Here's the deal:
I'm a fellow YouTuber with a passion for cinema and the art of film- making and I, along with a myriad of other YouTubers, make short films with our sweat, blood, and tears in the hopes of one day have film-making go from a dream hobby to a reality career. Many of us either remain stranded on YouTube or simply grow tired of film- making. However, a select few achieve the dream and make a real movie, like Shane Dawson, and Michael Gallagher before him with "Smiley". However, both of them have helped suggest to people that YouTubers deserve no position in film.
"Not Cool" lives up to the title; the movie is nothing but one long YouTube video devoid of humor for any audience above age 12 and a clichéd story that's been done in all possible coatings. Filled to the brink with toilet humor, there's a poop eating hobo, glory holes, public sex, and a girl using a zucchini as a dildo to lose her virginity; all in the first seven minutes mind you.
I'm aware that Dawson aimed this film at his fans, who love his YouTube videos for their slapstick, toilet humor, vulgarity-ridden tones and that's perfectly fine. No harm done. The harm is done when nearly one million dollars is wasted on a film poorly written, horribly shot, terribly scored, and just absurdly put together.
The actors, like "Smiley" are faces from YouTube and the web and also like "Smiley", they help suggest talents from YouTube are horrible actors. Only Keith David and Roger Bart aren't in "Not Cool" to help carry this film.
The characters are either cliché-ridden or just plain annoying; Scott (Shane Dawson) is the biggest wooden actor who whines for 60% of the film, Tori (Cherami Leigh) is the most pessimistic, loathing, depressing, angry, annoying downer I've ever seen period and it's hard for me to even consider liking her, despite the fact she's the main character, Joel (Drew Monson) is the stereotypical, annoying "gonna-try-to-fuck-my-obsessive-crush-if-it's-the-last-thing-I-do" character and I had a headache every time he was on screen, and Jaine (Michelle Veintimilla) hangs around a group of promiscuous girls (one played by Dawson) and is the character than annoyed me the least...so positive?
Another point to emphasize the idea of this film feeling like an hour-and-a-half long is that, mentioned above, Shane plays multiple parts in this movie from his YouTube videos (exaggerated roles of a promiscuous teenybopper girl, an outlandish bus-driver, etc.) which further proving that Dawson made no attempt to mature from YouTube onto the silver screen as he claims he wants to.
Now I'm sure some reading this review will point it out being for a reality show film produced on a budget on $800,000 and that I'm being harsh on Dawson for being a young director.
My response?
I haven't watched "The Chair", the show financing it, nor the other competitor's film (and to be honest, I probably won't) and have only seen this one, due to it being more publicized than "Hollidaysburg". In terms of "low budget", I understand it's restricting, but numerous directors have produced American classics with a budget lower than this film. Examples include: Halloween ($300,000), Assault on Precinct 13 ($100,000), THX-1138 ($777,777.77), American Graffiti ($777,000), and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (<$300,000).
I will close this review by reiterating that I hated this movie, but I fully support Shane Dawson transitioning into film and the when he does his next film, I'll go see that and the one after that, because I like seeing YouTube filmmakers accomplish their dreams of making a movie. But I suggest you avoid this pile of trash unless you're a die-hard Shane Dawson fan, or...wait, there's no "or".
Shane, if you read this, take advice and make an effort to disconnect your YouTube sketches from your films; Hollywood is a newer, broader, and bloodier battlefield...prepare.
I'm a fellow YouTuber with a passion for cinema and the art of film- making and I, along with a myriad of other YouTubers, make short films with our sweat, blood, and tears in the hopes of one day have film-making go from a dream hobby to a reality career. Many of us either remain stranded on YouTube or simply grow tired of film- making. However, a select few achieve the dream and make a real movie, like Shane Dawson, and Michael Gallagher before him with "Smiley". However, both of them have helped suggest to people that YouTubers deserve no position in film.
"Not Cool" lives up to the title; the movie is nothing but one long YouTube video devoid of humor for any audience above age 12 and a clichéd story that's been done in all possible coatings. Filled to the brink with toilet humor, there's a poop eating hobo, glory holes, public sex, and a girl using a zucchini as a dildo to lose her virginity; all in the first seven minutes mind you.
I'm aware that Dawson aimed this film at his fans, who love his YouTube videos for their slapstick, toilet humor, vulgarity-ridden tones and that's perfectly fine. No harm done. The harm is done when nearly one million dollars is wasted on a film poorly written, horribly shot, terribly scored, and just absurdly put together.
The actors, like "Smiley" are faces from YouTube and the web and also like "Smiley", they help suggest talents from YouTube are horrible actors. Only Keith David and Roger Bart aren't in "Not Cool" to help carry this film.
The characters are either cliché-ridden or just plain annoying; Scott (Shane Dawson) is the biggest wooden actor who whines for 60% of the film, Tori (Cherami Leigh) is the most pessimistic, loathing, depressing, angry, annoying downer I've ever seen period and it's hard for me to even consider liking her, despite the fact she's the main character, Joel (Drew Monson) is the stereotypical, annoying "gonna-try-to-fuck-my-obsessive-crush-if-it's-the-last-thing-I-do" character and I had a headache every time he was on screen, and Jaine (Michelle Veintimilla) hangs around a group of promiscuous girls (one played by Dawson) and is the character than annoyed me the least...so positive?
Another point to emphasize the idea of this film feeling like an hour-and-a-half long is that, mentioned above, Shane plays multiple parts in this movie from his YouTube videos (exaggerated roles of a promiscuous teenybopper girl, an outlandish bus-driver, etc.) which further proving that Dawson made no attempt to mature from YouTube onto the silver screen as he claims he wants to.
Now I'm sure some reading this review will point it out being for a reality show film produced on a budget on $800,000 and that I'm being harsh on Dawson for being a young director.
My response?
I haven't watched "The Chair", the show financing it, nor the other competitor's film (and to be honest, I probably won't) and have only seen this one, due to it being more publicized than "Hollidaysburg". In terms of "low budget", I understand it's restricting, but numerous directors have produced American classics with a budget lower than this film. Examples include: Halloween ($300,000), Assault on Precinct 13 ($100,000), THX-1138 ($777,777.77), American Graffiti ($777,000), and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (<$300,000).
I will close this review by reiterating that I hated this movie, but I fully support Shane Dawson transitioning into film and the when he does his next film, I'll go see that and the one after that, because I like seeing YouTube filmmakers accomplish their dreams of making a movie. But I suggest you avoid this pile of trash unless you're a die-hard Shane Dawson fan, or...wait, there's no "or".
Shane, if you read this, take advice and make an effort to disconnect your YouTube sketches from your films; Hollywood is a newer, broader, and bloodier battlefield...prepare.