Spun (Unrated Version)

Rating:
Summary: Cool Movie
Review: This movie is about speed freaks and what they do in 3 (or 4) days. That's the plot. But the plot is not what is important in this film, it's the crazed speed filming that makes it shine.

Not for everybody because it has disgusting characters, a unforgiving grimy setting, which includes probably the most casual nudity I've ever seen outside a porno (pink flamingos comes close) Oh, and on the note of Pink Flamingos, there is a homage to it in this movie, which has a fat lady in a trailer eating T.V. dinners (notice the pink flamingo by the door) It's no surprise that John Water's film was a huge influence on this film, I think Natural Born Killers also. A refreshing film.

Rating:
Summary: TWEEKERS SUCK! LOL!
Review: BUY THIS!!!!! IF YOU HAVE EVER LOST A COUPLE OF DAYS IN YOUR LIFE!PICKING UP WHAT I AM LAYING DOWN!! AWESOME MOVIE! THE ACTORS HAVE HAD TO EXPERIMENT OR HUNG OUT WITH SOME TWEEKERS CUZ THEY DID AN AWESOME JOB PORTRAYING THEM! ALSO IF YOUR AN OLD SCHOOL METAL HEAD YOU`LL DIG THE 1st SONG IN THE MOVIE!!!!

Rating:
Summary: Burning the Candle at Both Ends
Review: I decided to rent this film after reading reports of a serious methamphetamine epidemic in my hometown. Already having some brief experience with this scene and its denizens - some acquaintances of mine in college indulged/abused the substance - I pretty much knew what to expect, and in that regard *Spun* hit all the right notes, reconfirming the horrid extremities that make up this by-the-moment existence of abuse, degradation and constant, unsatisfied addiction.

*Spun* chronicles three days ("three? or four? or three?") in the transient lives of So-Cal tweakers. The characters are vividly drawn, complete with excellent costume-garb and cartoonish titles. We begin with: the paranoid dealer Spider Mike (John Leguizamo), his filthy girlfriend Cookie (Mena Suvari), and a necronerd ADD poseur by the name of Frisbee. These, however, are periphery to the triumvirate of Ross (Jason Schwartzman), a greasy-looking everyman; Nikki (Brittany Murphy) a implausible-fit methhead whom he meets at Spider Mike's, and her paramour The Cook (Mickey Rourke), a meth-chemist, pusher and stoned philosopher. The `plot' consists of this cast scoring, snorting, smoking and/or shooting their drug of choice, and how, afterward, the ways they seek to acquire more tweak and/or cope with said lifestyle.

To be more specific, the main thread of *Spun* hinges around Ross carting Nikki and The Cook about in his battered Volvo on various missions, scoring little bags of dope as a reward. "How long have you managed to stay up on this stuff?" Ross asks The Cook during one such errand. "Twelve or thirteen days," Mickey Rourke replies in a typical performance: the cowboy-burnout, world-weary and impeccably `cool': but this method of madness actually enhances *Spun* tremendously. Rourke gives a standout performance in his career, and the tenuous relationship of mentor/protégé between Ross and The Cook slowly exposes, by jerk and twitter, the unifying thread by which these people manage to make it day-in, day-out: burning the candle at both ends, looking ever forward to the next hit and ignoring the damage wrought in the meantime.

It's rather unfortunate that *Spun* borrows quite heavily from a number of films, for the audience finds itself forced to compare the movie with its predecessors. *Requiem for a Dream* is the most obvious influence, with the constant eye-surge shots and several key editing techniques, as is *Trainspotting* - the opening monologue practically invites comparison - and indeed, the juxtaposition of grimy addiction-subsistence and zany humor makes *Spun* a photo negative of the latter example. *Trainspotting* worked in large part to its `lust for life', the strangely uplifting quality to the writing and character development. The same cannot be said for this film: despite moments of earned levity and some truly bizarre animation sequences (the video-game hallucination standing out as particularly disturbing to these eyes), *Spun* is dark, negative and grim - just like meth - but it fails to successfully balance its humor and drama, struggling to find even ground in the integration of tragedy and comedy.

This unevenness is epitomized in the undercover cop subplot, which should have been excised from the film in my opinion, or at least radically reworked. For 1) it's not particularly funny, at least not anywhere near as funny as it tries to be 2) it's a cliché 3) it comes off contrived, breaking the spell of the movie, and 4) the attempted parody - 70's style copper-drama editing and dialogue - serves in ultimately subverting the pain and emotive catharsis intrinsic in the meth-abuse material.

Still, the way the director manages to combine and build upon his varied influences suggests an artist who has skillfully emulated and synthesized these elements a la Quintin Tarentino; hopefully on future films he will be able to step beyond homage and fashion something (breathtakingly) original. Above all else, *Spun* certainly shows promise.

~Potential Spoilers:~
The last image, beautifully shot, can be taken literally... but I wonder, given the (general) competence The Cook displays throughout. Rather, I prefer to see it as a symbol for how these addicts subsist: fuel for the constant burn.
~End Spoilers~

World religions tend to focus on the dichotomy of a Heaven and a Hell - tranquility for the blessed, punishment for the wicked. In my view, Heaven and Hell is a metaphor for how people choose to spend their lives; and for a fairly accurate scrutiny of Hell in its refined form, look no further than *Spun* and its assortment of damned souls. One glimpse should be enough.

