Summary: As someone else noted, I did not like the main character, and I found the overall plot to be too transparent. Frankly, for my tastes, they could just have put Andrew in a room by himself and filmed whatever happened for 90 minutes, and come up with a much better film. He's the only reason I watched it, and the entire 6/10 score is for him. Zero for everything else.
Plot: How many times do we have to go back to the tired penny shaving nonsense made popular by Superman III, but also seen in the excellent Office Space, and numerous other films? This has been done to death, and more importantly, it has been done better. Just stop it already.
Setting: Again, someone needs to tell Canadian filmmakers that Toronto, Vancouver, and in this case Montreal do not look like NYC. They just don't. Throwing in the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building every once in a while only serves to re-emphasize the difference. If Canada wants to make bad films, why don't we at least make them set in Canada? Why insult our neighbour to the south? If we're proud of this schlock (and somebody is, because our logos are all over the credits) then why isn't it set here?
Costuming: I thought whoever decided what financial software people look like has obviously never stepped anywhere near such an outfit. These are very conservative environments. They don't dress like whores, even in the back.
Direction/Editing/Writing: The visual aids were ridiculous. Did we really need to see disappearing coasters? Did we really need the sweetener-packet demonstration? I guess so. Because if you buy that you can follow a series of RANDOMLY generated accounts with ANOTHER series of randomly generated accounts, you do need a visual aid. Or maybe it's me. I could swear they told us the accounts were random. If the final account ISN'T random, then it would be easily found by examining the source code to determine how the final account is decided.
Computer Effects: Speaking of source code, since when is it executable? When does a comment line suddenly become a command prompt? If you're going to go to the trouble to mock up a computer screen, at least give the audience a little credit.
Plot: How many times do we have to go back to the tired penny shaving nonsense made popular by Superman III, but also seen in the excellent Office Space, and numerous other films? This has been done to death, and more importantly, it has been done better. Just stop it already.
Setting: Again, someone needs to tell Canadian filmmakers that Toronto, Vancouver, and in this case Montreal do not look like NYC. They just don't. Throwing in the Empire State Building or the Chrysler Building every once in a while only serves to re-emphasize the difference. If Canada wants to make bad films, why don't we at least make them set in Canada? Why insult our neighbour to the south? If we're proud of this schlock (and somebody is, because our logos are all over the credits) then why isn't it set here?
Costuming: I thought whoever decided what financial software people look like has obviously never stepped anywhere near such an outfit. These are very conservative environments. They don't dress like whores, even in the back.
Direction/Editing/Writing: The visual aids were ridiculous. Did we really need to see disappearing coasters? Did we really need the sweetener-packet demonstration? I guess so. Because if you buy that you can follow a series of RANDOMLY generated accounts with ANOTHER series of randomly generated accounts, you do need a visual aid. Or maybe it's me. I could swear they told us the accounts were random. If the final account ISN'T random, then it would be easily found by examining the source code to determine how the final account is decided.
Computer Effects: Speaking of source code, since when is it executable? When does a comment line suddenly become a command prompt? If you're going to go to the trouble to mock up a computer screen, at least give the audience a little credit.
