WARNING: Major Spoilers Within

Street Thief is a great film, but its no documentary. No matter how much the marketers want you to believe that the contents could be, or are real, there’s just too much to this film that plays out too conveniently for you to ever really take it as a serious piece of documentary filmmaking. The film is a stylized, suspenseful and very entertaining look into the life of a burglar, planning his jobs, casing the places, and putting himself into all sorts of situations where getting the job done is key, and being forgotten is almost mandatory.

The film focuses on criminal Kasper Carr who we understand is being followed by a few documentary filmmakers wanting to focus in on his craft and how he does what he does. Right from the start you’re hesitant to believe this as anything but a fictionalized and glorified life, but the screen presence of director Malik Bader, who portrays Carr,  is so engrossing that your almost hostage to watch. Our introduction to the character is him so eloquently breaking into a corner store and making off unknown amounts of cash. As he explains, it’s best to hit minority neighborhood businesses who do everything in cash, this certainly holds true until the film’s ultimate score.

The camera work is another dead giveaway to the nature of the film’s truthfulness as highly stylized lighting and camera work shies away from the more one-the-fly filming you’re used to for a film like this. Personally watching This Film Is Not Yet Rated and Street Thief back to back only amplified the gritty nature of the documentary and the clean look of Carr’s misdeeds.

It isn’t until the final act of the film that the wheels start to unravel in the storytelling department as the mysterious disappearance of Carr is inter-cut with clips of him earlier in the film maybe foreshadowing his ultimate plan, but there are a lot of loose ends that the filmmakers neglect to come through on. During the film’s big heist at a Cinemark Theater there’s special effort made to show Carr stealing a number of VHS tapes, although we never find out what they were. We also never learn what happen to Carr, and as huge advocates of the non-Hollywood ending this should please even the staunchest critics, but the open door here is more of a tease than anything else.

As a work of fiction Street Thief is a great way to spend 90 minutes, and as infatuated with the big heist film as we are in America (see: Ocean’s series) there’s a lot to like and a lot of pulp to this piece. The studio and cable network might want you to think of it as something more, but in the end it’s a work of fiction, good fiction, but fiction all the same.

Death of Seasons from director Chance White and writer/star Delfo Baroni busts in from the independent scene clearly wearing its influences on its sleeve but also proposing an interesting, new spin on the conventional psychological thriller that mixes parts of the genre’s best techniques and staples together to produce a film worthy of your time and money.

Produced on less than $10,000, Seasons never really shows its low-budget roots and cleverly uses real-world sets to mask these budget limitations, employing the use of both handheld and still cameras the view into this world is intricately paved out by White’s vision, especially the use of long range zoom in shots and long cuts. One particular cut has the film’s two protagonists walking the sidewalk of a residential street, never missing a beat the tit-for-tat dialog continues until either a very obvious cut is employed or a misplaced stylistic device seems to detract from the very impressive camera work. Seasons is easily one of the best independent films from a technological and stylistic standpoint with the aforementioned camera work combined with concise editing, and great lighting effects.

From the very beginning the filming and editing seems to employ a very Se7en-like Fincher cut with quick, distorted jump cuts, muted color palette, and image flashes akin to Tyler Durden appearance in the first act of another Fincher masterpiece, Fight Club. The film seems to channel many different films including Clerks with its liquid dialog, philosophical debate in the oddest of places (a Tarantino like conversation in a corner café), and pairing of two main characters who seem to have nothing in common but play off each other so well.

The script is generally tight and, as mentioned previously, Baroni’s dialog, while choppy at times, has the flow of some of the industries’ most respected linguists. The film isn’t completely linear, and as it goes on it becomes a bit harder to determine if things are indeed jumping from event to event, or are truly running in a straight line. The character’s clothing indicates that former rather than the latter. Generally this isn’t completely distracting, but it could be better established on how this should be interpreted by the viewer.

The story itself centers around two individuals who are dealing with the trials and tribulations of life in different ways. Aaron is torn between the physical desires of his human being and the spiritual requirements of his religion as he tries to find a happy balance with each side pulling him further off-center. Gabriel’s story is harder to pin down as the American Psycho-like ending may leave more questions than answers but after listening to the commentary provided and reading deeper into the film’s meanings one can see into the mind of the disposed character.

