
12 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lost Treasure (2003)
Please Append To My Review
12 September 2004
I just found out that "Lost Treasure" was contracted and produced as an "HBO Original Feature" and that is why it looks like and ends like a Made-For-TV Movie. It is! Since there is no indication anywhere that this is not what most people would call a "film" (theatrical release) but rather a hasty "teleplay," it is clear the distributors are screwing with the buying and/or renting public. This should no more be on the same shelf with a major studio release than my home movies. Maybe the Home Entertainment industry should do a little self-regulation on entertainment classifications. I have no problems with presentations like "Lost Treasure" as long as I know what I am buying or renting or watching. Other then that, let the viewer beware...
14 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lost Treasure (2003)
Made For TV?
12 September 2004
I am fascinated by this film. It has Made-For-TV all over it, but there is way too much money on the screen for that. Others here have flat-out panned this film as a waste of time and questioned how films like this get made. I would like to ask what was the context of this film's production? It certainly could not have been done for a US theatrical release with the cast used, yet the money spent on production places this WAY out of the range of an Indie filmmaker. So, this means it was either contracted for a major cable release and foreign sales. But I can't find evidence of either. If anyone knows, I would love to hear the details. There are some valuable lessons in film distribution embedded here - if only someone will take us behind the scenes!

BTW - many ripped the effects as being out of character with the story and second rate. I agree with out-of-character but there was a ton of money in some of those effects. It is almost like someone bought the negative of a major but obscure foreign production and mapped a story around some of the major scenes in the "other" film. That would explain why an art museum would have drums of gas in the basement. It would also explain how the "big stuff" got into a film with such a low budget look and cast.
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Small Time Film...
19 October 2001
This would have made a perfect short if the film had ended with the cookie success. The lines and visual comedy were pretty funny here but everything goes way downhill afterwards. About this time I found myself fixing on Mr. Allen and the major mismatch between him and the rest of the cast. He is getting on in years and looked out of place with the way younger cast. Also his complaining really starts to get very old after the first half hour. Yep, it used to be funny and it is part of his character, but what worked thirty years ago seems out of place today.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed