It may be short, but it sure ain't sweet. Scroll down for The Rules of Attraction (posted earlier this fine independent evening). The Terminator Trilogy is coming up next week so stay tuned.
Cheats
Review by Jon Waterman
*1/2
A group of four high school boys do everything they can to pass…except study. They build up a reputation within the school as masters of the ways of cheating. There is no job that is undoable, and they’re out to prove it.
The film is actually based on the experiences of writer/director Andrew Gurland and his friends. Nearly all of the situations are real, as far-fetched as they appear to be. Keeping this fact in mind will enhance the enjoyment of the movie. Knowing that Gurland and his gang of ruffians actually negotiated and conned their way through school as well as stealing tests and files makes what is seen more amazing. In fact, if the film was presented as pure fiction, I doubt I would have cared to sit through it. Think of this movie as the pseudo-documentary form of “Slackers,” but less funny.
Meant to be taken as a comedy, I just didn’t see the humor. I understood where the comedy supposedly came in. I have heard punch lines before. Nothing here struck me. I doubt I laughed once. Granted I’m pretty picky about what I laugh about. The jokes were not off-the-wall. They did not surprise. They did not have people delivering them correctly. Plus, they were very predictable.
Perhaps the fault should lie with the actors. Trevor Fehrman and Martin Starr (the main character and the nerdy crib sheet writer who writes “crazy small” respectively) are pretty new to such large parts. Maybe the pressure got to them. Maybe Gurland didn’t direct them as well as one could have hoped. Matthew Lawrence has experience in horrible comedies (“Brotherly Love” and later seasons of “Boy Meets World”), so it’s no surprise after watching that he was involved. Elden Henson (“Idle Hands” “The Mighty Ducks” trilogy) has made the best career choices overall, but he still tends to slip up half the time. Mary Tyler Moore (as principal Stark) is just trying to hold onto any type of non-television related career.
The film contained little to no character arc, which in one respect seems more realistic. Yet, it’s not as fun to watch. I sort of wish something was made up for the big climax. The moments lacked intensity or drama. The stakes never seemed to be raised to a significant degree so as to warrant us caring if they got caught. No serious repercussions makes for dull viewing.
I think if it were not for the fact that these events took place (or so they tell us), I wouldn’t have watched the whole thing. Fact may be stranger than fiction, but many times, fiction is more interesting to watch.
Cheats
Review by Jon Waterman
*1/2
A group of four high school boys do everything they can to pass…except study. They build up a reputation within the school as masters of the ways of cheating. There is no job that is undoable, and they’re out to prove it.
The film is actually based on the experiences of writer/director Andrew Gurland and his friends. Nearly all of the situations are real, as far-fetched as they appear to be. Keeping this fact in mind will enhance the enjoyment of the movie. Knowing that Gurland and his gang of ruffians actually negotiated and conned their way through school as well as stealing tests and files makes what is seen more amazing. In fact, if the film was presented as pure fiction, I doubt I would have cared to sit through it. Think of this movie as the pseudo-documentary form of “Slackers,” but less funny.
Meant to be taken as a comedy, I just didn’t see the humor. I understood where the comedy supposedly came in. I have heard punch lines before. Nothing here struck me. I doubt I laughed once. Granted I’m pretty picky about what I laugh about. The jokes were not off-the-wall. They did not surprise. They did not have people delivering them correctly. Plus, they were very predictable.
Perhaps the fault should lie with the actors. Trevor Fehrman and Martin Starr (the main character and the nerdy crib sheet writer who writes “crazy small” respectively) are pretty new to such large parts. Maybe the pressure got to them. Maybe Gurland didn’t direct them as well as one could have hoped. Matthew Lawrence has experience in horrible comedies (“Brotherly Love” and later seasons of “Boy Meets World”), so it’s no surprise after watching that he was involved. Elden Henson (“Idle Hands” “The Mighty Ducks” trilogy) has made the best career choices overall, but he still tends to slip up half the time. Mary Tyler Moore (as principal Stark) is just trying to hold onto any type of non-television related career.
The film contained little to no character arc, which in one respect seems more realistic. Yet, it’s not as fun to watch. I sort of wish something was made up for the big climax. The moments lacked intensity or drama. The stakes never seemed to be raised to a significant degree so as to warrant us caring if they got caught. No serious repercussions makes for dull viewing.
I think if it were not for the fact that these events took place (or so they tell us), I wouldn’t have watched the whole thing. Fact may be stranger than fiction, but many times, fiction is more interesting to watch.
<< Home