"Ten 'til Noon" is one of those films that are more interesting for their form rather than their content. The concept (how different but interconnecting characters spend 10 minutes of their life, from 11:50 to 12:00 p.m) is intriguing, the twists (that come when the concept is finally broken) are genuinely unexpected, the acting is fine (Rayne Guest, in perhaps the film's trickiest role, is both explosively sexy and a good actress), the direction is perfectly OK for the budget, but ultimately the film is little more than an exercise in gimmickry (even having a 5-minute epilogue sequence AFTER some of the end credits have rolled), with a few Tarantino influences also evident (mostly in the dialogue). Overall, I'd say it's worth seeing for its sheer audacity. (**)
23 Reviews
Today's art school project: Mimic pulp fiction in narrative style.
dilbertsuperman29 November 2006
This is the caliber of a great film school project, which is a bit below a poor theatrical release. The script has lots of twists and the narration is told out of sequence from various perspectives all covering the same 10 minutes or so and is worth a look on a boring day.
It's not a blockbuster but if you have a pulp fiction itch and want to see a movie that wishes it was pulp fiction but couldn't quite pull it off due to poor acting and limp action sequences- this is it.
Not a bad way to waste a Saturday afternoon, I liked it even though it had some super amateur moments like checking the pulse of a person with leather gloves on, an assassin that wears high heels to work, etc.
There are some sexually perverse scenes and I applaud it for that if nothing else. This movie tried pretty hard to be pulp fictiony but it's just OK-amateur in the end. PLOT: A guy is going to meet an unusual fate in ten minutes- see it from all the angles and pretend this is pulp fiction or something.
It's not a blockbuster but if you have a pulp fiction itch and want to see a movie that wishes it was pulp fiction but couldn't quite pull it off due to poor acting and limp action sequences- this is it.
Not a bad way to waste a Saturday afternoon, I liked it even though it had some super amateur moments like checking the pulse of a person with leather gloves on, an assassin that wears high heels to work, etc.
There are some sexually perverse scenes and I applaud it for that if nothing else. This movie tried pretty hard to be pulp fictiony but it's just OK-amateur in the end. PLOT: A guy is going to meet an unusual fate in ten minutes- see it from all the angles and pretend this is pulp fiction or something.
What a tweest!
bigflavor22 November 2006
Watching this movie didn't make me angry. It wasn't good enough to make me angry. It was shallow, the writing was bad, so the acting was par to it. The actors themselves seemed fine.
The story wasn't interesting, the settings weren't interesting, however the shots were interesting.
Worth watching? Not really.
Worth watching on a Saturday morning with the blinds drawn nursing a hang over? Sure.
It's far from the Usual Suspects, in fact, I gave the movie a 5 because I felt it was my duty to lower the current misleading rating.
I'd rather just watch episodes of 24.
The story wasn't interesting, the settings weren't interesting, however the shots were interesting.
Worth watching? Not really.
Worth watching on a Saturday morning with the blinds drawn nursing a hang over? Sure.
It's far from the Usual Suspects, in fact, I gave the movie a 5 because I felt it was my duty to lower the current misleading rating.
I'd rather just watch episodes of 24.
Boring and Derivative
chris-407123 November 2006
I should've realised it was a sign of things to come when the trailer for this film bored me.
Having watched several "indie" films on the strength of the reviews on here, and subsequently finding that my view is completely opposite to those other reviewers, I began wondering if it's possible I am watching completely different films from these people, or are they perhaps friends/family etc of the film makers trying to 'big up' their work? Hmmm.
Are you interested in seeing an amateur's homage to Pulp Fiction and 11:14, except done with worse actors, a silly score (undermines various scenes) and unbelievable jumps in logic? If not, then skip this film.
Here is my open letter to two of the players in this film.
Alfonso Morgan, please, please, please, stop trying to 'be' Samuel L Jackon a la Pulp Fiction. No-one can do what he does as well as he does.
