Saturday, February 19, 2011

STREETS, a review

In this post I have the fortunate pleasure of bringing you the reader (if any) my review and thoughts of the independent film entitled Streets. This film was shot on location in the cities of Fairfield, Suisun, and Vallejo. Written and Directed by Isaac Escobedo. This film has been about over four years in the making. I was also a 1st AC on this film. Heres the review:
Streets is a film about a young man named Willie "streets" Benjamin. He's a homeless guy that smokes a lot of crack. The film opens as we follow Willie going through his day to day life, digging through garbage cans and hoarding little nicknacks like rusty knives and picture frames. a few minutes in we are introduced to Stacy. For a homeless girl she looks fairly well kempt. We find out that Willie and Stacy share a common drug dealer by the name of Rahk (pronounced Rock, stupid..). Willie finds out that Stacy owes money to Rahk and they both decide that they are fed up with living on the streets. So Willie comes up with the most original plan ever to help them with their situation. The pimp and ho principle came into effect about 20 minutes into the film. They smoked more crack. talked and then walked away. We find out that Willie got thrown out of his house for smoking weed at work. Then they got to a party with some other hooker, which surprisingly her name is Candy. Seriously how original is that, like every film has a hooker named Candy in it. Then I guess Stacy cant open her mouth without putting something in it cause she starts blowing a guy at the party for coke. They argue and leave the party. Then shit really goes down. A cop by the name of detective Garcia, complete with the obligatory and blatant shoulder holster over the dress shirt look, tells her that Stacy's body was found in a dumpster. No surprise there. Willie, completely destroyed that his prize money maker is dead, decides to visit his father. He finds out that his mom is dead cause she was so depressed that her son was gone (a plot twist introduced way too late in the game). he smokes more crack. Then he goes to the drug dealer to buy more drugs. They talk for a moment and Rahk makes him point his gun at him. He reveals that he killed Stacy. Something that Willie should have put together long before Stacy was even dead. Then after more conversation that doesn't really lead anywhere Willie tries to shoot the gun. Either out of stupidity or just from a lack of brain cells he doesn't realize that there is no magazine in the gun. Luckily Willie finds it in himself to stab Rahk in the stomach. Oddly enough Rahk dies right away after being stabbed. Shortly after Willie turns himself in.
This film is a poorly executed portrayal of the troubles and hardships that the actual homeless youth of our surrounding areas are in. I think a little more research should have been done prior to making the decision to write a film like this. As for writing the script is insanely weak. I'm not even going to sugar coat this one. It is horrible. In no way or form does this film make me care about the characters at all. Never in this movie do I ever feel that the characters are realistic. They're just playing stereotypes of stereotypes. The drug dealer of Rahk, played by Marcus Gardner (and amazing up and coming black actor) is literally every stereotype of the low level, dealing-out-of-your-own-house black gangster in every crappy drug film you will find in the five dollar bin at wal-mart.
The story as a whole was genuinely uninteresting. Basically NOTHING HAPPENED. There was no clear beginning, middle, or end. Stacy just disappeared halfway through, never to be seen again. I didn't care at all that stacy died. Apparently neither did Willie from his Buster Keaton demeanor throughout the film. He basically had one mode and that was to stare blankly whenever the scene called for his character to become emotional.
As for the look of the film. the cinematography is pretty much nonexistent. Clearly the Director of Photography, Chris Powell has a lot to learn. This film was shot with a Panasonic DVX100b and a Letus 35mm adapter. Being late 2008, I'm sure that the filmmakers decided to forego the luxuries of the current technological advances in image quality and go with an outdated camera system that was too bulky, too heavy and flat out a bitch to handle. I can understand that the film was trying (cant stress enough on the word trying) to go for that gritty, documentary feel to it. The decision to shoot the film completely handheld seriously hurt the films emotional impact (if any). After watching this film I didn't feel like I was informed of the downfalls of our homeless youth. I was more concerned if the camera operator had cerebral palsy. It was just too damn shaky.
With the utmost respect to the sound operator Rick Bowman, (coolest dude ever and a hard worker) this film has a difficult time with audio consistency. Basically it sounds like a bad asian film. Its not that their words don't match cause they do. The sound calls to much attention to itself. Like when your brain puts the image and sound together, it just doesn't feel right. Also its just the voices and you cant hear any of the rustling of the movement. Or the sound of the cups hitting the tables. Something is just off about it and i cant put my finger on it. The ambient noise is also just horrible. There were tons of exterior scenes that the filmmakers had to edit around. Why the hell would you decide to film under an overpass? Also there are scenes with background music. Particularly the poorly lit and suspiciously empty house party. Theres some really bad and repetitive techno music playing. Its clearly just laid under the audio track in post. Horrible decision. If that was me I would have played the song on a radio, then recorded the sound throughout the house. It gives it that real organic tone that would have saved that scene from being as ridiculous as a student film dealing with suicide.
There are also some serious religious undertones. Besides the actual scene where the two homeless kids sit in on a preacher talking to a group of homeless people there is a ton of dialogue that just feels too preachy. As a viewer it just felt force fed to hear all the talk about getting saved and at certain points in the dialogue it just drowned out the actual point that the characters were hoping to meet.
All in all, taking the fact that I know this project personally and the stories surrounding the creation of this travesty, this is a horrible 77 minutes to watch. Falling asleep might be a viewers commonplace. It just felt like a short film that didnt know when to end. Like that awkward moment after a walking in on someone masturbating. For a film that strives so much but ultimately stumbles at the gates, I wouldn't even bootleg this movie. I feel like I should have gotten paid to watch this movie. I have officially found the cure to insomnia. This film is very pompous in nature and pretentious in its attempt. The filmmakers should have realized that a feature film was out of their league. I suggest going back to the drawing board, build experience on other people's sets, get your hands dirty, and come back with a real game plan. If you don't, then expect to see more reviews like this one, not just from me, but from everyone.