Gangster Exchange (2010)

I wanted to but couldn't!

Disappointment for a huge fan!

In truth, there is barely enough story here to make a film.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

I expected to see many more negative reviews about this movie since the average cinephile is dead serious and can't enjoy things for what they are - in this case, stupid fun. So I was pretty relieved to see that other people agreed with me: this movie is not good at all and it's great. Thanks to everyone over the age of 9 having access to non-linear editing software, anyone can make a zero budget action film. Gone are the no-budget indies that were all slice of life and dramedy, enter the "fog machine and CGI helicopter" era of indie filmmaking. For the most part, the vast majority of these movies are garbage. Not "so bad it's good" bad, just bad. But every once in a while we strike bad movie comedy gold like Gangster Exchange. A movie that is bad with the extra-added perk of being funny as hell.Battleship Potemkin, this movie is not. The pace of this movie is sure to turn a lot of people off. It never gets chaotic, it doesn't slow down for the dramatic bits. It just feels like "here's a scene. Here's another scene. This is also a scene." It's quite unimpressive. But it's also the perfect flow for a movie you're not planning on taking seriously from the getgo. It almost pleads with you to drink along with the characters. See, if it were all comedy, the movie would feel dreadful. And if it were all airsoft props and CG muzzle flash, the movie would feel dreadful. However, due to the irregular editing style, it's impossible to expect what kind of scene you're going into next, which I found refreshing. Couple that kind of amateurism with a set of ancillary characters whose only purpose are to liven the picture up and you can't help but laugh.The story is out of a can, the antagonists can't act their way out of a high school rendition of Grease, there's bad techno playing throughout the entire film and the hero is carrying a toilet around for an hour of screen time. The ending is predictable and satisfying, the obligatory party scene is loud and stupid, and the lead is attractive and likable. That's really it. So why'd I give it an 8? Because I can. Sorry, snobs.

So clearly not a movie with a big budget, it's still better than any B movie. Good story, characters and thoroughly engaging. If you can relate to anything in the movie it's even better, and more engaging. I don't know what that other reviewers (2 at this point) are going on and on about. It's simple. Most movies are stupid. The stupidness in this movie is just cuz they aren't playin the smartest guys, so it kinda makes sense. It only makes the movie better.The characters are almost realistic.... ya! Go figure. Clearly the writer/director knows people like the ones portrayed in the film, and there are some crazy and/or scary dudes in the story. They act a lot like the ones I ... uh can't confirm or deny knowing ;) The only thing bad thing is that the bikers seem off, they're kinda whack. But there is reason given for this early on, so.... since the rest of the movie rocks - forgiven! It even shows functional instructions for a rudimentary Y spliff. Amazing. Now I'm going on..If you think it might be your kind of movie, it probably totally is.

I'm usually very annoyed by movies that attempt too hard to be Quentin Tarantino-esque, especially since Tarantino is best known for ripping off other people's stuff, whether it be from the 70s or from foreign films, making his copycats thieves twice removed. But with some good casting, not bad acting and a concept first realized in Cheech and Chong's Up In Smoke (it was a van made out of marijuana in that one), this Candadian flick pulls it off pretty well, delivering something as engaging as a good Hong Kong action flick with the perverse humor of the Pusher trilogy. It starts off like a poor man's District B13 but instead of free running and over the top action we're delivered unique characters who interact in absurd situations reminiscent of Pulp Fiction. The main character, of course, is a toilet made out of heroin, which ends up being splattered with blood as it is carried under one arm through raves, acid trips and a few shoot outs as well. I'm really glad the underdogs just shot dead the really mean evil scary Bonsian kingpins (pulled that off twice in fact) because I can't tell you how many films I've seen during which I've shouted "Just shoot him already!" It was highly satisfying that their actions were dictated by common sense rather than by some sadistic screenwriter's whim. All in all I had a good time watching Gangster Exchange and would recommend it to anyone who enjoys a good crime movie.

Christopher Russell as Marco and Nobuya Shimamoto as Hiro make a buddy-buddy pair as appealing as Paul Newman/Robert Redford, and as expectantly to be looked for in the future. Russell has the athletic good looks - and hair! - of Tom Cruise in a role that Cruise would certainly turn down, due to the very unDianetics partying and vendettas. What raises the film to being totally Toronto is not only Marco carrying the drug toilet around with him throughout. But also, what I will not give away to future viewers, the identity of the Japanese-speaking PhD in Chemistry who solves our two friends problems. The Tarantino content of guns-and-drugs is treated in a way that calls for the audiences' complicity. The writer/director gets away from the aristocratic attitude on this subject. This is an ORDINARY PEOPLE'S movie.