Director, please come up with something original. It does you a disservice to churn out this stuff pretending to be Quentin Tarantino.
Simply dire, and I really cannot see how anyone could say this is a good film. It is a disgrace that people have somehow managed to put a score of 8.5 on this, the same as films like Pulp fiction or Goodfellas. It is no-where near these movies; a 4 or 5 would be a more reasonable average rating, I give it a 3.
Having watched several "indie" films on the strength of the reviews on here, and subsequently finding that my view is completely opposite to those other reviewers, I began wondering if it's possible I am watching completely different films from these people, or are they perhaps friends/family etc of the film makers trying to 'big up' their work? Hmmm.
Are you interested in seeing an amateur's homage to Pulp Fiction and 11:14, except done with worse actors, a silly score (undermines various scenes) and unbelievable jumps in logic? If not, then skip this film.
Here is my open letter to two of the players in this film.
Alfonso Morgan, please, please, please, stop trying to 'be' Samuel L Jackon a la Pulp Fiction. No-one can do what he does as well as he does.
Director, please come up with something original. It does you a disservice to churn out this stuff pretending to be Quentin Tarantino.
Simply dire, and I really cannot see how anyone could say this is a good film. It is a disgrace that people have somehow managed to put a score of 8.5 on this, the same as films like Pulp fiction or Goodfellas. It is no-where near these movies; a 4 or 5 would be a more reasonable average rating, I give it a 3.
Original Indie
cadmandu5 February 2006
I just saw this at the Indie Festival in San Francisco. No one else may ever get to see this one, but you should, so I'll make some comments.
The premise is very intriguing. A murder happens. The action occupies 10 minutes -- no more, no less, and that's what we see. Then we see a replay of those 10 minutes, and the actions of people associated with the murder, from their point of view.
This is a very clever premise, and the director pulls it off OK. As you might imagine, the acting is uneven; some very good, some really mediocre. The fellow who plays the hit-man is incredibly smooth, and his boss, Mr. Duke, also seems to be a more experienced actor. The rest of them are questionable. Larry (the unhappy bloke who is the hittee) is lame. Parts of the script are wooden. We also never get to see the story of the bank robber, which had the most potential in the whole setup. The gay characters are more of a plot trick than real people.
But on the whole, entertaining, with enough plot twists to make for an interesting time. I just wish they had done more with the script.
The premise is very intriguing. A murder happens. The action occupies 10 minutes -- no more, no less, and that's what we see. Then we see a replay of those 10 minutes, and the actions of people associated with the murder, from their point of view.
This is a very clever premise, and the director pulls it off OK. As you might imagine, the acting is uneven; some very good, some really mediocre. The fellow who plays the hit-man is incredibly smooth, and his boss, Mr. Duke, also seems to be a more experienced actor. The rest of them are questionable. Larry (the unhappy bloke who is the hittee) is lame. Parts of the script are wooden. We also never get to see the story of the bank robber, which had the most potential in the whole setup. The gay characters are more of a plot trick than real people.
But on the whole, entertaining, with enough plot twists to make for an interesting time. I just wish they had done more with the script.
Ouch - suck alert
winterpage9 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Honestly, people who gave this movie a ten would have given 100 for pulp fiction. This is the level that we are dealing with here.
The movie isn't bad but no way is it like "OMG, the best movie since Pulp Fiction!". Some people have incredibly low expectations for movies, even those of indie variety. Personally, I found my interest in the movie waned after the half-hour mark. The plot defies logic and belief. You have got to hear the part about why the wife did what she did in order "to save her husband". Yeah, right. I guarantee that you would walk out of the theatre thinking, "hmm, now that doesn't make sense at all." This is one movie in which you really need to suspend all logic and belief.
Those who said that the music score is good were probably listening to their MP3 players. It absolutely killed the movie in some parts.
In conclusion, watch the movie only if you have nothing particular important to do. I give this a three because there is one long sex sequence in the motel which is decent.
