IMDb RATING
7.1/10
3.5K
YOUR RATING
Traces the birth and failure of new media company govWorks.com.Traces the birth and failure of new media company govWorks.com.Traces the birth and failure of new media company govWorks.com.
- Awards
- 10 wins & 6 nominations total
Jonathan Agus
- Self
- (as Jonathan Agus)
Featured reviews
I think the greatest thing about this film is how it really shows the audience the future while the people in the film have no idea what is coming around the corner.
We get a real sense of what is to come early on when Tuzman comes back from a meeting trying to raise capital. He bitches about how he got ripped to shreds by one investor (you have no project experience etc... etc..). It's a very telling sign.
and it is amazing to watch how Tuzman was duplicated over and over again by several people who just threw money at a phenomenon without understanding it. It was an amazing thing to witness and Startup.Com captures it like nothing I have ever seen before.
Add in some dramatic moments, an office break in, a missing lawyer, a ruthless competitor, and a telling firing.. and startup.com is one documentary that will engage you.
Rating 8 out of 10
We get a real sense of what is to come early on when Tuzman comes back from a meeting trying to raise capital. He bitches about how he got ripped to shreds by one investor (you have no project experience etc... etc..). It's a very telling sign.
and it is amazing to watch how Tuzman was duplicated over and over again by several people who just threw money at a phenomenon without understanding it. It was an amazing thing to witness and Startup.Com captures it like nothing I have ever seen before.
Add in some dramatic moments, an office break in, a missing lawyer, a ruthless competitor, and a telling firing.. and startup.com is one documentary that will engage you.
Rating 8 out of 10
I have friends who either work for or own a Dotcom company. So many fail, but they keep going at it. For those who make it, life can be sweet. It use to be a world where everyone can make it until the NASDAC fell apart.
This film by former MTVers, is a slick and glossy look at a rise and fall of a Dotcom company. We follow two high school buddies (Kaleil and Tom) from their coming up with a name and idea for their site to their breakup and demise. The emotions are all there, from elation to despair. You are there for everything. Though the film has no narration you can still tell what is going on if you pay attention.
This is an interesting piece of life in the late 20th century. You'll think about these guys the next time you go cruising through the internet. If you see it, rent it.
This film by former MTVers, is a slick and glossy look at a rise and fall of a Dotcom company. We follow two high school buddies (Kaleil and Tom) from their coming up with a name and idea for their site to their breakup and demise. The emotions are all there, from elation to despair. You are there for everything. Though the film has no narration you can still tell what is going on if you pay attention.
This is an interesting piece of life in the late 20th century. You'll think about these guys the next time you go cruising through the internet. If you see it, rent it.
This is one of the most compelling and heart-wrenching films of the new millennium. The real-life struggle of two men trying to capitalize on the "Internet Boom" shows how mistaken everyone was that the Internet was the premiere way to get rich quickly and live happily ever after. But aside from the expose that formulating and operating an Internet business is far less glamorous than potential dollar signs would have one to believe, "Startup.com" is a perfect example of how the lure of riches and the good life can leave behind friendships made along the way; greed demoralizes oneself for the sake of material ownership that may ultimately cease and desist anyway. Filled with many subtleties and slight flourishes of (in)humanity, and telling signs of deteriorating personal relationships on the road to obtaining power and capital, this film contains far more juicy, resonating-with-truth moments than one could find (or even believe) in fiction. Perhaps most importantly, one realizes that with every little company with a numerical representation that he sees in the trade market one day that then disappears the next, there are real people like Kaleil and Tom whose lives are at stake and whom are suffering from the harsh reality that in the "real world," the American dream does not always come to fruition. Final Grade: A
Those who are commenting on the mediocrity of the craftmanship of this movie are missing the point. The rise and fall of the dot-coms have become a meaningful part of American history and lore. Stock tickers, balance sheets and bankruptcy sales tell part of the story, but there's a difference between arriving at the scene of a train wreck and actually watching it happen.
The value of this movie is that, in spite of all of its flaws, you get to watch the train wreck knowing full well what's going to come, you can see why the principals didn't see the things that seem so obvious to us watching the film now, and you can see how their hubris, lack of technical understanding and lack of focus lead to their downfall.
I'm sure that it could been a better movie, but it's the only behind the scenes account we have of what must have happened hundreds of times all over the country. Like the Zapruder film and Hanlon & Naudet's account of 9/11, it's value comes from the fact that the cameras were there, catching history as it happened.
This movie should be required viewing for all B-School students, sort of like making student drivers watch Red Asphalt.
The value of this movie is that, in spite of all of its flaws, you get to watch the train wreck knowing full well what's going to come, you can see why the principals didn't see the things that seem so obvious to us watching the film now, and you can see how their hubris, lack of technical understanding and lack of focus lead to their downfall.
