In a fantasy world, if Mamet and the Coen Bros. fought for control over making this 1990 film, it would be Mamet who won but he would include a lot of the Coens' work in it. That is the best description of this film's character and will be easily understood by readers knowing the work of both. It's not nearly as good as good Mamet or the Coens, but it has a similar appeal, especially in the deadpan Coen-like humor and in the short, snappy Mamet-like dialog that people don't speak in real life. Maybe just a little Buster Keaton in it too.
The story was unremarkable and character driven and I prefer plot driven stories, but the odd way the characters interacted made for some funny moments. Not Coen Bros., but not bad.
It was a slice of life combination of the conventional and quirky, depressive and optimistic, sad and funny, psychotic and realistic, good hearts and those not so good. The interplay between these opposites when done well are memorable. This film fell short of memorable, but it was nicely goofy and off-beat and a pretty effective overall effort for a low budget indy.
The terrific Edie Falco of the Sopranos had a small part and showed why she has done so well in later years.
The story was unremarkable and character driven and I prefer plot driven stories, but the odd way the characters interacted made for some funny moments. Not Coen Bros., but not bad.
It was a slice of life combination of the conventional and quirky, depressive and optimistic, sad and funny, psychotic and realistic, good hearts and those not so good. The interplay between these opposites when done well are memorable. This film fell short of memorable, but it was nicely goofy and off-beat and a pretty effective overall effort for a low budget indy.
The terrific Edie Falco of the Sopranos had a small part and showed why she has done so well in later years.