Crappy film

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Judging by the reviews on here, this seems like a "love it or hate it" type of film. After watching it, I came away strongly indifferent to what I saw. It's put together very well for the budget range, the technical work (lighting, photography, sound, editing...) is above average for the format (digital video) and it is well acted by both indy horror queen Debbie Rochon and promising leading man Michael Rodrick. What really shocked me was how it fluctuated from intriguing and entertaining to monotonous and unfocused, and how it often did it within the confines of a single scene. Ultimately it seemed to drag on for about 20-30 minutes longer than it should have, and with a running time of around 80 minutes (about ten of which consist of credits and some sorely misused closing credit outtakes), it is simply unforgivable for a film barely clocking in over an hour to drag, seem padded out or become redundant a half hour before the finale. Simply put, there is enough material here maybe for a short, but not a feature film.The structure of the plot doesn't intrigue as much as it annoys - jumping back-and-forth in time is becoming such a cliché now that it's almost expected in a film of this nature. But fracturing the time frame on a script does not add any additional depth to an already slim storyline. Nor does it automatically give it any kind of immediate artistic value. Nor does it heighten any of the suspense. This film would have played out much, much better had it taken place in real time with the events chronologically presented. If we could see the embitterment and desperation of the Rochon character grow and grow without being constantly interrupted, the impact would have been much greater and the violent retribution of her character much more believable. But the filmmakers chose to present it in a certain way and it's too late to go back now... So I'll go ahead and lay out the story chronologically to make the point that the layout isn't as important as content contained within.NOWHERE MAN, which basically attempts to be a black comic play-up on the John and Lorena Bobbitt castration story, deals with a middle class New Yorker named Conrad (Rodrick), presented flatly as a typical male with typical male hang ups, who seems to be in a fairly healthy relationship with his long-term girlfriend Jennifer (Debbie), who he wants to marry and have a family with. One day out of the blue an unmarked video ends up on the doorstep of their shared apartment a la David Lynch's LOST HIGHWAY. But instead of the visions of a creepy voyeur, he sees his girlfriend in an amateur porn tape from many years earlier having sex with a well-endowed porn star named Daddy Mac (Frank Oliver). It is then that his jealously, machismo, ego, violent and sadistic temperament and abusiveness kick into gear and he puts Jennifer through an incredibly humiliating and agonizing ordeal before throwing her out into the street. He shows the tape to all of his friends at a party, voices his opinion about what a worthless whore he thinks Jennifer is and, in the films most grueling scene, subjects her to the most impersonal rape-sex scenario imaginable where he refuses her any form of tenderness. Jennifer is thoroughly devastated, confused and dehumanized... so she sneaks into his bedroom one night and cuts off his penis with a pair of shears and runs away with it (one way to cure the male ego problem, eh?). The rest of the film details Conrad's attempt to retrieve his penis before it goes "bad." If he gets it back in a certain amount of time, it's salvageable. By the time it gets to that point, I seriously doubt many people will want him to get his way, so the director appeases his audience's desire for a fiery finish...At best, the film offers a platform for the two lead actors to prove they deserve a shot at better roles in better quality productions. I've always felt that Rochon's talent has been shamefully wasted over the years on films that exploit her looks over her acting chops, so it's nice to see her in a juicier role that actually allows her opportunity to expand on a character. Rodrick is equally fine (not that I gave a f**k what happened to 'Conrad' after a half hour or so) and could hold his own in a more expensive production; he's good looking, appealing and delivers most of his lines believably and naturally. Much of the supporting cast (including Lloyd Kaufman in a brief cameo as a doctor) is amateurish and detract a little from the overall realism, but not enough for that to be an overall factor in this films overall quality. But there is so much untapped potential here... unexplored subtext and worthwhile dramatic content about love, loss and adult relationships that is not even explored... The script doesn't seem to give the characters the right words at the right times... The camera doesn't stay where it should at crucial moments... A lot of it seems half-hearted and unfinished. There IS meat on these bones, but there's no real muscle or flesh. It's not terrible like some are saying, but it's also not a revelation like others would like you to believe. It's a case of being a watchable film that COULD HAVE been so much more.

DARK, BAWDY AND FEROCIOUS This no budget hand grenade rips apart the mold of gutless, brainless and disingenuously politically correct products that have become DE rigger in film-making today: our main character discovers that his fiancée has appeared in several interracial porno films; our main character calls off the engagement and abuses said fiancée; our main character has his penis cut off and held for ransom. Sound like an exploitation film? Yes, but this one has brains and wit. Probably one of the darkest films you'll ever see, but the pathos is leavened with a twisted humor (catch 'Daddy Mac' rapping, or 'Dr. Johnson' counseling). This being said, 'Nowhere Man' is sure to offend some of you, especially those who specialize in getting moralistic and self righteously worked up over whatever. And many will be turned off by the low production values, and somewhat thin storyline. But these are petty qualms in what is a gutsy little piece of counter-culture.

Description: Conrad, our hero, must retrieve his beloved 'member' within 24 hours so that it can be surgically re-attached, and… Well, you get the idea. You probably know now whether you're interested in seeing this little flic or not. If you are, you're in for a surprising treat, because writer/director McAnn serves up this no budget gem with a dose of spicy black humor; but the real kudos go to actor Michael Rodrik (who is this guy?) who steams his way through one of the darkest psychic tunnels an actor ever had to go through, and does so with alarming gusto. Some viewers will get their panties twisted over the lewd (and I do mean lewd) subject matter; but hey, that's how I feel about romantic comedies, so different strokes, right? Hopefully this flic will not be buried amid the tons of crappy video sensationalism. Whoever released it deserves some credit for having the courage to do so. Two thumbs up!

This is a must see film and Debbie Rochon's performance is her best one ever. Debbie will invoke emotions in you. as she chooses her own special type of vengeance upon a boyfriend that takes offense to previous job that Jennifer once held. Debbie by all rights should be collecting awards for her performance in this difficult roleTim McCannn has has written a great script and done great job in directing this film. Michael Rodrrick and Frank Oliverare really good in their roles as the abusive boyfriend and the porn star/friendI was really glad to hear that it was showing in limited release in New York, Chicago, and L.A.This movie is a lot better then some of the stuff showing in theaters today and a must buy when it comes out on DVD