OK it's not as bad as all that -- it is sort-of OK -- but I had to say it. I'm probably not the first.
This is basically a short film on infidelity, dragged out to a couple of hours. It's not terrible, but it's also not good.
The film has its good points, of course. I found the cinematography to be great, for example. Particularly the shots in and around water were very effective, and showcase the use of film to communicate without words. But the fact that I'm noticing the cinematography first tells you that the story isn't really there.
I thought the acting was believable. Everyone performed well in their roles, as far as I can tell. Seth, Luke, and Michelle were good choices for the triangle. That said, I am confused about casting not just one but two popular comedians against type. It made me question what I was supposed to be seeing. I'm not sure I figured it out.
For me I attribute the problems to editing and writing.
The story didn't provide anyone for me to root for, identify with, or even hate. I didn't really care for any of the characters. I like these actors, but I found these characters annoying to varying degrees, but not so annoying as to be detestable. I just didn't wish to spend any more time with any of them than I had to. Perhaps if I could recognize in them any motivation for their actions (or lack thereof) it might be different. I compare this with The Postman Always Rings Twice, where understandable things happen, and lead to a more satisfying (but too preachy-perfect) ending.
The long silences here are not deep and meaningful. They're just long. I figure the film could be cut by half an hour, and not lose much beyond silence or small talk. In fact, even the end could be lopped off. There were several points where I thought it was over, but it kept going. What's odd is that there are some scenes where random half-second cuts are made, music-video-style, but real cuts to speed it along aren't made. I'm certain you could cut another hour or so and turn it into a really great short. There's nothing wrong with that, if telling the story with emotion is the goal.
The tie-in to Leonard Cohen's song seemed forced. I cringed. When I think about that scene, it feels to me like someone decided we needed a cryptic song by a Canadian poet to name the film after. I don't feel that any of the characters in the film are devoted Leonard Cohen fans.
Overall, I wouldn't recommend this film, but neither would I say to avoid it. It will surely be on the The Movie Network (among others) in Canada, since they apparently helped pay for it. The best place to see it is therefore probably cable or satellite.
This is basically a short film on infidelity, dragged out to a couple of hours. It's not terrible, but it's also not good.
The film has its good points, of course. I found the cinematography to be great, for example. Particularly the shots in and around water were very effective, and showcase the use of film to communicate without words. But the fact that I'm noticing the cinematography first tells you that the story isn't really there.
I thought the acting was believable. Everyone performed well in their roles, as far as I can tell. Seth, Luke, and Michelle were good choices for the triangle. That said, I am confused about casting not just one but two popular comedians against type. It made me question what I was supposed to be seeing. I'm not sure I figured it out.
For me I attribute the problems to editing and writing.
The story didn't provide anyone for me to root for, identify with, or even hate. I didn't really care for any of the characters. I like these actors, but I found these characters annoying to varying degrees, but not so annoying as to be detestable. I just didn't wish to spend any more time with any of them than I had to. Perhaps if I could recognize in them any motivation for their actions (or lack thereof) it might be different. I compare this with The Postman Always Rings Twice, where understandable things happen, and lead to a more satisfying (but too preachy-perfect) ending.
The long silences here are not deep and meaningful. They're just long. I figure the film could be cut by half an hour, and not lose much beyond silence or small talk. In fact, even the end could be lopped off. There were several points where I thought it was over, but it kept going. What's odd is that there are some scenes where random half-second cuts are made, music-video-style, but real cuts to speed it along aren't made. I'm certain you could cut another hour or so and turn it into a really great short. There's nothing wrong with that, if telling the story with emotion is the goal.
The tie-in to Leonard Cohen's song seemed forced. I cringed. When I think about that scene, it feels to me like someone decided we needed a cryptic song by a Canadian poet to name the film after. I don't feel that any of the characters in the film are devoted Leonard Cohen fans.
Overall, I wouldn't recommend this film, but neither would I say to avoid it. It will surely be on the The Movie Network (among others) in Canada, since they apparently helped pay for it. The best place to see it is therefore probably cable or satellite.