The movie isn't bad but no way is it like "OMG, the best movie since Pulp Fiction!". Some people have incredibly low expectations for movies, even those of indie variety. Personally, I found my interest in the movie waned after the half-hour mark. The plot defies logic and belief. You have got to hear the part about why the wife did what she did in order "to save her husband". Yeah, right. I guarantee that you would walk out of the theatre thinking, "hmm, now that doesn't make sense at all." This is one movie in which you really need to suspend all logic and belief.
Those who said that the music score is good were probably listening to their MP3 players. It absolutely killed the movie in some parts.
In conclusion, watch the movie only if you have nothing particular important to do. I give this a three because there is one long sex sequence in the motel which is decent.
nice audio
ginsu-130 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This film has a really nice mix. The soundtrack is classy complex and cutting edge. I give the audio 10 stars.
The shot composition is uneven. Some sequences are shot with boring coverage - then are repeated with inspired shot choices.
The film establishes a certain rhythm - but then breaks it. It would be nice if they put the time into the screenplay to keep the rhythm and move the story forward. one feels cheated when the rhythm is broken.
the happy ending, sad ending, happy ending didn't work for me. I would have been satisfied with the first happy ending. the sad ending seemed unmotivated.
Overall I was progressively impressed by the story as it unfolded (aside from the above notes).
The shot composition is uneven. Some sequences are shot with boring coverage - then are repeated with inspired shot choices.
The film establishes a certain rhythm - but then breaks it. It would be nice if they put the time into the screenplay to keep the rhythm and move the story forward. one feels cheated when the rhythm is broken.
the happy ending, sad ending, happy ending didn't work for me. I would have been satisfied with the first happy ending. the sad ending seemed unmotivated.
Overall I was progressively impressed by the story as it unfolded (aside from the above notes).
These filmmakers had an idea. Too bad they didn't have any talent
MBunge26 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
This movie went bad faster than a jug of milk left outside on a summer day in the Sahara Desert. These filmmakers came up with one good idea and then spent the 87 minutes of 10 'til Noon proving they had absolutely NOTHING else to offer. After watching this, I now believe inspiration should not strike some people.
The good idea of this film is that it is about what happens one day to an interconnected group of people between 11:50 AM and Noon. The story is told in 10 minute segments where we see what happened to a different character in that amount of time. The first two segments are okay. They're not great, but they're good enough to keep your interest. Unfortunately, the 67 minutes that follow are awful and get worse as they go along. And when I say awful, I mean crappy 1970s sitcom awful.
The first 10 minutes focuses on Larry Taylor (Rick D. Wasserman). He's a rich man who wakes up to discover Mr. Jay (Alfonso Freeman) and Miss Milch (Jenya Lano) starring at him. They're there to kill Larry. Mr. Jay is one of those hit men who talk like he went to finishing school and then got a philosophy degree. Miss Milch just stands there.
The second 10 minutes focuses on Larry's wife, Becky (Rayne Guest). She's having rough sex in a hotel room with Alan Free (Jason Hamer). Becky seems like the angriest woman in the world, yet Alan still inexplicably cares for her.
The third 10 minutes focuses on Carter and Rush (Daniel Hagen and Dylan Kussman), two surveillance experts who masturbate in front of each other. Do you see what I mean about the story going downhill? Carter and Rush are spying on Becky and Alan for a man named Mr. Duke (Thomas Kopache).
Mr. Duke is the subject of the fourth 10 minute segment as we see him arrange everything that's happened in the movie so far. I will admit there are a few moments in this stretch that are pretty good when Mr. Duke explains his plans to one of his henchmen, thanks mostly to the acting chops of Thomas Kopache. That doesn't change the fact you could cut this entire segment out of the film and it wouldn't affect anything.
