The quality of the film made me think it was made in the 70's. The story was pretty straightforward - a film about people trying to get a film made - and the acting ropey! But hey I bought it, watched it and am know writing this review. It has a lot of pointers of how not to do things so as a learning tool for filmmakers it is good! I watched it because I don't't like to abandon ship until the very last minute and I feel enriched now that i have. The fact that a film was made in the US by these guys and I bought it in England and watched it proves to me that the process of filming and distribution is possible for any level of film-making and that is an inspiration! If you are feeling very relaxed and have 101 minutes of time on your hands grab a notepad and write down all the things you liked about the film and have a laugh..
10 Reviews
Ouch, that hurt
Elijah_Chandler14 March 2006
Being (somewhat) an independent filmmaker myself, I really understand what these guys were trying to do and it sounds like a good idea. On paper. On 16mm film, however, it's awful. I didn't realize the thing was made in the mid 90's because the film was so grainy and bad I would have sworn this was one of those 30 year old flicks where a porn producer tried to go mainstream. And the sound! Ugh, I don't know what kind of mic they were using to record but it sounds like someone is walking over dead leaves throughout the entire thing. I guess I shouldn't judge too harshly, after all, how many feature films has MY company put out? None, but I'd like to think that we'd at least have good picture and sound quality to go with our poor acting, writing, and directing. A+ for idea, F-- for execution.
Shoe string movie
junk-monkey16 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This movie has one or two slightly interesting gags but they are NOT worth the wait. After an unexplained argument between two guys picking up litter in a drive-in movie theatre we cut to a family leaving! Hollywood and driving driving driving driving their camper van across the screen again and again as inane dialogue is voiced over. At least I think it's inane, the terrible song that accompanies this montage is mixed so loud it renders the dialogue at times almost inaudible.
Finally the camper van arrives, at night, at a gas station where the family get out, have another inane conversation, before driving off. The camera then pans across to reveal the actor we have just seen drive away. He talks straight to camera and we realise he is the director of the movie we are watching which is about him, and how he came to make the movie.
A nice idea which ALMOST (but not quite) makes the previous sequences worth the pain.
As the movie unfolds he encounters the two characters we met picking litter at the start of the movie and they all form a motion picture company.
All sorts of not very funny and clumsy comedy ensues as they put together a crew and attempt to raise the cash needed to start filming.
This movie was obviously put together on a shoe string and a promise and there is a nice little idea in here struggling to get out but the execution is so inept that the idea gets lost. Comedy is more than things just falling over and everyone talking (or shouting) at once. So much of the dialogue here is shouted by several actors simultaneously - Robert Altman can do this sort of thing well because he has a script, rehearsals, decent sound techies, and editing facilities. Everyone shouting at the one mike which, by the sound of it, was hidden in a dustbin in the next room, does not make for clarity.
Finally the camper van arrives, at night, at a gas station where the family get out, have another inane conversation, before driving off. The camera then pans across to reveal the actor we have just seen drive away. He talks straight to camera and we realise he is the director of the movie we are watching which is about him, and how he came to make the movie.
A nice idea which ALMOST (but not quite) makes the previous sequences worth the pain.
As the movie unfolds he encounters the two characters we met picking litter at the start of the movie and they all form a motion picture company.
All sorts of not very funny and clumsy comedy ensues as they put together a crew and attempt to raise the cash needed to start filming.
This movie was obviously put together on a shoe string and a promise and there is a nice little idea in here struggling to get out but the execution is so inept that the idea gets lost. Comedy is more than things just falling over and everyone talking (or shouting) at once. So much of the dialogue here is shouted by several actors simultaneously - Robert Altman can do this sort of thing well because he has a script, rehearsals, decent sound techies, and editing facilities. Everyone shouting at the one mike which, by the sound of it, was hidden in a dustbin in the next room, does not make for clarity.
Worst film ever...not even close.
pappasl15 December 2007
Gave it two stars because the DVD cover was good enough to make me buy this piece of horse manure. I paid a dollar for it at the local DVD exchange and I want my money back. I have a couple of good movies(at least I think they're good) that have never seen the inside of a video store. After seeing this, I'm really insulted by that. Light years worse than anything I've ever seen, I can't even recommend this as a campy joke movie. It is so bad, instead of making you laugh it makes you angry. How did this awful film find any kind of distro? I can only believe it was self distributed as the amateurish DVD authoring would suggest. To the producers of this "movie" get out of the business, it's obvious you have no talent for it.
Bad movie about making a bad movie
Jcwoo512 February 2007
With the little respect it deserves, I would like to state that this movie was horrible. The filmmakers had good intentions, but the overall quality of the direction and production value was obviously lacking a great deal. I would recommend this movie to anyone who likes a good hard laugh and then wasting two more hours of their life enduring a truly painful experience. I'm surprised I even found this movie on the $1 DVD rack where it was aptly placed. I thought maybe it was going to be good and that I might discover some amazing independent film - I was wrong. I wish I had never seen this movie. My 3-year-old cousin couldn't make a worse film. I'm glad I saw the film because I can finally tell people I've seen the worst movie ever made, and be sure of it.
The single worst movie of all time!
rlhron9 July 2011
Jump Cut is impossible to watch without falling asleep. If anyone knows of a worse film, please let me know.
