|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Index||15 reviews in total|
Horrible cardboard acting. Silly plot line. The characters are obviously idiots who should know better -- even if they moved the initial 500 hits of ecstasy at $40 a piece, that's still only $20k. Minus whatever the boss' cut is, there's no way they could live as large as they seem to be. This film is a total joke -- basically an after-school special with swearing. I couldn't find myself caring about any of the characters or their problems. How anyone thought this movie was a good idea is beyond me. How it actually got made is even further beyond my comprehension. The 10-star review by indiefan looks to be from someone associated with the production...I can't imagine anyone else who could appreciate this.
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Contrary to what most of the posts state here, there is NO WAY this
film is a 10. Those people obviously worked on the film or are friends
of the director. It WAS an engrossing tale, one that has been told a
million times in cinema, but I give the director credit for trying a
People have been getting caught up in the tempting world of drugs on film for decades, only to have their dreams of quick cash and instant cred go up in a ball of flames. But this time, director Dave Rodriguez took a bunch of no-name actors, made them middle-class working stiffs, and gave the old story a modern twist. The three central characters, Joe (Lindberg), Kevin (Forsythe) and Mickey (DePaolo) are all life-long buddies who have taken different career paths. Kevin is a commodities trader, Joe (who resembles Giovanni Ribisi) a bartender, and Mickey (a dead ringer for a young Kevin Spacey) a salesman; all of them dream of a better life. So when Mickey picks up a bag of Ecstasy dropped by a dealer as he was getting busted at a club, they start to talk about making a quick score. But the drugs belong to the local "X" kingpin, Paul Diaz (Sanchez), who is like a little Tony Montana, right down to his 2nd in charge named Manny. Not wanting to get busted selling HIS stuff, the boys go to Diaz' house and offer a deal: let them sell the stuff- they have plenty of connections- and they push hard to do it. After some debate, Diaz agrees, over Manny's objections, and the clock starts ticking to their implosion.
Of course they start out like gangbusters,slinging "X" all over the place, especially in Miami's gay clubs, thanks to Kevin's friend Toni (a hilarious turn by "Entourage"s Paul Ben-Victor). Things are going great; they're all making cash AND paying Diaz on time, so they start to think bigger: Kevin wants to leave his job after making some large investments, and push full-time; Mickey is becoming a hero with the teen rave crowd and trusting too many people under him; and Joe has dreams of getting out soon and buying the bar when the owner Vince (Palminteri) retires.
Here's where the flick starts to sag a bit. Everyone watching knows what's coming- it's going to end badly. But we are treated to numerous scenes of "emotional heft" that were, frankly, pretty amateurish. When Joe's girlfriend confronts him about sleeping with Diaz to get Joe out of the biz, their crying almost brought me to tears- of laughter. Kevin also becomes an emotional wreck, unconvincingly. This was when the solid but inexperienced cast looked over-matched, which brought down the rating of the film.
Anyway, not to spoil it but it doesn't end well for the boys, and it tells a cautionary tale of not going for the quick buck to sacrifice your whole life. Like I said, nothing new there. But the cinematography, Miami backdrop, and decent if not spectacular performances all made it a film worth watching. Oh, and Michael Rappaport was great as the big time trader with a major drug problem and an attitude.
The reviews here seem to be divided between those who consider "Push" a
10-star masterpiece and those who say it's total garbage. First of all,
there's no way in hell this movie rates 10 stars. I can't imagine why
anyone would rank it that highly; and yes, one does wonder whether some
of the more enthusiastic reviewers were involved with the production in
But I'm just as baffled by those who panned it top to bottom and gave it the lowest possible rating. If "Push" is one of the worst films these folks have seen, then I'm sorry, but they're simply not watching enough bad movies. Much of the plot is predictable or silly, and the sets and settings are limited and unimaginative, but the atmosphere is enjoyably tense throughout (helped by excellent, nervous editing), and the script is, for the most part, sharp and tight. There's quite a bit of overacting---the cast may have watched "Scarface" one too many times---but it never falls below professional level. No Pacinos here, but a talented young cast doing a solid job.
I found "Push" in the local bargain bin for $2, and fully expected to watch it (or part of it) once, then sell it back to the store for a buck. Instead, I'm keeping it.