The fifth 10 minutes are about Leo (George Williams), the unintentionally buffoonish gangster that is Mr. Duke's boss and the reason why Becky is getting spied on and Larry is getting killed. Leo is more like Al Bundy than Al Capone, right up to having a wife he wants nothing to do with. Sheba (Jennifer Hill) walks around topless most of the time she's on screen and has a really ugly boob job. Whether these filmmakers deliberately cast an actress with a really ugly boob job to make some sort of point about the character of Sheba or if they just wouldn't know an attractive breast if it slapped them in the face, I can't say.
I'll leave the remaining segments of 10 'til Noon to your imagination because, frankly, what you come up with in your own head will be better than what's actually in the movie.
This is also one of those movies that doesn't have an ending. It just stops. When I was watching it and the end credits came up, I thought there HAD to be something more. Well, there was but it was an epilogue that had nothing to do with the nonsensical way the main story finished. The epilogue did include some atrocious acting, making sure you finish the experience of viewing 10 'Til Noon with the worst possible aftertaste.
The truth about 10 'til Noon is that these filmmakers came up with 20 minutes of watchable stuff, added 40 minutes of pointless dreck and another 27 minutes of drivel that made less sense than a dyslexic hamster. They should have just come up with 10 more minutes of decent material, add that to the first 20 minutes of this movie and been happy with a nice film festival entry. Instead they came up with a feature film that sucks. As Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations".
The good idea of this film is that it is about what happens one day to an interconnected group of people between 11:50 AM and Noon. The story is told in 10 minute segments where we see what happened to a different character in that amount of time. The first two segments are okay. They're not great, but they're good enough to keep your interest. Unfortunately, the 67 minutes that follow are awful and get worse as they go along. And when I say awful, I mean crappy 1970s sitcom awful.
The first 10 minutes focuses on Larry Taylor (Rick D. Wasserman). He's a rich man who wakes up to discover Mr. Jay (Alfonso Freeman) and Miss Milch (Jenya Lano) starring at him. They're there to kill Larry. Mr. Jay is one of those hit men who talk like he went to finishing school and then got a philosophy degree. Miss Milch just stands there.
The second 10 minutes focuses on Larry's wife, Becky (Rayne Guest). She's having rough sex in a hotel room with Alan Free (Jason Hamer). Becky seems like the angriest woman in the world, yet Alan still inexplicably cares for her.
The third 10 minutes focuses on Carter and Rush (Daniel Hagen and Dylan Kussman), two surveillance experts who masturbate in front of each other. Do you see what I mean about the story going downhill? Carter and Rush are spying on Becky and Alan for a man named Mr. Duke (Thomas Kopache).
Mr. Duke is the subject of the fourth 10 minute segment as we see him arrange everything that's happened in the movie so far. I will admit there are a few moments in this stretch that are pretty good when Mr. Duke explains his plans to one of his henchmen, thanks mostly to the acting chops of Thomas Kopache. That doesn't change the fact you could cut this entire segment out of the film and it wouldn't affect anything.
The fifth 10 minutes are about Leo (George Williams), the unintentionally buffoonish gangster that is Mr. Duke's boss and the reason why Becky is getting spied on and Larry is getting killed. Leo is more like Al Bundy than Al Capone, right up to having a wife he wants nothing to do with. Sheba (Jennifer Hill) walks around topless most of the time she's on screen and has a really ugly boob job. Whether these filmmakers deliberately cast an actress with a really ugly boob job to make some sort of point about the character of Sheba or if they just wouldn't know an attractive breast if it slapped them in the face, I can't say.
I'll leave the remaining segments of 10 'til Noon to your imagination because, frankly, what you come up with in your own head will be better than what's actually in the movie.
This is also one of those movies that doesn't have an ending. It just stops. When I was watching it and the end credits came up, I thought there HAD to be something more. Well, there was but it was an epilogue that had nothing to do with the nonsensical way the main story finished. The epilogue did include some atrocious acting, making sure you finish the experience of viewing 10 'Til Noon with the worst possible aftertaste.
