Top of Sidebar
Mission Statement
Do It Yourself Tips and Tricks
Books, Equipment, Software, and Training Reviews
Film Critiques
Community Section
Savings and Links
Editorials
Archives
Bottom of Sidebar
Back to the Home Page
Short Critique: Fizzy Days, Pg. 2

I think the two elements that made Napoleon Dynamite such a success were its randomness – a lot of the action on screen never even related to the plot at all – and its cleanness – the filmmakers were mostly Mormons, as such there was no crude humor or language. It was a truly funny movie – but without resorting to Kevin Smith-esque dick and fart jokes. While Fizzy Days has its share of clean humor, there are plenty of references to sex – and even some brief on-screen action – to eliminate a good percentage of Napoleon’s fan base.

But as none of them
have enough money
...
...Eddy takes a minimum-wage
job at a supermarket.

Visual Look
I really loved the visual look of this film. First of all, the opening credits were great. There was a great “motorbike” song, and some color-tweaked footage of guys on their bikes riding through the country. Then, in the introduction of the main character, various shots of his bedroom and the pictures of 70s rock stars that cover the walls. (My favorite being David Bowie, of course.)

The costuming was also great. It’s a huge challenge for a filmmaker to re-create a bygone era, especially one so distinctive as the seventies. If it’s done wrong, the film is virtually ruined because it will look completely faked. If it’s done right, however, the result is great. In the case of Fizzy Days, I was skeptical about whether the 70s setting would be convincing, but in this case it definitely was. The hairstyles, makeup, and clothing were spot on – the crew must have raided every Goodwill in town to get them. Of course, seeing as how the 70s “came back” not too long ago, it couldn’t have been too difficult to find those outfits. The hairstyles were impressive as well – especially Eddy’s. I couldn’t tell if it was a wig or not, but it sure looked real to me. That shows an actor’s true dedication, if he’s willing to walk around with that kind of a crazy hairdo for the duration of filming!

Of course, even with period costumes and meticulous hairstyles, a carefully-planned period piece can easily be ruined by a passing motorist or an obviously modern building. The best way to avoid such mistakes is to shoot in as many out-of-the-way places where there is little risk of passers-by, to shoot majority close-ups in outdoor settings, and only use wide-angles when one can get away with it. In this case, these filmmakers followed all of those rules, and were able to avoid almost all hints of modernity; though I did notice a few modern cars reflected in the windows of the moped shop and driving by in a couple of the shots of the two girls.

I didn’t notice any white balance or lighting issues, in fact the entire film had a slightly warm-colored tint to it that seems characteristic of 70s films – another good touch. There were some interesting camera shots and angles, such as the three boys poking their heads out of a door sequentially.

Finally, there are some really great cutaways and vignettes within the film that really add to its humor value. For example, when Eddy goes to work at the supermarket, and discovers that Thomas’ mother works there as well, he then reads her name on her nametag, and realizes that he’s seem her picture in a porno magazine. There is then a brief music cue and a flashback to a shot of him reading the magazine earlier. Though slightly crude, it’s a rather humorous moment that helps to explain why Eddy is so much more uncomfortable around Thomas’ mother for the rest of the film. These little vignettes add a nice touch of interest, putting the audience inside the mind of the main character, as well as some moments of humor.

Mission | Tips & Tricks | Equipment & Software Reviews | Film Critiques
Groups & Community | Links & Savings
| Home


Contact Us Search Submit Films for Critique