There’s an odd “musical” number in the film’s second act which doesn’t seem to fit in with the rest of the film, even after the ending is revealed. In fact, the second act in general seems to drag on a bit and slows down the film’s taut, brisk first act which brings the viewer into the world of Gabe (Baroni) and Aaron (Justice Leak). The third act picks up once again as the narrative comes to a head, although the big reveal ending does come off slightly confusing as the viewer searches for motives to Gabriel’s actions they might not have picked up on earlier in the film.

The film’s cynical commentary and religion vs. atheism arguments resonate well as social commentaries, whether intended or not, on the nature of the world we live in. Most of this is embodied in the conversations Gabe has with his cantankerous, blind neighbor Mr. Harper (Kermit Rolison) who’s less than bright outlook on life certainly highlights the dark comedy aspect of the film.

Death of Seasons excels as a film that never lets the low-budget, independent stigma bring it down. The excellent direction by White and wonderful writing and portrayal of Gabe by Baroni only solidify the film’s ascension to the top of the indie scene. With some tightening of the script in a few places, and some smoothing of a few rough spots of dialog it wouldn’t surprise me to see Death of Seasons on a theater marquee in the very near future.

For more information on Death of Seasons, check out the official website right here.

Royal Faceoff, and independent picture from director Stu Pepper, is an intriguing picture with a unique, but odd story that sets a young girl, trying to change the world for the better, to London to challenge the crowned Queen of England to remove her image from all currency in the former British colonies and commonwealths. The premise is both good and bad for the film as its unique plot allows for some interesting story dynamics we’ve never seen before in a film, but the sheer odd-ball nature of it makes it almost impossible to take the film seriously at times because the suspension of disbelief is so great there’s nothing real to grab on to.

The film opens up with one of the most cheese-tacular opening songs of all time relaying the events of the film (a version also closes up the movie providing an ending summation), but as you progress through the movie its hard to determine if the production is progressing with tongue planted firmly in the co-screenwriter’s cheeks or if most of the film was written with a straight face. There are some points in the film where the actors really overstep and try to hard to create some artificial humor, which makes you laugh, but for all the wrong reasons.

The storyline itself could be interpreted two ways, as either a satire of the American tendency to overstep our international bounds and make unneeded changes to countries we have no business meddling with, or a simple feel good family-type comedy one is likely to find on ABC Family on a Friday night. The film works out far better with the former rather than the latter. There are also some curious subplots about Diana and her family being direct descendents of the infamous traitor Benedict Arnold and the Queen’s love letters to former President Truman. Added into the whole, these subplots don’t seem to gel entirely with the rest of the production.

Pepper and co-writer Michael Sausville’s scripted dialog ranges from witty in parts to downright groan inducing in others, especially when the lead character’s parents are interacting with her, the quick cuts and dialog play host to some inconsistencies and have a “home-movie” feel to them at times making themselves more obvious than they need to be. Coupled that with two very awkward montages, one of Diana, in a bikini, listening to her boyfriend play on his guitar and the other as an introduction montage to London in which we are treated to still pictures of the roofs of buildings, and you can see how the movie can feel awkward at times.

It’s a shame because Pepper’s direction is spot on in some instances with some great perspective shots and use of existing sets. You can tell the film was done with a minimal budget (especially since London looks conspicuously like southern Florida), but this doesn’t really detract from the film. What do distract the viewer is the Gandhi-inspired flashbacks where both Diana and her dad, curiously, share the same visions but more than one of them go on for far too long to the point where it looks like the film is being padded out, and the fact that this is a very dialog heavy film with no action shots to break anything up and give the viewer some reprieve throughout its nearly two hour runtime.

I certainly don’t want it to sound like I hated this film, far from it; it’s a curious, but interesting movie that has great ambitions but maybe not the script and budget to back up those ideas to their full potential. As mentioned before, examining it as a satire of the American culture, even if it was never intended to be held in such light, opens up a realm of possibilities for the feature. As a family-centric piece about a young girl whose class assignment gets a little out of hand, it’s an adequate vehicle for young girls as an inspirational piece. The film isn’t for everyone, and ambition might have been bigger than execution here, but Pepper has a keen eye and seems adept at working with a minimal budget, so here’s looking forward to the next from him and his team.