Rating:
Summary: Spun FUN
Review: No use rehashing the facts presented by all the other reviewers. The simple point I want to make is that Spun is fun movie to watch. It is full of little touches that made me laugh and kept me interested, such as the opening song, the CD skipping as Ross leaves the girl tied up, and the green dog.

I haven't watched every drug movie in the world, and maybe Spun is a knockoff as others have stated, but I make this analogy: Spun is to "Requiem for a Dream" as a Cheech & Chong movie is to "Reefer Madness". That overstates the difference a bit, as Cheech & Chong was strictly comedy and I would call Spun comedy/drama, but I think you will find that the basic analogy is valid.

If you want an afterschool special to scare your kids and teach them a lesson, show them Requiem, not Spun. Although bad things ultimately happen to the characters, they're just not all that miserable. Likewise, after watching the movie, you're not all that miserable. You may even have a smile on your face and a chuckle in your heart, thinking, "Those goofy speed freaks..."

If you want misery, watch Requiem. For fun, watch Spun.

Rating:
Summary: Riding Aronofsky's coattails
Review: "Spun" will inevitably draw comparisons to Darren Aronofsky's generally superior film "Requiem for a Dream." The latter movie, based on Hubert Selby's soul shattering novel of the same name, dealt with the theme of addiction in a way rarely witnessed in other films. The story traces the disintegration of four individuals, three hooked on heroin and one on diet pills and television, in a manner that will break your heart. As crushing as the book is, Aronofsky's movie really drives the point home in an even more horrific way. Moreover, his use of a talented cast--including Jennifer Connolly, Jared Leto, Marlon Wayans, and Ellen Burstyn--will reduce you to a quivering wreck. All four so completely disappear into their roles as damaged human beings that any other film daring to tread the same ground faces an uphill task. What does "Spun" offer us to supplant our recollections of "Requiem for a Dream"? Jason Schwartzman, Mena Suvari, Brittny Murphy, John Leguzamo, Patrick Fugit, and Mickey Rourke. There are some fine actors in that list, but can they possibly trump the magical foursome of the other film? In some ways, perhaps, but overall they cannot. "Spun" is a shameless rip-off of Aronofsky's film.

It is, however, an intriguing rip-off. The film follows four or five days in the lives of several Los Angeles based speed addicts as they struggle to score amidst a plethora of personal problems. Main character Ross (Schwartzman) spends all of his time cruising around town in his jalopy, calling his former girlfriend to leave messages on her answering machine bemoaning their breakup, and stopping by a sleazy drug den run by the tattooed Spider Mike (Leguzamo). This character, who earns his livelihood selling crank to a number of upstanding citizens, is more paranoid than the John Birch Society. Chez Spider houses several zombies worth mentioning, including Mike's dentally challenged girlfriend Cookie (Suvari), former socialite turned basket case Nikki (Murphy), and gene pool disaster/lobotomy candidate Frisbee (Patrick Fugit). Ross, who tied his girlfriend to his bed back at the sewer he calls an apartment (?), must exercise efforts of herculean dimensions if he is to successfully score in an abode filled to the rafters with neuroses, psychopathologies, and physical confrontations. Fortunately for him, Nikki claims allegiance to a man responsible for producing most of the methamphetamine in Los Angeles, The Cook (Rourke), and she promises to bring Ross in on the action if he will chauffer them around town.

As cracked as the above characters are, they pale in comparison to The Cook. Safely ensconced in the confines of a cheap motel room, this grungy chap refuses to sell any crank before its time. He parcels out bits of speed to Ross in exchange for rides to the local gas station, to a video store where Rob Halford of "Judas Priest" runs the cash register, and even to the man bankrolling The Cook's entire operation (Eric Roberts in a hilarious role). At one point, Ross helps take Nikki's dog to the vet's office after a tragic accident resulted in the animal receiving a most unusual dye job. Subplots spring up like weeds only to pass away into insignificance, such as Ross's suspicious neighbor (Deborah Harry) and her efforts to learn what's going on in his apartment. There are also relationship problems between Nikki and The Cook that need fixing, a couple of cops on the trail of Frisbee and Spider Mike, and a liquor store where two Hispanic chicks giggle the hours away watching The Cook and later Ross's neighbor beat the same guy into unconsciousness. Confused yet? I suspect that's the idea: throw a whole bunch of offbeat characters strung out on speed into a series of chaotic scenarios, reasons the director, and you might just replicate the disordered world of your everyday drug user.