The truth about 10 'til Noon is that these filmmakers came up with 20 minutes of watchable stuff, added 40 minutes of pointless dreck and another 27 minutes of drivel that made less sense than a dyslexic hamster. They should have just come up with 10 more minutes of decent material, add that to the first 20 minutes of this movie and been happy with a nice film festival entry. Instead they came up with a feature film that sucks. As Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations".
Storm Watch - A Distant Early Warning
Keynote-110 January 2007
"Scott Storm has the most natural talent of any filmmaker I know." - Bryan Singer
Scott Storm continues to be an under-appreciated creative variable in the States. Despite carrying a major award with his first feature at the Slamdance Film Festival some years ago, it has taken this long to realize his follow-up, a guerrilla indie production with the brand of TEN TIL NOON.
While the title evokes images of a classic western, the picture is actually a dark examination of a single ten minute segment of one very bad day for a random group of seemingly amoral inhabitants of the City of Angels. While the film has yet to secure distribution beyond the festival circuit, it is crafty, violent and delightfully offensive in certain scenes. You could say that they don't make them like this anymore. Despite grander ambitions from the outset, Storm, Paul Osborne and their collaborators have accomplished uniquely commercial production values despite the complete absence of an "A-List" cast or reasonable project capitalization. In fact, the filmmakers en masse are to be commended for realizing a no-budget independent film ON FILM (as opposed to digital video) with intelligent sound design and yet another fine original score by the similarly underrated Joe Kraemer.
Given the current industry prejudice against this type of independent film, your first opportunity to see TEN TIL NOON may be through AMAZON, STARZ late-night programming or NETFLIX. Despite the naysayers, this film is very much part and parcel of the Tarantino oeuvre, and if you like 'em lean, mean and bloody, TEN TIL NOON is worth your time and attention.
Scott Storm continues to be an under-appreciated creative variable in the States. Despite carrying a major award with his first feature at the Slamdance Film Festival some years ago, it has taken this long to realize his follow-up, a guerrilla indie production with the brand of TEN TIL NOON.
While the title evokes images of a classic western, the picture is actually a dark examination of a single ten minute segment of one very bad day for a random group of seemingly amoral inhabitants of the City of Angels. While the film has yet to secure distribution beyond the festival circuit, it is crafty, violent and delightfully offensive in certain scenes. You could say that they don't make them like this anymore. Despite grander ambitions from the outset, Storm, Paul Osborne and their collaborators have accomplished uniquely commercial production values despite the complete absence of an "A-List" cast or reasonable project capitalization. In fact, the filmmakers en masse are to be commended for realizing a no-budget independent film ON FILM (as opposed to digital video) with intelligent sound design and yet another fine original score by the similarly underrated Joe Kraemer.
Given the current industry prejudice against this type of independent film, your first opportunity to see TEN TIL NOON may be through AMAZON, STARZ late-night programming or NETFLIX. Despite the naysayers, this film is very much part and parcel of the Tarantino oeuvre, and if you like 'em lean, mean and bloody, TEN TIL NOON is worth your time and attention.
I hope no one ever has to go through the pain of watching this movie!!
julia_lepage14 September 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Worst movie ever!! Its not clever or funny or thought provoking. 84 minutes of bad actors doing their best with an awful script.
Acting was so bad that you can see the dead people breathing.
Maybe the writer/director combination believed they were Quentin Tarantino or something (you know make a movie about nothing still cool) but failed miserably.
I hope the writer never makes another movie EVER!! not everyone is born a writer, sometimes we need to count our losses and go back to being a bathroom attendant or whatever.
Please don't watch this movie, even on mute with the stereo going its still a painful 84 mins.
Acting was so bad that you can see the dead people breathing.
Maybe the writer/director combination believed they were Quentin Tarantino or something (you know make a movie about nothing still cool) but failed miserably.
I hope the writer never makes another movie EVER!! not everyone is born a writer, sometimes we need to count our losses and go back to being a bathroom attendant or whatever.
