Fifty Pills

After partying, groggy New York University freshman Lou Taylor Pucci (as Darren Giles) wakes up. He has lost his scholarship and is unable to pay for the next semester. But Mr. Pucci wants to stay in school, finish his paper on Dante's "Inferno" and lock tongues with pretty blonde Kristen Bell (as Gracie). Via answering machine, his perfectly eyebrow-plucked roommate John Hensley (as Coleman Anderson) offers Pucci an opportunity. Pucci must sell 50 hits of the drug "Ecstasy" for Mr. Hensley, at $20 a pop… We flashback four months ago, to see what happened to prompt this deal; Hensley had a party and, although Pucci didn't attend, he was blamed due to having a bottle of vodka in his refrigerator. Next, we see how Pucci endeavors to sell the pills...

"Fifty Pills" is the kind of movie which fails as a whole, but has parts which are interesting. Director Theo Avgerinos and his team show they are capable of telling a good cinematic story – though this isn't exactly it. This may also be why "Catcher in the Rye" is not represented well on film. The drug peddling plot doesn't make much sense; of course, it's meant to be comic, but it isn't funny. Neither are the tame representations of deviant sex or the dumb gay references. The first segment that amuses is the scene with "Different Strokes" fan Eddie Kaye Thomas (as Ralphie), due to the absurdity of the film's themes reaching momentary cohesion. The crew's work on the "Cross the River" interlude is nice; musicians David Manning and La Rocca contribute well.

**** Fifty Pills (4/26/06) Theo Avgerinos ~ Lou Taylor Pucci, John Hensley, Kristen Bell, Eddie Kaye Thomas

Interesting that this movie has received some bad reviews. I think it's being treated too harshly as it's overall a nice tale, with decent acting, cinematography, and a well interwoven soundtrack.

In general, the plot was amusing enough and any ills it may have contained were overcome by a great soundtrack. While, Lou Taylor Pucci can be almost a little too cute sometimes and his character's naivety is a little overplayed, the overall the story moves along, is captivating enough, and the characters both entertaining and compelling enough that you want to see the movie resolve in its predictable but happy ending. It's a nice movie and left me with happy feelings.

This is a decent attempt at making an original movie about a college student who loses his scholarship and battles having to pay for school and working up the courage to ask out the girl of his dreams. Its pretty ambitious but just didn't seem to pull off neither a professional or gritty-like feel to it, i thought the camera-work and stuff was kind of sloppy, and not in a good way. Some of the acting was good, but for the most part, this movie just didn't cut it. It was neither funny, interesting or serious enough to amaze or be considered a good movie. Overall this felt like a film school project movie, but not a legit studio release of a first-rate movie.IMDb Rating: 4.7. My Rating: 7/10

Darren attends NYU and is matched with a roommate who is a creep and a slimeball. Before he knows it, he is on probation and on the administration's radar.

Everything seems to go wrong for Darren Giles, except he meets an attractive girl named Gracie (Kristen Bell).

Because he desperately needs money, he spends a day selling ecstasy to the customers of his roommate. These quirky customers include a dominatrix, and a day trader who is passionate about the TV show "Different Strokes."

I'm afraid I can't score this film very highly for these reasons:

1. The romance is a secondary theme that is not well-developed.

2. The primary story--the sale of the pills--is disjointed.

3. The characters are weak. Some of their behavior is inappropriate to the character. I wish Monica Keene, who played Petunia, could have been used more. Kristen Bell's talents were wasted.

4. Some jokes have obvious punchlines.

5. The background music often does not fit the action.

6. In the early part of the film, Darren talks to the audience, narrating the action, similar to Ferris Bueller. This is not carried throughout the film; the style of the film is inconsistent.

Strangely enough, the ending has some congruity. If only the entire film possessed that same quality.

It's too bad that someone took such a good name for a movie...I mean the title alone gives anyone an idea or three about what this movie could have been...(almost famous, requiem for a dream...just to name two extremes...and extremely good, creative movies with similar resources)...It's like when a band takes a great name and shoulda' just named themselves 'another lame-ass band'... Well, the same thing holds true here...a great writer could have taken the same concept (forget the name) and driven this movie into a completely original direction with some real drama, real comedy and real emo-tion...instead, we get what we get...plus now this great title is attached to this run of the mill, halfass storyline with so-so performances...

I don't know...Whenever I take on a project (regardless of what it is) I find myself 'forced' to 'climb the mountain, burn the candle at both ends', etc, etc...to get the best result I can...even if 'those' results weren't required, expected or asked for, I just find myself pushing it as far as I can with the resources I have. So I really don't get it (or maybe just let down) when I see something that has been given great resources and it's not even nearly the best it could be..Specifically, when I see a movie that has had a decent budget thrown at it and it turns out mediocre (at best)..well, it's just too bad...someone fell down somewhere...I think in this case it was a combination of people not giving it their all...starting with the screen writing and then dribbling down to the casting...then onto the direction and the actors themselves...it's just not as good as you would hope for (especially with the great movie name, again)... and that's all I gotta' say about that....F...F.G.