The DVD box says it's Trainspotting meets Beverly Hills 90210. I'd say it was more Human Traffic meets Hackers meets Requiem for a Dream.
I was drawn to this film by its title - BUT its title in the UK, which is "American Chav's". Aside from the jarring use of the possessive apostrophe, there is the complete butchering of the use of the word 'chav'. Chavs are a uniquely British phenomenon. 'Chav' (n.) is a word used to the describe a British "underclass". Fake Burberry cap wearing, white cider drinking yobs who engage in the modding and doing-up of cars that REALLY shouldn't be done up. There cannot be American chavs. It is a technical impossibility. The two words do not - and can not - go together.
But what I find most offensive is Kentaro Seagal's diction. He either has a weird accent, or he's disabled. His voice is very quiet and mumbly. And that's the lead he plays. As for everyone else, it's this strange juxtaposition of hammy acting and good acting. This creates an inconsistent feel, which I feel is worse than if all the acting were hammy.
Some of the criticisms have been about how the film was way off the mark with the fashions and music. However, while this is so, I do think there is at least SOME good music in it regardless. And THAT'S A BIG THING for me to say coming from someone who holds as dear to his heart dance/rave/drug culture as I do. At the very least it's evocative of what it's trying to portray. And with the fashions... I suppose some of it is cool. Mostly not though.
It is not a great film by any means, but it was much better than I thought it'd be. It does feel a bit of a lumber-through sometimes, but I've seen way worse films, films that I couldn't even get through at all. The story doesn't really grip you, but it's interesting nonetheless. The moral lesson is confused, and the acting of the protagonist by Kentaro completely ruins the film - but it's not totally without worth in my opinion. The visual direction actually can be pretty cool. Overall the film is pretty cringey how seriously it takes itself, so there is a little bit of enjoyment factor there - however it hasn't got a very compelling plot... Basically there is betrayal on the good guy, there's arguments and fighting, and gratuitous scenes of clubbing, fashion design, petty crime, drug-taking, and Shannon Elizabeth still in her clothes. So I guess it is a bit like The Room in one or two respects, but that is a generous comparison. The worst thing is the dreadful title - both the original and UK title - but "Seamless: Kidz Rule" is probably a little worse as it's so detrimentally clunky. With the subtitle it's cumbersome; without it, it's just confusing.
In summary, it's an intriguing watch if you feel nostalgic for your carefree 20s full of intoxicants, hot girls of a somewhat loose nature, parties, and raving like a loon, before the scene changed/you got a new serious relationship/your friendship group broke apart/whatever.
I was drawn to this film by its title - BUT its title in the UK, which is "American Chav's". Aside from the jarring use of the possessive apostrophe, there is the complete butchering of the use of the word 'chav'. Chavs are a uniquely British phenomenon. 'Chav' (n.) is a word used to the describe a British "underclass". Fake Burberry cap wearing, white cider drinking yobs who engage in the modding and doing-up of cars that REALLY shouldn't be done up. There cannot be American chavs. It is a technical impossibility. The two words do not - and can not - go together.
But what I find most offensive is Kentaro Seagal's diction. He either has a weird accent, or he's disabled. His voice is very quiet and mumbly. And that's the lead he plays. As for everyone else, it's this strange juxtaposition of hammy acting and good acting. This creates an inconsistent feel, which I feel is worse than if all the acting were hammy.
Some of the criticisms have been about how the film was way off the mark with the fashions and music. However, while this is so, I do think there is at least SOME good music in it regardless. And THAT'S A BIG THING for me to say coming from someone who holds as dear to his heart dance/rave/drug culture as I do. At the very least it's evocative of what it's trying to portray. And with the fashions... I suppose some of it is cool. Mostly not though.
It is not a great film by any means, but it was much better than I thought it'd be. It does feel a bit of a lumber-through sometimes, but I've seen way worse films, films that I couldn't even get through at all. The story doesn't really grip you, but it's interesting nonetheless. The moral lesson is confused, and the acting of the protagonist by Kentaro completely ruins the film - but it's not totally without worth in my opinion. The visual direction actually can be pretty cool. Overall the film is pretty cringey how seriously it takes itself, so there is a little bit of enjoyment factor there - however it hasn't got a very compelling plot... Basically there is betrayal on the good guy, there's arguments and fighting, and gratuitous scenes of clubbing, fashion design, petty crime, drug-taking, and Shannon Elizabeth still in her clothes. So I guess it is a bit like The Room in one or two respects, but that is a generous comparison. The worst thing is the dreadful title - both the original and UK title - but "Seamless: Kidz Rule" is probably a little worse as it's so detrimentally clunky. With the subtitle it's cumbersome; without it, it's just confusing.
In summary, it's an intriguing watch if you feel nostalgic for your carefree 20s full of intoxicants, hot girls of a somewhat loose nature, parties, and raving like a loon, before the scene changed/you got a new serious relationship/your friendship group broke apart/whatever.