"Gowanus, Brooklyn" is a 20-minute live action short film from 2004, so it's already 12 years old now. It was written and directed by Ryan Fleck fairly early in his career. Fleck is known for "Half Nelson" mostly today and this short film here is actually a version of his most famous work. It follows a little black girl and her school teacher and we find out a bit about their lives and their emotional state. The reason why I liked this somehow was not child actress Shareeka Epps, who wasn't bad, but ultimately forgettable, but it was Matt Kerr. He was interesting to watch with his acting and mannerisms and I believe he has great recognition value. Makes me a bit sad that he did not make it big as an actor, maybe even in "Half Nelson" instead of Gosling. Anyway, all in all this was a solid little movie, nothing really outstanding, but worth 20 minutes spending on. I give it a thumbs-up.
3 Reviews
Read Bob the Moo's review--it gives insights that explain why this film was made in the first place.
planktonrules11 June 2008
My review is based on never having seen HALF NELSON and I am thankful for Bob the Moo for explaining the context for this short film. It seems that Bob and I have odd taste because we both love short films and when he explained this film was made to be used as a "pitch", then it makes a lot of sense. I've seen a lot of similar films made by young and inexperienced film makers. Unlike shorts made in the golden age of Hollywood, these films were NOT meant to be shown to a wider audience and were more like demo-tapes--to be seen by potential financial backers so that money could be obtained to make a feature-length film. In this context, I can clearly understand why GOWANUS, BROOKLYN was made and why it had such a disjoint and incomplete look about it. You see, instead of a complete narrative, you just catch an unsatisfying glimpse of the main character's life. Nothing is resolved and so much waits to be explained. In this context, the film isn't bad from a technical standpoint, but someone like myself why didn't see HALF NELSON will be no doubt confused and left feeling unsatisfied. Try not to see this film without seeing HALF NELSON first--otherwise, you, too, will feel unfulfilled.
On its own it has limited value but in the context of Half Nelson it is interesting at least
bob the moo28 November 2007
Drey's lift doesn't come through for her after school one day and she goes back into the gym to use the bathroom. In there she finds her teacher and coach, Mr Dunne smoking crack. Embarrassed, he gives her a silent lift home and they say no more about it. With this secret held by Drey, she tries to figure out her teacher as he suddenly has a completely new side to his character.
This film was introduced as a trial run for Half Nelson, a tool for the writers to enable the film to become a reality. This is more or less how they view this short and watching it now I can attest that this is certainly the case for all to see. I chose to watch this after watching the main feature but it is possible to watch it as a standalone short. Both produces benefits and negatives though. The first thing to stress is that, as I said, this is mostly about getting the feature made and as such it does not really work as a stand alone film. The plot is too simplified in some regards and does ultimately feel like a trailer because it doesn't take the characters anywhere. So watching it without the context of the film will be a rather frustrating affair because it doesn't really say or do a great deal.
Watching it with the knowledge of the film will give you more of a context but the downside is that it feels very amateurish and half-done next to the feature. I am not saying that I thought the main film was perfect but compared to the short it does show its many strengths. The narrative is the most obvious difference but that is perhaps understandable since one has 18 minutes and the other has 110 minutes. The direction is of a similar style but not as good due to some poorly framed shots and a limited budget. The most obvious weakness is in the casting of Kerr as Dunne and it does show just how much better Gosling was. Given Kerr's work as a grip and other crew roles, this is understandable but he never feels like anything other than a guy acting as a stand-in for this short. Contrasting with this though is yet another strong performance from Epps. She doesn't have a lot of depth in her script or character but she is effortlessly convincing and charming while also being sullen and withdrawn. To me she is the selling point of the short and it is no surprise that she got the role in the feature off the back of this.
Overall an interesting film but only really in the context of the main feature, Half Nelson. As a stand alone it doesn't really have much to offer apart from Epps in a natural and convincing performance but at least as a companion piece to the main film it is interesting in how it formed the basis and sales tool for the full feature.
This film was introduced as a trial run for Half Nelson, a tool for the writers to enable the film to become a reality. This is more or less how they view this short and watching it now I can attest that this is certainly the case for all to see. I chose to watch this after watching the main feature but it is possible to watch it as a standalone short. Both produces benefits and negatives though. The first thing to stress is that, as I said, this is mostly about getting the feature made and as such it does not really work as a stand alone film. The plot is too simplified in some regards and does ultimately feel like a trailer because it doesn't take the characters anywhere. So watching it without the context of the film will be a rather frustrating affair because it doesn't really say or do a great deal.
Watching it with the knowledge of the film will give you more of a context but the downside is that it feels very amateurish and half-done next to the feature. I am not saying that I thought the main film was perfect but compared to the short it does show its many strengths. The narrative is the most obvious difference but that is perhaps understandable since one has 18 minutes and the other has 110 minutes. The direction is of a similar style but not as good due to some poorly framed shots and a limited budget. The most obvious weakness is in the casting of Kerr as Dunne and it does show just how much better Gosling was. Given Kerr's work as a grip and other crew roles, this is understandable but he never feels like anything other than a guy acting as a stand-in for this short. Contrasting with this though is yet another strong performance from Epps. She doesn't have a lot of depth in her script or character but she is effortlessly convincing and charming while also being sullen and withdrawn. To me she is the selling point of the short and it is no surprise that she got the role in the feature off the back of this.
Overall an interesting film but only really in the context of the main feature, Half Nelson. As a stand alone it doesn't really have much to offer apart from Epps in a natural and convincing performance but at least as a companion piece to the main film it is interesting in how it formed the basis and sales tool for the full feature.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
