Monkey on Mama's Back

Saw this at the Blue Sky Film Festival in Las Vegas, NV. I've never seen a more complete waste of time, money, and effort. There was nothing of merit. The script was horrible. The acting was pathetic, and the directing was non-existent. There wasn't even a hint of an idea to this thing. It didn't come across as a documentary, or movie, or even a student film. The only question that came to mind was, "Why?" Why would anyone invest any kind of time or energy to shoot such nonsense, such no-talent, such non-creation? To criticize the script, there were essentially two totally distinct storylines that at no time connected. This "video" swapped back and forth between the two distinct storylines, with absolutely no connection at all between them. Basically it was two different movies. Hey, why not just make two different movies to begin with and save the audience the anguish? Inter-dispersed through all this stuff is consistent cutaways to static shots of people telling stories that also have nothing to do with anything. The writer needs to go back to school. As for the directing, the director did nothing but document what was supposed to pass as a "story." There was zero creativity. He did not tell a story, he documented it. Imagine Uncle Harry with a new video camera. He doesn't even know how to program the vcr, but here he is with this new toy. Now imagine what kind of non-organized nonsense he would shoot. Well, this is what the director of this thing did. The only thing that even came close to containing some kind of meaning was the acting. Amateur at best, but the only thing that showed any hope for the future. Don't waste your time watching this thing. Life is too short. Rather, go stand in the corner of your living room and count the cracks in the ceiling. It'll be time better spent.

I was at the Blue Sky International Film Festival also and caught this cool little feature. I was a little confused at first, by the competition between the storytellers and the actual story being acted out (by some pretty decent actors, I thought), but soon caught on to kind of an inner rhythm that kept me really entertained, and isn't that the whole idea of a movie? I thought the stories were hysterical and I liked how the people telling them were "real". The story about the two main guys was a little "ordinary" but well acted - especially Joseph Kucan as Richard. I have seen him in the game "Command and Conquer" and he is really good. All in all, I thought it was by far the best video feature shown there.

This movie is hard to pin down as to exactly what it is, but I liked it. I saw it at its world premiere in Las Vegas at the Gold Coast Hotel's theater, and the house was packed. The filmmakers and actors were there, they spoke before it, it was pretty cool. Afterwards, talking to the people in the audience, it was clear that what we saw was definitely different, but there was a lot of laughter and everyone had a great time.

In a nutshell there's two primary stories - a guy who has everything but is a mean S.O.B., (Richard Kane) and a guy who tries to come to Vegas to make it big on a stage show (Larry Rich). The stories are pretty much unrelated except in their contrast - one guy's a real "have" and the other's a total "have-not." Their storylines only met one time, when Richard nearly kills Larry with his car in a nice bit of foreshadowing.

Sprinkled throughout the rest of the film are some totally out-of-left-field storytellers. They had absolutely *nothing* to do with the rest of the picture, but they told the wildest stories, and they were all true (the filmmakers said so). One guy, a rough-looking biker type, told a story about his misadventures while getting a double enema at the hospital that was so funny it brought the house down. Another guy told a long story about when his friend got shot by a gang member at a party and basically died in his arms. It was obviously hard for him to tell the story, he choked up a few times, and it was riveting to watch because it was *real*.

The concept of the two unrelated stories mixed in with the storytellers is hard to explain but was fun to watch, in a quirky, indie-film kind of way. I wouldn't compare it to Pulp Fiction because it wasn't anything like that - it was its own style. It bothered some people in the audience because it was out of the ordinary, but most of us just settled in and enjoyed the ride.

The picture had its rough edges, but when you consider how little it cost - they said the budget was $7,000 cash, for a 91-minute movie! - it was really commendable. They said almost everyone worked for free, and Joseph Kucan was outstanding as the bad guy Richard.

If you see it in a video store, check it out. You might love it, or you might not, but it's definitely different and you probably won't have seen anything quite like it.