review by David Merryweather
Cashback 2006
Watched Oct 28, 2010
David Merryweather’s review:
I detested the short film from which this grew out of -It seemed a bit morally dubious and sleazy to me. I had a problem liking the main character - he has the ability to stop time and, true to some adolescent fantasy, he uses this gift to strip naked, or near naked, the implausibly good looking female patrons of the supermarket where he works. He doesn't do this because he's a voyeuristic creep completely objectifying women, no, he's an artist and as such can see their true beauty. Which naturally involves pulling their skirts up.
Still, the feature length version has had some good reviews, so I was willing to give it the benefit of the doubt. Have to say I stand by my initial reaction, in fact, this only went to underline what was so repellent in the earlier version.
Let's get one thing straight right from the off - The only interest in the female form going on here is straight-forward T&A. All that clunking forth-form drivel the lead character spouts in voiceover is phoney and embarrassing, and it can't disguise that the "beauty" that he/the director is interested in is strictly limited to: tits, arse, crotch (though not necessarily in that order).
I mean, fine. Go for it. I just wish the film was more honest in that regard, though that supermarket scene in the short would still be a fucking disgrace. Many movies objectify women, but this takes the biscuit. The women in this scene are viewed literally as objects. And making mediocre pencil sketches of a woman's shaved cunt doesn't award you an "but I'm an artist" get-out clause either.
(One telling drawing is pinned onto the lead's bedroom wall throughout the film: A headless torso with a great big pair of tits. I know what this is, and it ain't art)
Degas drew and painted naked teenage girls dancing round his studio many times. Pretty dodgy, but, even leaving aside the fact that he really managed to capture his subjects' nimble, ethereal beauty, at least the women there were consensual - and, not least, FUCKING CONCIOUS at the time.
Sean Ellis is really out of order with this shit, and the film had a mountain to climb with me afterwards. I can't say it won me over, but at least it was more true to itself: it resorted to being a low-brow laddish comedy.
It's disjointed as hell this film. A series of mostly go-nowhere filler scenes padding out Ellis' ho-hum attempt at a dippy romantic storyline for the catastrophically uncharismatic lead and his thinly characterised love interest. What a load of utterly depressing rubbish it all is, but at least the support actors have fun larking about, easily stealing the show.
Of course, it's bawdy humour and strippers and the boys getting all flustered because a customer has a huge pair of knockers - or maybe they're entranced by the beauty of the female form? - all the way. And, just occasionally, Ellis will remember about the time freeze gimmick.
The scene in the locker room when the lead (what's his name again?) takes a break from the 5-a-side footy match and encounters another person who can step out of time, is the film's highlight. Not just well staged, but pointed to a whole other more interesting pathway the film could have followed. Whether Ellis wasn't interested, or just didn't have the courage to lead his film away from the lazy '90s laddism throwback it had become, who can say. But what a shame it wasn't explored.
So. I didn't really like this. It's harmless enough once the lead character stopped sexually abusing women, and we weren't asked to find it charming, and him sensitive. I guess the other main problem was that the lead actor was such a cardboard cutout of a human being, a black hole from which no discernible emotion was able to escape. Also: he looked 12, which just made him look more of a creep.
I will never watch this movie again, nor anything else Sean Ellis ever directs. I give it zero out of one million.
Finally somebody who doesn't like this film! I thought I was the only one.
There clearly isn't enough 'stuff' in it to make a 90 minute film so they just slow everything down and add in ridiculously long and pointless flashbacks that do take you out of the story rather than reinforce it. Take away the time manipulation angle (which is pretty much copied verbatim from the novel The Fermata) and what do you have? A pointlessly arty and predictable love story. The break up with the first girlfriend happens too quickly so all his emo moping around makes him come across as some emotionally retarded prick rather than a sympathetic lead that you want to see actually get the girl. Then his infatuation with Emilia Fox's character is, at worst, creepy and best downright dull and obvious. And did anyone really care about a single character in this film?
The set up and voice over is reminiscent of Fight Club but without the energy or wit. I am pretty harsh on voice overs in films but this one almost sent me to sleep it was so boring. There are some nice scene transitions but most of these are accompanied by ridiculously overblown music that sounds like some cheap American Beauty rip-off.
And when the hell was this supposed to be set? I assume it was a contemporary film yet the protagonist looked about 20 and had watched the '84 LA Olympic Games when he was 10 (this is an estimate). He seems as if he is a generation older than he is supposed to be and then he is trying to get with Emilia Fox (who does look ten years his senior) - Are we to believe they are around the same age?
It is a film that thinks it is saying a lot about love, beauty, art and time but really it is saying absolutely nothing. I hated it!
David, you aren't missing anything by avoiding Ellis' other films because Broken isn't much better.
Hilarious awesome review!!!
So. Did you like it, then? ;)