I had never heard of this movie before and was really amazed
to watch it after all the good reviews of it and the 9 out of 10
score here on IMDB, so I gave it a Chance:)
But I must have seriously missed something cause this movie
didnt "add" anything at all to me, I still wonder what the point
with it was so please someone explain it to me.
How did you find it?
Vanessa
Hey Vanessa, a friend of my had it but none of us had seen it before.
I think you can order it from the movies website:
www.chancemovie.com
For starters, try the review in the "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" (reproduced at http://pub31.ezboard.com/famberbensonfrm3.showMessage?topicID=520.topic&index=1332). This review covers quite a lot of what you might have missed.
It's fair to say that "Chance" is a cult movie, and one person's cult is another's poison... As for me, it tells me something new about how women think about men that I've not come across in any number of mainstream Tinseltown trash. But that's probably just me, eh?
This film is by far one of the greatest comedic movies of all time. The story is fresh and new (unlike a lot of the hollywood films out there) and the cinematography was unlike any I'd ever seen. Okay maybe it reminded me of David Lynch's early work. It was innovative and interesting on so many levels but now I'm beginning to repeat myself so I'll just say it was brilliant, it would've made tons of money if it had been released in theatres and it would've been hailed as the breakthrough film for Amber Benson as both an actress and a director, and a writer. If you have a chance see this movie and don't let anything get in your way.
i don't know if i'd go as far as to say it's one of the greatest comedic movies of all time, lord knows there are movies that are far better at comedy than this was, in fact i think the film is more of a dramedy (drama/comedy). Don't get me wrong I love Amber Benson's singing and acting, but the story was rather disjointed, really didn't give us much, except for a small look into someone's life for a week or so, crammed into 90 minutes. As for the cinematography and directing, bleck, horrible. El Mariachi looked better and was made for $7000 or so, and was shot on 16mm, now I don't know the budget of Chance but it couldn't have been too much more than Mariachi, and it was shot on a Canon XL-1 at least that was one of the camera's I saw in the outtakes. Now I've used the XL-1 and you can make some really beautiful footage but at least the transfer that I saw was just poor, and personally the editing was a little choppy for me. The lack of music was another thing and the music that was provided was iffy, it would have been better if Amber and James wrote some music for it and performed it. Now as for the acting, Amber was awesome, James is by far one of the most enthralling actors today, as Spike he makes me hate and like him at the same time, as Simon, I was with him, his ups and downs and all that stuff, seriously see the movie just for James and Amber alone. Hearing James's real voice while acting is weird, cool but weird.
As for making tons of money if it'd been released in theaters, I don't know if I could agree with that either, neither side of the Atlantic seems too interested in Dramatic Love Comedies at the moment or even when it came out, and I don't know if Buffy fans alone could send it to the top of the charts, maybe I guess. All in all I liked it but wasn't too impressed with it, it was hyped waaaaaaaay too much. Just my opinion. (let the bashing begin in... 3, 2, 1...)
I totally agree with you. I thought it was okay, but it was nowhere near as good as everybody said it would be. I was a bit disappointed.
shareDon't know if I'd bash you for it. I thought the movie was strong enough on acting, dialogue, and character that I didn't notice the underwhelming camera work you describe. Then again, I'm a big Kevin Smith fan.
As much as I like enthralling and original camera work, a lot of times--especially these days--directors/cinematographers seem intent on using a bunch of MTV/Matrix-inspired camera moves to draw attention to how freakin' clever they are, rather than ensuring that the cinematography serves the needs of the story. It gets distracting. I liked this movie, just like I like Smiths', because it's so different from the FX-laden pap Hollywood spurts out so much these days. Including the basic camerawork. It got the job done.
gc sisiutil
sharePlease PLEASE stop comparing this to Kevin Smith!!
Come on people... I don't like it when directors go too far with the MTV gen crap as well, but come on... Directing is one of the hardest jobs in the worlds, it's like directing orchestra, EVERYTHING depends on you and you alone.
So if you can't take it, it's like a domino trail, EVERYTHING will just fall apart piece by piece. I hate how some people think that it just takes a camera and a crew to make a director... this shows that it doesn't...at all... again, I love the writing, but seriously what this lacks comes all down to the fact that Amber is NOT a director...period... it's a well written movie and that can hold it up for some people, but it does not make it into a great movie.
You can turn a blind eye to anything, but come on.... KEVIN SMITH IS A DIRECTOR. Amber is an actress and a great writer, and there it stops.
Would I have watched it had it hit theatres? YES of course. But that does not save it...
'Immature artists imitate, mature artists steal.'
Picasso
With all due respect, I think you're being a little over-simplistic in your use of terminology, but you're not alone in that regard.
Amber has directed a film; that makes her a director. The question is whether she's a GOOD director, which is of course open to debate. It's like saying something isn't art. Of course it is! Saying it isn't is just a way of saying you don't like it.
Is she in Kevin Smith's league as a director? No, probably not, but there were similarities in their styles and approach that I noticed. That's the way artists develop, by imitating their established idols--say the way Brian de Palma imitated Hitchcock early in his career. Your sig even points to this fact. ;-)
Anyway, comparing her to Smith is a distraction from my point (and I did have one), which was that the minimalist approach to the camerawork was not a problem for me. It was a good approach in that it allowed the story, characters, and dialogue to be the focus, which for a film of this scale and subject matter was entirely appropriate.
I thought that for a first time director/writer, it was really good. I have friends who are film students, so I'm used to seeing how people's work evolves with experience.
It was fun... yes, a week in the life. I agree with your points though, about the editing, music, and film quality (28 days later was shot on an XL-1)... but I'll raise you the sound... there were times I had to lower it.
However, I really did enjoy it, I've seen it several times- and like it more and more each time.
I hadn't heard of any of the hype... just was board and doing my IMDB link clicking and thought it looked cute.
"The prince is never going to come, everybody knows that; and maybe Sleeping Beauty's dead." Lestat
I'm a fan of the Mulholand dr. and donnie darko type of film and i thought i would like this since the film was of the same genre (and also cause of the fact that ambers in it) however i have to say that i really didnt do anything for me. The character 'Chance' reminds me of Christina Riccis character in the Opposite of sex.