Here is my theory on how this film was made:
In 1970, a group of not so intelligent guys had a camera and wanted to make a porn. Without a script, they starting filming all the "acting" parts of the movie. Then they realized that no one was willing to take their cloths off and have sex with them. They soon lost interest in finishing the movie and put the cans of film on a shelf. There the cans sat until 1993 when a man from Jacksonville, Florida found them. He thought he found the missing footage from "Metropolis" and had them transferred to DVD. When the transfer came back, he watch it only to find it wasn't lost footage, it was crap. Feeling bad, he decided the only way to recoup his transferring costs was to released the film "as is" and see if anyone would buy it. He made 10 copies and found 10 suckers to buy them. Since 1993, those 10 copies have gone from person to person, each one watching this horrible film and feeling ripped off and in turn, each person wanting to recoup their loses.
I have one of those copies and I'm willing to stop this terrible chain of reaction by taking my loses ($2) and burning my copy. Anyone else with me? Please make the world a better place by helping me find the rest of the copies out there and destroying them...
Anyway, that's my theory on how this movie came to be!
You can find a list of other movies that I consider terrible at:
Films You Shouldn't Waste Your Time On: http://www.imdb.com/list/11WhyQvJiTk/
Here is my theory on how this film was made:
In 1970, a group of not so intelligent guys had a camera and wanted to make a porn. Without a script, they starting filming all the "acting" parts of the movie. Then they realized that no one was willing to take their cloths off and have sex with them. They soon lost interest in finishing the movie and put the cans of film on a shelf. There the cans sat until 1993 when a man from Jacksonville, Florida found them. He thought he found the missing footage from "Metropolis" and had them transferred to DVD. When the transfer came back, he watch it only to find it wasn't lost footage, it was crap. Feeling bad, he decided the only way to recoup his transferring costs was to released the film "as is" and see if anyone would buy it. He made 10 copies and found 10 suckers to buy them. Since 1993, those 10 copies have gone from person to person, each one watching this horrible film and feeling ripped off and in turn, each person wanting to recoup their loses.
I have one of those copies and I'm willing to stop this terrible chain of reaction by taking my loses ($2) and burning my copy. Anyone else with me? Please make the world a better place by helping me find the rest of the copies out there and destroying them...
Anyway, that's my theory on how this movie came to be!
You can find a list of other movies that I consider terrible at:
Films You Shouldn't Waste Your Time On: http://www.imdb.com/list/11WhyQvJiTk/
Music by David Bishop credits
heytrustme31 March 2023
It is of note that the music that the credits were given to David Bishop were written by Jim Turnbow.. the lyrics for the theme song were written by Robert Flickinger.... this issue was brought up to Lawrence Gardner.. he stuck to Daves story.. after some wrangling you will see Jims names in the fast scroll as Jim Turnbrot.. but Dave could not play music and asked the band Mad Hatter to help him.. that would be Jim Turnbow, Robert Flickinger and.. Daniel Gonzales.. Daniel and I think his sister also worked on the film.. at any rate.. of note the growling dogs also in a particular scene.. Dave Bishop recorded at Jim Turnbows house.. his dog.. Hank.. neither one received proper credits.. but yeah.. Dave Bishop?.. could not play or write music.. but was good at asking for .. then claiming credit..
2nd version?
insurance12 February 2019
Is there a chance this movie was a 2nd attempt at a film that was made in Roseville in the mid 80's? I was in the cast of a film by the same name filmed (partially) in the Old Roseville Theater on Vernon Street in about 1984 or 1985. I played a bus-boy in a restaurant where the toilets all exploded. I always wondered what happened to the film but it looks like maybe they scrapped all the original footage and attempted to re-make it 5 years later. Just curious. Any idea where I can get a copy?
Worth Watching
fanfilm222 June 2011
When I watched this film I thought my TV sound was on the blink, however I think this was the intention of the film to make it poor sound and picture quality. I really like Film within films such as Living in Oblivion, Bowfinger and The Independent, this well could be the original film to shoot a film like this, there are 561 titles listed on IMDb but many are just the odd scene here or there rather than the whole movie. Jump cut in my opinion is worth watching if you are in the film industry if you are not it maybe hard work to get it! one thing that I was not keen on was the lead actor talking directly to camera apart from this it was OK and the budget was lo for shooting on film if it was shot on digital you could slice this budget by 80%, i'm interested what happened to the director? my rating 6 out of 10 and worth $1.
I bought this film for one euro and was robbed.
collettedvs97115 October 2011
They put a documentary together of the worst films ever made, how this film was missed is beyond me. I went into the a movie store that sells second hand dvds. I read the back of it and premise of it seemed very original, it was about a guy getting the money together to make a film.
The problem with the film itself is for a start the graphics. When I found out this film was 1993 I was surprised because with a graphics and sound it looks like it may have been made in the 70's.
Second problem was the overall script,there seemed to be constant reminder that you are just watching a film like there was a scene were they were at with bikers and the bikers were getting very rowdy and the guy turns to the camera and says something like "how we going to get out of this one" and all the actors take of their wigs. I can see why they think it was funny but trust me it wasn't.
There was nothing good about this film, the DVD I bought is gone down to a charity shop and will be bought for another 1. Anything more I be going to hell for torcher.
The problem with the film itself is for a start the graphics. When I found out this film was 1993 I was surprised because with a graphics and sound it looks like it may have been made in the 70's.
Second problem was the overall script,there seemed to be constant reminder that you are just watching a film like there was a scene were they were at with bikers and the bikers were getting very rowdy and the guy turns to the camera and says something like "how we going to get out of this one" and all the actors take of their wigs. I can see why they think it was funny but trust me it wasn't.
There was nothing good about this film, the DVD I bought is gone down to a charity shop and will be bought for another 1. Anything more I be going to hell for torcher.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