Please don't watch this movie, even on mute with the stereo going its still a painful 84 mins.
Tremendous Indie Thriller
picklefuzzy9 February 2006
I caught this at SF Indiefest and didn't know what to expect beyond a tired retreat of "Momento" or "Pulp Fiction". But I was extremely surprised and impressed - "Ten 'til Noon" is a true original, a terrifically involving, funny thriller that is able to consistently surprise the audience.
Well-acted, well-shot, and much slicker than the other low-budget fair at the festival, this movie is actually able to reinvent itself every ten minutes with significant shifts in tone, yet it never feels jarring or that somehow we've wandered into a different film. The result is a brilliant, wide-ranging view of a very small event (a 10 minute crime), and how it both effects and is effected by the players involved.
One should be warned that the movie has it's fair share of potentially offensive stuff - sex, violence, language, and homosexuality, all presented in somewhat extreme fashion, which is a surprise given the overly mature, sober tone and pace of much of the film.
If you have a chance to catch this film, do so. We, as an audience, aren't lucky enough to have a lot of movies like this out there.
Well-acted, well-shot, and much slicker than the other low-budget fair at the festival, this movie is actually able to reinvent itself every ten minutes with significant shifts in tone, yet it never feels jarring or that somehow we've wandered into a different film. The result is a brilliant, wide-ranging view of a very small event (a 10 minute crime), and how it both effects and is effected by the players involved.
One should be warned that the movie has it's fair share of potentially offensive stuff - sex, violence, language, and homosexuality, all presented in somewhat extreme fashion, which is a surprise given the overly mature, sober tone and pace of much of the film.
If you have a chance to catch this film, do so. We, as an audience, aren't lucky enough to have a lot of movies like this out there.
Critics...
mksentinel25 September 2007
Too many people have rated this film poorly. This is a fun movie made in the Hollywood underground style that gave us hits like "Reservoir Dogs" and "El Mariachi". The story itself is clever and one of the smartest shoot-em-up flicks I've seen since "Shooter". A lot of plot twists and an ending that leaves a bittersweet sense of closure. The film introduces a lot of new talent in the acting arena too. No big stars carry this one. No big name director (though he should be). No huge label. And yet it's destined to be a classic. The film isn't perfect. It's not the best movie ever made. It IS a great treat and something worth seeing. I am in NO WAY attached to the production. I don't know ANYONE attached to the film. I've been plugging it left and right though. GREAT FILM!!! Frederic Doss http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2427168/
Well... Congrats on shooting on film and...
punkfilm233429 March 2019
Getting a movie actually made. Official rejection sent me here and after all the holahooping from that documentary, it felt as if though it was just an advertisement for this movie. Your documentary was far more entertaining. This film read like a bad soap opera that failed. There's score throughout every scene, bad mind you. It felt like a made for tv film from the 2000 era that would have made lifetime network wet their panties had to not been perverted and used foul language. (Not that that's ever bothered me, just seemed asanine in your agenda). I love your enthusiasm and passion for your project and am glad it's completed and you had that experience, but stick to documentaries or tell a more personal story. I agree with some, the style mimics that of Tarintino, but I hate comparing other artist to other artist especially when it comes to first time works. Not sure how to make this movie better, maybe ditch the score in every single element of the movie. Who knows. Like your documentary said, never stop shooting.
Even thrillers need attention
ttrkwcz15 December 2019
I do not know why somebody tries to make a thriller w/o knowing that this is the most complicated type of movie, certainly not suitable for indie. Just to not waste time on review of this very bad movie: if one crucial element (in this case tape with recording of sex - making it also requires some knowledge...) has in one scene XX and few scenes further it is marked XXX then obviously screenwriter did not know what he was doing, director didi not make notes on what is important and crew did not watched what was going on. Spare you time and do not watch this bad thriller!