I have never seen so many enthusiastic responses that were obviously staged when the film first came out in 2006 - LOL had a good laugh with them. The film had its merits, a decent attempt at a crime/drug thriller but what bothered me was the source - are there really people like this - have decent jobs, great girlfriends, lives seem together and accidentally find some drugs and then track down the big time dealers to offer their services? That's a serious WTF moment right there! I know some folks idolize the bad guys but usually they are impoverished and see it as a way out. Well to do folks that dabble in crime are in it for the thrill but go about it smarter. If they had come from a different angle it might have been more plausible. Chad Lindberg from Fast and the Furious tried hard in his role but I kept seeing the vulnerable character he played in that film. Chazz Palminteri did great as usual in a small role, but would have been better as the bad guy. Michael Rappaport was excellent as usual and Charlotte Ayanna while gorgeous, needs some acting lessons as much as the rest of the unknown cast does. Decent attempt at Drama but filled with so many script, acting, editing, and production flaws I would have sent them back to the lab!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
All we wanted was a decent movie to watch on Sunday. The only reason I gave this 2 stars was for Chazz Palminteri. He is a great actor and is the only thing good about this movie. The other acting is ... I don't know how else to explain it... crap. I came on this site hoping it would indicate the actors were given the story and script minutes before filming. I would have felt better if it had been impromptu... not much better, but better than I do now. It was frustrating to watch and the characters were unbelievable... and I mean I could not identify or feel empathy/compassion for any of them - except Chazz' character. Are some people really as stupid as they seemed to be in this movie??
Having watched over 800 movies from past few years (don't
ask.blockbuster / netflex unlimited rental for flat price).....
I have to say...anyone who rated this movie more than a 5 star is an absolute nut....
This moving is got to be the lower button 10% list....
I see no exciting drug/sex or fast money sense as promised.... and not enough suspense to make this interesting. Not enough action to make this interesting. Not enough sex to make this interesting. I mean....I do watch and enjoy variety of movies but I can't seem to put a category on this movie (it just fail on funny, suspense) a crime movie maybe? And that was it. No way a normal person would rate this film 5 or more stars.
Unfortunately. My advice is to Stay away.
After reading some of these other comments rating this film good and even great with good acting, I am absolutely convinced that people associated with this film are installing these comments. I can understand people having differing opinions. But this movie was flat out horrible, and the acting was some kind of joke. It was like a bunch of high school kids made this movie. I almost never make comments unless I see something so bad or so great that I need to vent my feelings for spending the 2 hours. This movie was that bad. The film is so ridiculous it could be used as comedy or camp ranking right down there with Reefer madness and ShowGirls.
I Sat in anticipation of this film expecting to be entertained but sadly that was not to be. I found the camera work to be very jerky at the start and during the film which did not add to any aspect of the film. the sound where characters were sat in a room sounded like the mic man had the mic set on echo and again did not add anything to the film. music was good if that is to your taste and the storyline I found to be predictable. overall I did not enjoy this film and now have to find a way of gaining the two hours of my life wasted watching it, maybe I will go to be two hours later tonight and watch Kill Bill again.
I remember hearing the arguments of "The Godfather" vs "Goodfellas".
"The Godfather" is a gangster fairy tale. "Goodfellas" is gutty and
real. I've seen "The Godfather" twice. I've watched "Goodfellas" at
least 10 times.
Perhaps this movie is to "Goodfellas" what "Scarface" is to "The Godfather" "Scarface" was a drug dealer fairy tale. "Push" does have some rather stylish bad guys. But this movie has a very real gritty feel to it, ordinary Joe's selling drugs and what happens to a group of life long friends when the fast money and fast drugs comes into their lives.
I'll be interested in seeing Dave Rodriguez's next movies.
all the other reviews here were written by the production team. this
movie is just that pathetic. bad acting, worthless plot, no logic....
they should have just played the soundtrack to a black screen with the
words XTC is cool on it. that would convey the same idea. alas i bet
the ritilin generation will love this "movie" (read: feces) because it
has shiny lights. im assuming this was produced by some coked up
Hollywood idiot. which explains how they sell x for 40 / pill. guess
what. no one has payed that much in a decade.
please don't watch this.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |
|Plot keywords||Main details||Your user reviews|
|Your vote history|