No Way Jose

The story, so-called acting, soundtrack / music, unfunny dialogue, directing, cinematography, etc, etc Sucked major big time. Trgic, tragic, tragic, tragic and totally pathetic. AG and the rest of the crew actually paid themselves? Oy...

Worst movie that i've ever seen, really, and i'm 48. OK you ask for 10 lines text. this is the worst movie not funny not interesting not even clever he thinks he is some kind of genius, and he is just dumb. Don't even try to watch this senseless movie. Who paid for the make of this corpse? This guy should work somewhere else, like a mcdonalds or 7 eleven Stop thinking you are funny Goldberg, you are the joke. Why you keep asking for ten lines? is not enough suffering whit this atrocious movie? God i hope he will never try to make another piece of garbage like this one. Respect yourself Goldberg and go back to your moms house and finish your high school. i hope you can find peace someday because this movie is a real fraud.

I'm writing this while the movie is running on Movie Central in Canada.

Gosh, this is terrible, terrible, terrible. I'm not talking about story or plot or acting: Just what the picture looks like. Yes, it's a low budget movie, but I've seen better -- much better -- visual quality in undercover documentaries and home movies shot on iPhones and GoPros. The framing of the shots in 16:9 is worse than bad (sometimes, half of the actor's heads were cut off horizontally -- one can tell that common top for concurrent release in 4:3, 16:9 or 1:2.35 formats was never a consideration), and often out of focus (ever heard of depth-of field or lighting control?). Shots and counter shots in dialogues lack integrity in terms of color, contrast and focus -- and, if it weren't for actors wearing the same cloths through the shots, one would guess that different scenes were hacked together.

In inside shots, one can see the overhead microphone boom reflected in the glass of the patio door -- which wouldn't be all that bad if the mike position was static, but one can see how the mike was pointed at the actors as the dialogue moves along between actors, and seeing such visual artifacts totally took me out of the movie. Yuck.

Oh, yes, and then there's tripod shot contrasted with jittery hand- held shots without steady-cam. It must be cool to say FU to an audience that is supposed to make work commercially viable.

As I said: Terrible, terrible, terrible. But, hey, if you happen to be a visual masochist, you actually may enjoy a movie that looks like a failed high school project. I hope Goldberg gets a chance to make more movies -- but he needs (and deserves?) much better people behind the camera and in the editing room, specifically, he needs people with a sense of aesthetics, and enough trained skills to create visually pleasing images. For all I know, it's eye candy that sells movies even if the story is bad, but the lack of eye candy kills any good story. Else, it's just a radio play.

In a nutshell: I believe that the people handling cameras and managing post owe it to the actors to make them look as good as possible -- which certainly hasn't happened here. That being said, nobody looks as bad (or out of focus) as much as Goldberg himself. The movie leaves me guessing if he wanted to commit visual suicide. Bad as it is, there were some (but not enough) good shots in the movie: The underwater shots in the pool consistently were very nice quality and better than the movie as a whole.

OK, the movie's over. Here are the culprits listed in the credits:

'A' camera operator: Mark Putnam

'B' camera operator: Jonathan Bruno

1st assistant 'A' camera: Michael Gonzales

2nd assistant 'A' camera: Alicia Pharris

1st assistant 'B' camera: Ludovico Isidori

Additional 'B' camera operator: Monika Lenczewska

Additional camera operators:Greg Cotten, Ian Benham, Nich Musco, Adam Goldberg

Additional 1st Assistant camera operators: Tyler Harrison, Justin Kane, Adam Dorris

Underwater camera operator: Boyd Hobbs (Kudos! As mentionend above).

Digital Imaging Technician: Michael Halper

Video Assist: Lou Spadaccini

Additional Video Assist: Jorden Kadovitz

Jose lacks purpose and never committed himself fully to anything. He is singer in a band, Jose and the Joses, that plays at children birthday parties but refuses to write children's songs for example. He still borrows money from his sister who made moderate fame with You Tube make-up tutorials. When the real motives behind his name change to Jose come out and break up his relationship he has to re-evaluate his life. The movie works as an underdog character piece with pointy dialogue. It reminds slightly of Greenberg although less strong and slightly listless in it's execution. The performance of the cast alone is worth it though. O'Reilly and Goldberg deliver as a couple so do Siegel and Belknap as supportive friends. Being mediocre, it still has some true gems. Band membermGabe losing himself in solo is touching and Jose's conversation with his sister summer are truly phenomenal moments to name a few.

I gave this a 6 not because of Jose but because of the surrounding characters her gave the film some intelligence and reality. I just wanted to slap Jose around the ears. I don't believe you have to spend years with a woman to work out if you love her or not and this pathetic character has done that multiple times with no result. Yes kids can be messy and difficult and unpredictable but the love and joy that that come with them and someone you love, far outweighs what car or house you have or even how poignant you think your music is. Jose seems to me to be the most woefully inept version of a man that there is.