A day in the life of a New York City dive bar and the denizens that inhabit it. Set in the waning days of the Eighties, an era marked by excess and self-invention, the film is like an R-rate... Read allA day in the life of a New York City dive bar and the denizens that inhabit it. Set in the waning days of the Eighties, an era marked by excess and self-invention, the film is like an R-rated version of the lighthearted series "Cheers".A day in the life of a New York City dive bar and the denizens that inhabit it. Set in the waning days of the Eighties, an era marked by excess and self-invention, the film is like an R-rated version of the lighthearted series "Cheers".
Penn Jillette
- Radio DJ
- (voice)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaMichael Massee's first film since his sabbatical following the death of Brandon Lee on the set of The Crow (1994).
- SoundtracksI Don't Want to Look Into the Mirror
Written by Dennis Diken and Pete DiBella
Performed by The Smithereens
Featured review
I'll be completely honest, I wanted to like this film a lot more than I did.
I stumbled upon it in a search for something else, and it appealed to me: the style of filmmaking, the time period, the cast. When I saw Tony Todd in the trailer playing a role very much unlike his usual horror icon type, I thought it was definitely worth a view.
Two things before going in: despite the release date, the film was made in 94. This appealed to me more, to see the cast in earlier up-and-coming years than today, as well as the setting- at the time I was a staple in a seedy city bar, so I got that kind of feel watching the film too. Also, the original cut is a bit shy of 90 mins, and the cut I watched (streamed) was a little more than 45 mins. What happened here that they edited out half the film?
The film centers around a bar during a night in the late 80's (in which it's set), and a number of different characters come and go in little vignettes. People come and go and have interactions with the bartender ('Sal', who is genial enough in a 90's soul patch kind of way, but not enough to the point you really get invested in him), with Burnzy (who at first I thought was the owner but I believe is just a regular...he tells poignant tales and waxes poetic), and with each other.
PROS:
CONS:
I honestly don't know what happened here. Is it a great film? It's ok. To be honest it feels really kind of too Tarantino/Kevin Smith -y, and I wanted to be a lot more invested in the characters and the atmosphere than I felt I was for most of it...and just when I did start to feel that way the film ended. It's not however, by any means, a bad film. At all. It's got a nice warm feel, a great cast, and it does a lot with what it has.
What I don't understand is why it's being released in '22, when I can't help but think if this came out in a decent release when it was shot it could have been somewhat notable as an indy treasure and a cult classic. If you're into seeing a type of filmmaking that isn't really done these days, and get a nice feel for the time period, to get your nostalgia thing on, I'd say give it a view. It's definitely an indy film of it's time period (and I assure you, there's way way worse).
I'd love to see it get a complete release one day, all hour plus run time, to really see what was intended. A nice blu ray with interviews and maybe an extra soundtrack disc bonus.
So, really...splunge ("it's a great-idea-but-possibly-not-and-I'm-not-being-indecisive!").
I stumbled upon it in a search for something else, and it appealed to me: the style of filmmaking, the time period, the cast. When I saw Tony Todd in the trailer playing a role very much unlike his usual horror icon type, I thought it was definitely worth a view.
Two things before going in: despite the release date, the film was made in 94. This appealed to me more, to see the cast in earlier up-and-coming years than today, as well as the setting- at the time I was a staple in a seedy city bar, so I got that kind of feel watching the film too. Also, the original cut is a bit shy of 90 mins, and the cut I watched (streamed) was a little more than 45 mins. What happened here that they edited out half the film?
The film centers around a bar during a night in the late 80's (in which it's set), and a number of different characters come and go in little vignettes. People come and go and have interactions with the bartender ('Sal', who is genial enough in a 90's soul patch kind of way, but not enough to the point you really get invested in him), with Burnzy (who at first I thought was the owner but I believe is just a regular...he tells poignant tales and waxes poetic), and with each other.
PROS:
- it's not at all by any means a bad film. It's fun, interesting, and light hearted.
- I'll admit it faked me out, I thought the title was indicative of the story's conclusion, but it really had a nice heart warming light hearted ending that I enjoyed a lot
- Performances are pretty top end from some notable Talent, as much as you get anyway. They all really put their all into it.
- If you're in it for nostalgic value, oh man, are you in for a treat. Between the style of filmmaking, the time period, the types, the clothes, the bar itself, it's a huge throwback to early 90's.
- The soundtrack if really good..for what you get of it.
CONS:
- some of the dialogue feels a little contrived. It's stylistic of indies of that time (like the opening monologue of a loan shark over the still photo in the opening credits). Some of it feels a little hokey.
- maybe it's just this cut, but it's very hard to get into the characters, mainly because most of them you don't really see so much.
- again, maybe due to the cut, but it feels like the actual night in the bar is so short. Just when you feel settled and getting into it, it's closing time.
- OK, so without spoiling...there's a wraparound making the analogy of the bar itself to a watering hole in the wild. As the film shows scenes it shows clips from said watering hole that relate to the upcoming vignette. I get it, really, and it's cute, but after a few times gets a bit trite. I don't think I would have minded as much if there was more story in between.
- All in all, some of the storylines felt like they were cut short.
- what happened to the soundtrack? If you go on
I honestly don't know what happened here. Is it a great film? It's ok. To be honest it feels really kind of too Tarantino/Kevin Smith -y, and I wanted to be a lot more invested in the characters and the atmosphere than I felt I was for most of it...and just when I did start to feel that way the film ended. It's not however, by any means, a bad film. At all. It's got a nice warm feel, a great cast, and it does a lot with what it has.
What I don't understand is why it's being released in '22, when I can't help but think if this came out in a decent release when it was shot it could have been somewhat notable as an indy treasure and a cult classic. If you're into seeing a type of filmmaking that isn't really done these days, and get a nice feel for the time period, to get your nostalgia thing on, I'd say give it a view. It's definitely an indy film of it's time period (and I assure you, there's way way worse).
I'd love to see it get a complete release one day, all hour plus run time, to really see what was intended. A nice blu ray with interviews and maybe an extra soundtrack disc bonus.
So, really...splunge ("it's a great-idea-but-possibly-not-and-I'm-not-being-indecisive!").
- lubbertdas
- Apr 7, 2022
- Permalink
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Language
- Filming locations
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content