The fan service film Lovecracked! The Movie, a play on words featuring the works of H.P. Lovecraft is representative if what can happen when you get a lot of people together to try and meld together short stories and “inspired by” takes on the works of a particular author and turn them into a semi-successful full length film. I say “semi-successful” because there are parts of Lovecracked! which really stand out as something extraordinary and others that, well, not so much.

The film starts out presented its way of linking all these stories together (loosely). We are witness to the filming of a faux TV show focusing on H.P. Lovecraft, his works, who he was, and what he was about. In between segments of the show, which has the roving reporter querying people such as oblivious businessmen and a snowman, we are sometimes treated to interpretations of Lovecraft’s work. Each segment is done by a different director and a different cast which gives the overall film a sense of freshness as things will change nearly a dozen times in Lovecracked!’s 87 minute runtime and if you don’t enjoy a particular segment, a new one is on tap.

Stand out bits include “The Statement of Randolph Carter” which seems like the most direct interpretation of a Lovecraft short story and “Remain” which brings back an old school Tool music video like feel as well as possessing the film’s greatest special effects in the stop motion animation.

Passable segments include the semi-cliché “Witch’s Spring” where a femme fatal seduces a young man only to harvest his heart and soul and “BugBoy” which comes up short in the story department but shines in its excellent special effects.

The rest of the segments, including the soft-core porn “Re-Penetrator” come up decidedly short in more ways than one. “The History of the Lurkers” is a dialog-devoid chasm of dull which doesn’t seem to end as soon as it should. The aforementioned “Re-Penetrator” is gratuitous for the sake of being gratuitous and leaving out all the humor one would expect given its premise and start.

A lot of the films jokes feel forced and recycled from other works (such as the TV show host appearing, sans-pants, in the middle of a segment). There are times when you feel yourself laughing out loud, but after a well done title introduction the jokes are few and far between for what you feel is a horror/comedy in the same vein of Troma’s work (whose co-founder Lloyd Kaufman is featured in the film).

Fans of Lovecraft may be mixed on where they stand after viewing the film. Several of the segments seem to perfectly channel the aura of Lovecraft’s work while others may only bare a passing resemblance to the original written material, or reference it in name only. With a mixed bag of good and bad bits chained together with a semi-funny, semi-original on-going bit Lovecracked! is an average endeavor.

What if you were forced to relive a single hour of your life over and over again? What if your actions in life would have no long lasting consequences on the world, what would you do? Would you choose the life of a hero, leading the life of good, or would you indulge in the darker side of your mind, and throw morals out the window? These are the types of questions I believe writer/director Thomas Ikimi wants you to think about after you view his independent film LIMBO. The film, shot in contrasting black and white, is a tale of one man thrown into a moral quagmire when he enters the nothingness of limbo, a state between heaven and hell which provides no absolutes for anyone.

Adam Moses (Christopher Russo) is an attorney looking to make a difference in the world. He’s in the middle of a huge case which seems to bring out the true colors of everyone around him. Adam is summoned to a suspicious meeting about the case on a roof top where here’s gunned down by a hitman, only Adam doesn’t die. He enters limbo, and as he soon learns, he is forced to repeat the same hour of his life over and over again, almost as though the entire universe resets every 60 minutes. Adam believes that the hitman who killed him may hold the truth behind his stay in this state and seeks this Ouroboros out to find some answers. Along the way he meets the beautiful, yet mysterious, Rebecca (Etya Dudko) and a collective mix of other characters in his search for the truth. Most of the film is told via a flashback as Adam tells his story to Vaughn (Eric Christie), whom he saved from committing suicide, at least for the next 60 minutes.

Being shot in black and white, with the provided voice over, and nice, static camera angles the film has a great noirish look to it, almost a tone similar to the video game Max Payne. The use of light in the film adds a high level on contrast to the whites while the blacks offer the possible dark reaches of the human condition. All of this is captured eloquently be director of photography Jon Miller. Adam’s turmoil in limbo makes him question his own morality after repeating the same hour 2000 times he begins to lose his direction, and sanity. Through a brutal beating of a homeless man and the rape of a prostitute we see the two facets of Adam after saving Vaughn from his own hand. With the slate being whipped clean after every cycle, the question that presents itself is simple, are you doing anything wrong if no one gets hurt, at least in the long run?