I'm sure that it could been a better movie, but it's the only behind the scenes account we have of what must have happened hundreds of times all over the country. Like the Zapruder film and Hanlon & Naudet's account of 9/11, it's value comes from the fact that the cameras were there, catching history as it happened.
This movie should be required viewing for all B-School students, sort of like making student drivers watch Red Asphalt.
Startup.com is not a movie about the dot-com boom. It's not a movie about building a business; it's not a movie about technology and new industries.
It's a movie about greed and ego.
The two founders start off with the idea that they want to create a "dot com" -- they bounce around a bunch of goofy ideas like virtual cemetaries and eventually settle on a portal for government-related services. The fact that they wanted to document the startup of this venture from day one is another testimonial to their ego, greed and lack of focus.
I agree with most of the comments others have said about the movie. It's fragmented, and has gaping holes in it relating to explaining what's going on. The viewer ends up really not having a clue as to why the venture failed, which is another testimonial to the principals in that apparently the nature of what went wrong wasn't nearly as important to them as the fact that it did go wrong and their dreams weren't realized. Boo hoo.
After seeing the movie and not having much additional information on the project, I am left with my own thoughts as to some of the blanks that the film left open. Specifically, these guys failed because they were more interested in the fruits of their labor, than the labor itself, which was a means to an end. That's why they failed. The only reason they got as far as they did is they ran into others, greedy employees, greedy financiers who were just like them and had no passion for the job, just the brass ring that was promised at the end.
They might have had "good people" working for them, but I'd bet that there wasn't a single person in the company who actually had innate passion for the application and industry they were in. If you ask any successful businessman what's the secret, the first thing they'll likely tell you is, "Do something you enjoy doing." I'm sure Kalil enjoyed hob-nobbing with rich people, but that wasn't the purpose of his company, though it looks like his subsequent career involves that.
We're left to try to figure out exactly how things went wrong.
The one thing that I'm left with is, the tech end of the project never worked right. I'd bet good money the whole foundation was built on Windows technology and was never very flexible or manageable. And Tom is probably responsible for dropping the ball there, but then again like I said, these guys didn't really care about the business... they just wanted to be successful.
If anything, the movie doesn't really teach us lessons about startups. It is a tale of two misguided, self-absorbed guys who find other self-absorbed people with more money and get a free ride for a little while.
It's a movie about greed and ego.
The two founders start off with the idea that they want to create a "dot com" -- they bounce around a bunch of goofy ideas like virtual cemetaries and eventually settle on a portal for government-related services. The fact that they wanted to document the startup of this venture from day one is another testimonial to their ego, greed and lack of focus.
I agree with most of the comments others have said about the movie. It's fragmented, and has gaping holes in it relating to explaining what's going on. The viewer ends up really not having a clue as to why the venture failed, which is another testimonial to the principals in that apparently the nature of what went wrong wasn't nearly as important to them as the fact that it did go wrong and their dreams weren't realized. Boo hoo.
After seeing the movie and not having much additional information on the project, I am left with my own thoughts as to some of the blanks that the film left open. Specifically, these guys failed because they were more interested in the fruits of their labor, than the labor itself, which was a means to an end. That's why they failed. The only reason they got as far as they did is they ran into others, greedy employees, greedy financiers who were just like them and had no passion for the job, just the brass ring that was promised at the end.
They might have had "good people" working for them, but I'd bet that there wasn't a single person in the company who actually had innate passion for the application and industry they were in. If you ask any successful businessman what's the secret, the first thing they'll likely tell you is, "Do something you enjoy doing." I'm sure Kalil enjoyed hob-nobbing with rich people, but that wasn't the purpose of his company, though it looks like his subsequent career involves that.
We're left to try to figure out exactly how things went wrong.
The one thing that I'm left with is, the tech end of the project never worked right. I'd bet good money the whole foundation was built on Windows technology and was never very flexible or manageable. And Tom is probably responsible for dropping the ball there, but then again like I said, these guys didn't really care about the business... they just wanted to be successful.
If anything, the movie doesn't really teach us lessons about startups. It is a tale of two misguided, self-absorbed guys who find other self-absorbed people with more money and get a free ride for a little while.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaJehane Noujaim, the videographer and producer, began the project when she was the roommate of the documentary's principal character, Kaleil Tuzman. She was previously a producer at MTV.
- How long is Startup.com?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Стартап.ком
- Filming locations
- Silicon Valley, California, USA(business meeting)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Gross US & Canada
- $1,283,356
- Opening weekend US & Canada
- $16,118
- May 13, 2001
- Gross worldwide
- $1,830,008
- Runtime1 hour 47 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.33 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