Creativity melded with style
againstdan27 April 2006
this film has the correct components to make a smart, sexy, funny, thriller that keeps the viewer glued while a complex plot is unfolded in a series of events that occur during the same ten min. period on the same day. the writing for the film is edgy and well done with great visual and audible sarcasm and dark humor. the acting is all well done and the actors help portray a cool style and sleek visual that aids the film in being the noir piece that it is, i highly recommend this film to anyone that is a fan of pulp fiction, Jackie brown, reservoir dogs, and any David Mamet film. the fact that this film was a low budget effort should not deter you from seeing this creative film. the cost of the film does not even begin to affect the quality of this picture or the caliber of the portrayed talent. the movie itself comes off as a polished, sleek film that doesn't fail to impress and enjoy.
Weary of sequels? See TTN!
imdb-1623611 November 2006
Personally, I am tired of remakes and sequels! I know the studios think they are safe financial bets, but c'mon, aren't the viewers deserving of some originality? Well, Ten Til Noon, will keep you on the edge of your seat, wondering what will happen next from beginning until end! Parts of it will have you squirming in your seat and in the next minute your seat will be shaking with laughter! Excellent performances by all! An ending that will surprise the best of sleuths and a freshness that you will find in few films! Check it out on the big screen if you can! If not, grab the DVD, popcorn and prepare yourself for a treat! Yes, I am purposely not telling you about the story! It will be the most interesting 70 minutes you have spent recently!
Thriller with a twist.
adkins5328 April 2006
I recently had the privilege to view the motion picture Ten 'Til Noon. This movie is an edgy flick that's not for the whole family. It has many twists and turns that keep you guessing. Just when you think you knew what's going on, you find that you didn't know. This movie has it all; suspense, laughter, violence, betrayal, sex and a surprising love story. The story is told in the same ten minutes of the different characters that are linked in what appears to be a home invasion robbery. My mood was apathetic when the movie first started, but as each tale evolved my interest peaked. I couldn't wait to see what was next, even though it was sometimes shocking. The movie reminded me of a Quentin Tarantino directed movie and it had some of the suspense of "The Usual Suspects". After the movie was over, I found myself wanting to see it again. I feel that it would have this effect on most people or it would completely turn you off. The only question I had was "
what happened to Reuben?"
Highly recommended. Entertaining and well-crafted.
raykirk6 February 2007
A very innovative treatment in the Film Noir genre. Be warned that there are scenes of explicit sex, graphic violence, homosexuality and homophobia. Something to offend just about everyone. Of course, so does the wildly successful Borat! That said, this film is very well executed at all levels. The screenplay is very tight, with no holes in the logic. The direction is very even and consistent. The suspense builds in a well controlled manner with numerous twists that can be very difficult to manage effectively. The story has humor as well as intrigue and is quite captivating. The plot is somewhat reminiscent of Roshomon (Kurosawa), or it's American remake The Outrage. A story told from various points of view. But in this case, the emphasis is not on the differences in the points of view, but the actual events as they happen in real-time. Acting is quite good, sometimes excellent. Score is very innovative and appropriate to the events on the screen. All in all, the production values of this film are absolutely top-notch and equal to, or even superior to major studio offerings. And, the film begs the viewer to see it a second time in order to appreciate what is being told but not understood the first time. Highly recommended.
Amazing!
algpics17 September 2006
I drove an hour and a half to see this film, and I am glad I did!I took my 60 year old mother as well and she loved it,she didn't want to get up from her seat until the credits were completely done.She just had to know everyones name that was involved, how cute! The writing and directing was Superb! To do what they did , as far as the style of how the film was shot and the time lines and all that, is not easy! It kept you on the edge of your seat waiting for what was going to happen next without being confusing.
I love to watch Independent films and this is another one to add to my must tell everyone list. I will own this as soon as it is available on DVD.
If you get a chance to see this film, it is a must trust me!
I love to watch Independent films and this is another one to add to my must tell everyone list. I will own this as soon as it is available on DVD.