"Spun" is more interesting for its appearance than its nonlinear plot. The film boasts a hazy, washed out color scheme that gives the proceedings a sort of hyperreal look and feel. Then there is the manic camera work: zipping, zagging, and zooming around all over the place. "Spun" contains so many jump cuts and other quick editing techniques that the film makes MTV look like an episode of Masterpiece Theater. This movie even uses a variation of the eye gag used in "Requiem for a Dream." Shameless, I say, but "Spun" is an interesting take on one of our greatest problems today. Moreover, the performances help propel the movie to its explosive denouement. Schwartzman's twitchy mannerisms and rough appearance prove he's got range and is ready to move on to grittier roles. I don't like Brittny Murphy, but even she does a good job as a former beauty now trolling the gutter. The most astonishing element of "Spun" is Mickey Rourke, a once promising actor reduced to accepting B-budget films in the past decade. He's as weird as ever--maybe more so here--in a role that demands oddness on a metaphysical scale. No matter what your perceptions of the movie, "Spun" will keep you on your toes.

The extras on the unrated disc are bountiful. Two commentary tracks, trailers, a music video, and deleted scenes add additional time to the viewing experience. Perhaps the biggest problem with "Spun" is that it doesn't make you root for the characters, let alone feel an empathy with them, like "Requiem for a Dream" does. Aronofsky's film provided enough backstory so the viewer could understand why the characters embarked on such self-destructive behavior. We only see a portion of that here, and what we do see isn't as deep or as meaningful as in "Requiem." Cinema fans will want to check "Spun" out, however, since it's more than likely to attain cult status at some point in the future.






Rating:
Summary: Do you think this guy's a Darren Arrenofsky fan?
Review: it's hard to review this film. it was entertaining, but it wasn't really good. the story was very unrealistic. If this was in fact the average day of a speed-freak, then there would be no such thing as a crank-head anymore. most of the characters ended up in jail and they were CRAZY. Read the sypnosis on the back. This is the "Reefer Madness" or "Cocaine Feinds" of methamphetamines. They made everyone so beat-up looking and dramatized the effects of crystal meth. It's ridiculous how much this film was merely trying to shock. Unnecessarily graphic, akward amount of cursing, unrealistically filthy homes and a drug-addict image so outlandish and cliche that it comes off as if a middle-school health teacher or a DARE-officer put their collective minds together to see how terrible they could make the characters seem. Not only that, but they juiced "Requiem for a Dream", "Trainspotting", and "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" (to name a few) for all they were worth and made a rip-off so melodramatic and corny that it becomes an insult. Honestly, I think this movie was trying to jump on to the "Requiem..." craze and tried to do so by making the same movie over with an allstar cast, more eyecandy, and by trying to outoffend, if you will, previous "drug" movies (you see, when trite filmmakers jump on the bandwagon they eventually make innovations cliches and create new pigeonholes). That being said, the cast was good and the film was entertaining and visually-appealing despite being completely stale and unorigional.

Rating:
Summary: Very realistic lifestyles of meth heads
Review: Contrary to what all the other reviewers said, this movie very well depicts what the life of a crank user would be, atleast in some way. For instance, when one reviewer was crying over the ending that they didnt understand, it all makes since, if you went on a 3 day meth binge and slept for none of it, as soon as you stop using, your going to pass out.

I feel the movie crammed tons of material in it for being not to lengthy, and i think it did it perfect, not as dark and depressing as Reqeuim for a Dream, but just as true and fun to watch.

The crazy editing and shots are there for a reason people, to make you feel like your the one useing methanphetamine, and i feel it couldnt have been done better unless some crank was included with the movie...
The characters really play the parts well, and seem to be alittle more normal than one would expect of a meth head, but it all comes into the light when you see the true side of it when Ross finnaly talks to his hott (so called) girlfriend, and he stutters away and can barely follow her words.

Altogether a great entertaining story mixed with some really funny parts and i think this is what makes it better than Reqeuim.

If you like Junkie movies this one shouldnt be passed up regardless of the bad reviews those other horrible critics gave it.

Rating:
Summary: It's like you are really there...
Review: Watching this movie actually makes me feel a little ill, due to the fact that the characters, sets and story details are so REALISTIC. To see such characters as Mena Suvari looking so repulsive (contrary to her ususal american beauty as displayed in other movies) adds to the realism, because I have known so called "Beautiful" people who have turned up later looking and acting like these characters. Its almost spooky to see how one's lifestyle choices can totally change one's appearance & behaviours. The tricky camera work and extreme closeups just intensify the experience (though they do go a little overboard at times), and make the viewer feel as if s/he is actually there, experiencing it all. It is also great to see Deborah Harry reprise her Intimate Stranger-esque phone sex role too.
My creative writing teacher, back in high school used to always say that the object of the writer is to move the reader, which doesn't always mean to make the reader feel pleasant. The movie makers in this film do move this viewer, so, as far as I am concerned they have more than done their job.

Rating:
Summary: The Sicker Side of Life
Review: Unlike it's couterpart"The Salton Sea" this film is difficult to follow.You follow the main character around on a 5 day speed trip and and all the insanity that comes with it.The plot tends to be more about using speed,what it does to you&the insane life of a tweaker.After watching this movie,I felt like I had to go into re-hab.John Leguziomo is entertaining,but there are few scenes with him in it, and Mickey Rourke was good as well,and there were some funny scenes with him in it, and a few other instances where I found the film funny in a sick way.For the most part...this film wasn't as good as I was hoping it would be.If there ever was a film about showing people why you should'nt be doing speed,this one is it.