MovieChat Forums > Firecracker (2005) Discussion > The Star Tribune review

The Star Tribune review


THE STAR-TRIBUNE
10/28/05

Karen Black gives two of the finest performances of her career in "Firecracker." She plays symbolically linked roles as Eleanor, the meek, zealously religious mother of an uneasy family, and Sandra, a sultry, self-assured singer with a carnival. The characters are polar opposites, yet Black inhabits each one down to her toenails. The mirror-image characters are stylized beyond the bounds of everyday reality, but fit seamlessly into the imaginative world of the film, which suggests a collaboration between Alfred Hitchcock and David Lynch, with surrealist touches and crime-drama suspense feeding off one another.

Eleanor presides over tense dinners where her older son David (Faith No More singer Mike Patton) berates sensitive, artistic Jimmy (Jak Kendall). Eleanor looks heavenward during David's tirades; Jimmy looks at the floor. The antagonism between the two young men explodes when the carnival makes its annual visit to town, bringing a forbidden charge of erotic excitement with its burlesque dancing girls and sideshow freaks. There is a murder and a clumsy coverup that unravels in a slow drip-drip-drip of unnerving tension. When Eleanor asks the local carpet store salesman to remove the "shoe polish" soaking her rug, their awkward refusal to recognize it as an obvious bloodstain skillfully balances anxiety and comedy.

It's a sensational feature for writer/director Steve Balderson, who is clearly a talent to watch.

***½ out of four stars

COLIN COVERT

reply

This is a fake review, it is not on the star tribune page which lists all the film reviews of the last few years. I subscribe to the star tribune and Colin covert has never written a review like this, completely praising a film with no criticisms. Movies he gives 4 stars and best film of the year mentions will have at least somthing picked on. It is way way to short, Ive never seen him write a review this short. Colin Covert is also of impeccable taste and would not give this pice of crap more than 1 and a half.

reply

Gosh, the lengths people will go to attack this movie are silly and jouvenile.

Yes, this review is real. Here are a couple links that go direct to the Star Tribune website:

Main page:
http://www.startribune.com/412/story/67328.html

Printer Friendly page:
http://www.startribune.com/dynamic/mobile_story.php?story=5693791

So, all you trolls - will you please mellow out and stop your jealous attack? Just because you didn't understand the movie or like it doesn't mean other people didn't. You need to admit that some people, like Colin Covert, might know more about movies than you do.

reply

I am only one peron sir, you speak as if I was an army of film hating facists intent in burying this awful film.

Kootos to you for unearthing the link to Colin's misguided review. He must have written this one on drugs. I do alot of drugs myself, and nothing could convince me that this piece of trash was entertanining or meaningful.

It is an extremely brief review, and I know Colin, and if we were to sit together and watch it, I guarantee he would not enjoy it as much as he did on the first viewing. I am actually obliged to believe he wrote a positive reivw just to promote the film, theres nothing wrong with trying to help your local indy theatre.

This movie was trash, was not entertaining in any aspect, thouroughly awful and hard to watch and beyond redemption.

I LOVE Mike Patton btw, why I rented the film. I really wanted to like it, but it is so awful, so unentertaining, I have to bury it.

reply