I saw this film in its Regional Premiere at the SXSW Film Festival. The point of the film seems to be to openly steal Morgan Spurlock's 30-Day premise from Super Size Me and apply to stoner comedian Doug Benson being stoned for 30 days. It lacks the originality of Spurlock's premise. For one, many people spend every day stoned and the affects are well-known. I agree with their premise that that they want to show that marijuana doesn't do much harm to human health and therefore should be legalized. But if this is the best they can do, it should perhaps offer some caution about the degree to which marijuana effects cognitive thinking skills and behavior. While it is a funny film at times, it adds little to the political debate - unlike the Spurlock film - and doesn't really offer anything new or interesting.
As the filmmakers (including Benson and director Blieden) volunteered during their Q & A after the film, they really didn't know what sort of film they wanted to make. Did they want to tell of Benson's humorous 30-day stoned journey? Did they want to make a political film about the dispute between state and federal authorities on Marijuana legalization in California? Or did they want to make a club film about Benson's comedy act during the period of his 30-day experiment? They couldn't really decide, so they combined all three efforts and the film shows that lack of a clear direction.
Also, they throw in all of these cameos with Benson's comedian buddies that add almost nothing to the film. Incidentally, their 10th amendment Constitutional arguments are poorly presented since there is a long tradition of Federal legal supremacy based on Article 4, section 2 of the Constitution which has been the basis of America's Federal system of government for centuries.
So it is good for a few laughs and its own political diatribe, but it could have been much better. One of the best points that they make is that medical marijuana is, in many cases, an excuse for recreational drug usage. They imply that it is sort of farce and real debate should be over the legalization of recreational use. If we want to have that debate, let's find better film makers and other advocates to make that argument, because this barely qualifies as a political documentary. I recommend the film "Grass" which is a much better film and presents a fascinating history of the prohibition of marijuana in the U.S.
As the filmmakers (including Benson and director Blieden) volunteered during their Q & A after the film, they really didn't know what sort of film they wanted to make. Did they want to tell of Benson's humorous 30-day stoned journey? Did they want to make a political film about the dispute between state and federal authorities on Marijuana legalization in California? Or did they want to make a club film about Benson's comedy act during the period of his 30-day experiment? They couldn't really decide, so they combined all three efforts and the film shows that lack of a clear direction.
Also, they throw in all of these cameos with Benson's comedian buddies that add almost nothing to the film. Incidentally, their 10th amendment Constitutional arguments are poorly presented since there is a long tradition of Federal legal supremacy based on Article 4, section 2 of the Constitution which has been the basis of America's Federal system of government for centuries.
So it is good for a few laughs and its own political diatribe, but it could have been much better. One of the best points that they make is that medical marijuana is, in many cases, an excuse for recreational drug usage. They imply that it is sort of farce and real debate should be over the legalization of recreational use. If we want to have that debate, let's find better film makers and other advocates to make that argument, because this barely qualifies as a political documentary. I recommend the film "Grass" which is a much better film and presents a fascinating history of the prohibition of marijuana in the U.S.