Saint John of Las Vegas

I was really excited about this movie. When I saw the trailer for this movie, I felt like it couldn't be out on DVD soon enough. As soon as this was out on Redbox I rented it. Lucky for me I had a promo code and got this movie for free. You can just see how low the budget on this movie would have been.

It had it funny moments which were REALLY funny, but they were few and far apart. When you snag actors like Steve Buscemi, Romany Malco, Sarah Silverman and Peter Dinklage, you ensure they have a script to match their caliber. This script was mediocre and the story had no drive or punch. I expected a bit more off the ending, but to me it was an anticlimax.

My suggestion is to rent this movie if you really like the leads. Steve Buscemi and Romany Malco have done a great job acting. If you are expecting a classy suave movie set in Las Vegas, look elsewhere.

John (Steve Buscemi) is a compulsive gambler that in his last months has had a lot of bad luck and wants to move from Las Vegas to Pennsylvania and so he does a road trip with an insurance fraud investigator with which he joins his job thanks to Mr. Townsend (Peter Dinklage). John doesn't want to go anywhere near Las Vegas and on the road they'll meet a few odd types; a nude militant (Tim Blake Nelson), a stripper on a wheelchair and a human torch. John then realizes that his only solution is to go again to Las Vegas and face his demons head on.

The movie is billed as a comedy, but instead it was more a drama and it hadn't that many funny moments to begin with. The moments of the nudist and the stripper looked kinda awkward and only for the sake of shocking the viewer. If you are searching for a comedy, this movie is not for you.

IndieVest shot themselves in the foot by putting this dud out as their first release. With their membership based business model of anyone funding a film, Saint John Of Las Vegas killed that platform after opening theatrically without so much as a whimper.

This is an unwatchable, amateurish disaster overloaded with quirk and just limps from one disconnected non sequitur to the next. How this pile of nonsense attracted Spike Lee, Stanley Tucci and Steve Buscemi as producers is more bewildering than the final product. This is an awful picture, that had the support of people that should have known better.

Steve Buscemi holds this one together, the other main characters are impossible to identify with - either because they don't say much or they are mysterious and mean. There are a lot of bizarre situations that are thrown in which don't really further the storyline but show off a type of artistic creativeness. They definitely had a lot of good ideas here, and perhaps the movie would have been more interesting if they simply abandoned the tired story line and went from one hypnotic scenario to the next (Like Fear and Loathing). But the main story (the story about the insurance fraud) progresses in the background without momentum and when it is finally resolved it feels anticlimactic. But there is another story here, perhaps more important - the one concerning Steve Buscemis past. This could have been developed into a compelling and meaningful drama but it is only used to further the comedy (and to tack on the Confucious ending) There are a few laughs along the way here and a good deal of cute/quirky ideas. Could have been improved with a bit of storyline editing beforehand.

John (Steve Buscemi), a recovering gambler, is sent back to Las Vegas by his employer to research insurance fraud. Along the way he must face junkyard thugs, a crippled stripper and try to maintain a relationship with his less-than-stable girlfriend (Sarah Silverman).

This story is somehow based on the writings of Dante Aligheri. I don't see it. I freely admit by knowledge of "Inferno" and "Paradiso" is not on the level it could be, but this had to be a very loose interpretation to say the least. However, regardless of the source material, the finished product is a gem that sadly did not get the full attention it deserved. This should have been a major theatrical release and success rather than a film festival darling.

Sure, it has that "independent" feel to it, like a darker "Garden State"... but if people like Wes Anderson can make it big off of the indie film feeling, why not this film? Steve Buscemi has a huge cult following, as does Sarah Silverman. Buscemi was what attracted me to this film -- he has never failed to disappoint me in any of his roles from "Big Lebowski" to "Ghost World" to "Reservoir Dogs". One of the biggest flaws another indie film, "Floundering", made was using Buscemi too little.

The directing is tight, the story is tight... the word "tight" is really the way to describe this film. The pace keeps steady, with never a dull moment despite not really being anything close to an action film. John is a perfect everyman inserted into odd situations (did I mention the nudists?) so we can both sympathize with him, yet enjoy that he has quirks we wouldn't, and weaknesses we do not. It is as though watching our best friend on an adventure.

If you missed this one on the festival circuit (and let's be frank, most of us do not have the luxury of attending them), please do yourself a favor and rent this film, or perhaps even purchase it. I think it's the kind of film that will have a strong word-of-mouth fan base, and it would be in your best interest to discover it before all your friends have first. So many films slip under the radar... don't let "Saint John of Las Vegas" be one of them.