As we’ve seen with previous independent films, like Kevin Smith’s Clerks, the use of black and white truly makes the audience focus on the characters rather than the set and everything else on camera. Like Clerks, Ikimi’s decision pays off with LIMBO as the character of Adam becomes the primary focus of the film as we journey with him through his never-ending life.

The use of handhelds in the film is very well done, for the most part. Handhelds, open up the possibilities of a director to devise new, unique shots due to the smaller size of the cameras, as opposed to full size recording devices. The only time when the use of a handheld seems over done in LIMBO is the montage near the end of the film as we move through the city to most of the movie’s principle locations. The film is sped up here as well and the constant bobbing of the camera leaves the audience disoriented as to what exactly is going on, or what Ikimi may be trying to get across to us as we reach the film’s climax.

Andrew David Daniels’ score fits in perfectly with the rest of this film as its high quality only adds to a great atmosphere. Filming on location, rather than blatant sets, also brings the audience into the film just like Broken‘s use of an actual location aided that film in setting the tone for the viewers.

The script itself is more cerebral that your standard Hollywood-fare, but the dialog is choppy in some spots. And some viewers may be a bit perplexed as to the ending of the film, or lack of an ending, for that matter, but I believe Ikimi wanted to leave the possibilities open and have the movie-goer decide the character’s ultimate fates.

Like the previously mentioned Broken, LIMBO is a thinking-man’s movie which is more focused on delivering a compelling story with an overall question for the audience to answer for themselves. LIMBO is another shinning example that maybe Hollywood is in such a slump because they think we are content with the same-old, same-old when we really want something new that presents to us new types of stories, stories with an IQ.

For anyone who gets a chance to experience LIMBO, jump at it, as the film comes highly recommended.

For more information on LIMBO, including production notes and trailers, visit the film’s official website at www.limbomovie.com.

In an age where $8000 can barely fill up your gas tank independent film maker Alex Ferrari has managed to create a short 20 minute film that rivals much of what Hollywood has produced this year. The film, bridging a gap between the mind-warping Memento and the gritty Saw, establishes a group of characters that are as intriguing as they are mysterious. Broken‘s only problem is that once the runtime is up you immediately want more only to find out that’s all there is…for now.

The story starts with a bang as Bonnie (Samantha Jane Polay) wakes up suddenly to a gunshot and finds a mysterious man sitting in her kitchen. He abducts her and the film proceeds from there. I don’t want to give too much away, but there are glimpses to a much bigger picture that would flesh out the main characters even more. The short runtime does limit the establishment of any of the background characters (such as the handful of guys and gals waiting for Bonnie to arrive after she is abducted). Ferrari’s story makes the viewer question what is really going on and just as we think we may have some idea, the credits begin to roll in the stylistic backwards crawl akin to David Fincher’s Se7en.

The entire film was produced for $8000, which is pretty damn impressive when box office bombs like Troy and Van Helsing cost upwards of $200 million and don’t offer any of the same rewards. One of the biggest cost cutting tips, as stated by the production team, was the filming of only one location. This setting, filmed in an actual Mental Health Hospital, is picture perfect complete with flickering lights, old pipes, and an atmosphere geared for a film such as this, Fincher would be pleased.

Being a nut for the unconventional camera angle, the cinematography impressed me the most. There’s something about placing a camera behind a carton of orange juice that makes me smile from ear to ear. Some of the scenes reminded me of the recently released Sin City and its graphic novel “framed” scenes with an extreme close-up in the foreground and a foreboding character in the back. The influence from some of Hollywood’s darker films is apparent, especially in the aforementioned setting for the film but it isn’t a copy by any means as Broken is injected with its own style.

The special effects, of which there are over 100, are also top notch for the most part. Some of them are very easy to pick out (such as the sparks from an impacting bullet) and others are subtle enough to the point where only the VFX wizards who constructed them would know. Even the movie’s weakest effects are better than you would expect based on the budget.

Alex Ferrari and producer Jorge F. Rodriguez have produced a film that brings independent filmmaking to a whole new level. Hacks like Uwe Boll can make one atrocious movie after another and single handedly destroy an entire genre, these two guys should be the one’s to watch in the future. If this is what these guys can do with $8000; I can only imagine what they could do with $60 million and a very much hope I get to see that one day.

For more info on Broken, including more screenshots and a trailer, visit the official site.