Before coming here to write, I read through the Trivia for this film. The very first item says that the writers spent almost a year perfecting the script. I don't want to be unkind because this is a student film, but how did this ever make it out of the school it came from?
Even considering the fact that this was written by what I assume are 20-somethings, actual humans don't talk like they do in this film, and you shouldn't need to be older than 20-something to know that. I can't really even fault the actors for this because they seemed to be trying to do their best with what they were given.
The editing was jumbled to the point that there were times I didn't know who was where, and what they were talking about. It's as though there were sections cut that were important to the story flow, but were seemingly just chopped out. On the other hand, there is a scene with stale doughnuts that repeats. It's exactly the same scene, about 20-30 minutes after it's originally seen. For a moment I thought it meant something -- that it was yet another story arc that was started, but not finished -- but no, it wasn't. Considering one of the Trivia items is that the film was only finished a week before the release date, it makes a little sense, but still would have been caught by anyone who watched it once through after the final edit.
The story was a lot of different ideas that never really fit together. We go from one character, Jacob, being struck by lightning, and after a long stretch of filler, seems to die. And then a title card says "Two Months Later," where Jacob is driving a car, with his two friends, on the way -- the first time -- to that doughnut shop with the leftover stale doughnuts. After a bit of that, we have another title card that says "Two Months Earlier," which theoretically would bring us back to where we were before "Two Months Later," but no. Now, through dialog, we find out that Jacob was struck by lightning "a few months ago." From there, the story completely changes into the discovery of a "global disease," but not a virus, so apparently, not COVID. And THAT then spirals into a discussion of how it started, why it continues, and why this hapless trio of friends seem to be immune. I'll leave all that unspoken here.
In my mind, I tried to fit this film into being a satire, but that didn't work because it really satirized nothing except maybe how people stay the same as they were in their freshman year of high school? I don't know. I couldn't make anything I tried to find in the film actually work in the world of film. It's not satire or a parody or drama or a mystery, or even science fiction. I DO know that it was a student film, so I've, again, tried to not be unkind about it. But didn't ANYONE say "no, this just isn't what you think it is?"
I won't say to "not waste your time," but I won't recommend it either. It's a one-watch and done. I gave it three stars because I could see that whatever the final result, a lot of work was put into it, and the three main actors had very nice teeth. They do, really! Proceed with caution.
Even considering the fact that this was written by what I assume are 20-somethings, actual humans don't talk like they do in this film, and you shouldn't need to be older than 20-something to know that. I can't really even fault the actors for this because they seemed to be trying to do their best with what they were given.
The editing was jumbled to the point that there were times I didn't know who was where, and what they were talking about. It's as though there were sections cut that were important to the story flow, but were seemingly just chopped out. On the other hand, there is a scene with stale doughnuts that repeats. It's exactly the same scene, about 20-30 minutes after it's originally seen. For a moment I thought it meant something -- that it was yet another story arc that was started, but not finished -- but no, it wasn't. Considering one of the Trivia items is that the film was only finished a week before the release date, it makes a little sense, but still would have been caught by anyone who watched it once through after the final edit.
The story was a lot of different ideas that never really fit together. We go from one character, Jacob, being struck by lightning, and after a long stretch of filler, seems to die. And then a title card says "Two Months Later," where Jacob is driving a car, with his two friends, on the way -- the first time -- to that doughnut shop with the leftover stale doughnuts. After a bit of that, we have another title card that says "Two Months Earlier," which theoretically would bring us back to where we were before "Two Months Later," but no. Now, through dialog, we find out that Jacob was struck by lightning "a few months ago." From there, the story completely changes into the discovery of a "global disease," but not a virus, so apparently, not COVID. And THAT then spirals into a discussion of how it started, why it continues, and why this hapless trio of friends seem to be immune. I'll leave all that unspoken here.
In my mind, I tried to fit this film into being a satire, but that didn't work because it really satirized nothing except maybe how people stay the same as they were in their freshman year of high school? I don't know. I couldn't make anything I tried to find in the film actually work in the world of film. It's not satire or a parody or drama or a mystery, or even science fiction. I DO know that it was a student film, so I've, again, tried to not be unkind about it. But didn't ANYONE say "no, this just isn't what you think it is?"
I won't say to "not waste your time," but I won't recommend it either. It's a one-watch and done. I gave it three stars because I could see that whatever the final result, a lot of work was put into it, and the three main actors had very nice teeth. They do, really! Proceed with caution.