If you get a chance to see this film, it is a must trust me!
I loved it!
jodimaree482 April 2007
I loved the film. Some of the negative things said on this thread are the same things said about Blue Velvet, Boxing Helena,and etc. It's a shame that someone would go so far out of their way to attack someone's work. This film has won many awards, has been accepted to festivals and received a distribution deal as well...so apparently other people are finding it to be a good movie. Everyone I know who saw it had positive things to say.
This is a perfect example of Film Noir. If you are a lover of true Indie you will also be glad you saw this!
I am interested in more of this director's projects.
This is a perfect example of Film Noir. If you are a lover of true Indie you will also be glad you saw this!
I am interested in more of this director's projects.
Sleek, Sinister and Freakin' Crazy Ass Narrative Film-making!
bision6 August 2007
I caught this movie while in L.A. a few moths ago. Two girls were handing out flyers in front of a theater during the brush fires near the Hollywood sign, Traffic was at a stand still so my wife and I took up the idea of a random movie in the middle of the day. We each paid 8 bucks to see the movie on the flyer, "Ten till Noon". When the film ended my wife turned to me in the lobby and said : "That kicked ass". "Yea it did" said I.
This tight little flick flips the structure of a 90 minute movie experience on its head. Like a great roller coaster, it seems to be ready to jump the tracks, but yet it never did. When it was over and the blooper scenes spilled out and credits rolled, I felt that an epic story had been told in the compression that we, as humans, know as TIME.
Hence the title, and it's star, the ticking, digital and all other devices that display TIME and how insane life is within 10 minutes. The subject matter pushes the R rating as far as R rating goes, and the actors make the reality real, gritty with the story pulling them in along with the viewer. Kudos to the director for holding shots and letting the build happen. You don't see many films brave and confident enough to hold shots and let images and dialog soak in. When the walls of horrific violence do come crashing down. Its as if the viewer (camera) is also in 20 feet of it and better run!
The most refreshing film experience of 2007.
This tight little flick flips the structure of a 90 minute movie experience on its head. Like a great roller coaster, it seems to be ready to jump the tracks, but yet it never did. When it was over and the blooper scenes spilled out and credits rolled, I felt that an epic story had been told in the compression that we, as humans, know as TIME.
Hence the title, and it's star, the ticking, digital and all other devices that display TIME and how insane life is within 10 minutes. The subject matter pushes the R rating as far as R rating goes, and the actors make the reality real, gritty with the story pulling them in along with the viewer. Kudos to the director for holding shots and letting the build happen. You don't see many films brave and confident enough to hold shots and let images and dialog soak in. When the walls of horrific violence do come crashing down. Its as if the viewer (camera) is also in 20 feet of it and better run!
The most refreshing film experience of 2007.
Creatively Solid
rhodimer23 August 2007
This is a great indie film. And when I say indie, I mean true indie. Not a huge budget, big studio film with "A" list actors trying to "keep it real." More about using a clever plot device (or several) great directing and sharp acting. The script I felt was well written with several memorable lines in it. Rare these days. The humor was a bit shocking but a refreshing departure from the "safe" old used jokes of it's contemporaries. The performances were solid, skating between stylistic and realism which is a tough line to ride consistently while keeping believability, again, good directing.I enjoyed it and would definitely suggest it.
What just happened? Whatever it is, I like it
wyzardd5 February 2010
I've seen bad movies. I live for bad movies. This wasn't a bad movie. I read reviews and expected a bad Pulp Fiction or Usual Suspects knock off, which this isn't. If it was attempting to emulate Tarantino, thankfully it failed. There are a few "what just happened" moments, a few "what does this have to do with" and while it comes together in the end you're left wondering, just enough to make it worthwhile. At one point I thought it would be a great time to end, with maybe some questions unanswered and sure enough that's when it ended. This should be one of those that people talk about at work the next day, and unlike the kind of stuff I usually watch, the next 10 minutes are unexpected ... every time.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
