The film itself clocks in at a lean 85 minutes, and has some pretty darn funny scenes. The setup is completely contrived, but in some sort of other-world logic, it works. It's the kind of movie where, if the lead characters just had the conversation any real couple would have, it would have alleviated the need for most of the movie. That being the case, the film was still a fun ride. The comedy was completely random, yet everything pointed towards the inevitable conclusion. All of the actors played their parts well, buying into the situations they were placed in.
We were told that the film was still in the early stages of post-production, so early, in fact, that this was the first cut made. There was missing music, mismatched audio, unfinished effects, and end credits were a scrolling series of the words "End Credits."
Following the conclusion of the film, there was a brief Q&A. We had a discussion of what worked, what didn't, which characters we preferred, whether the story was unclear, what was funniest, whether the pacing was good, and other questions along those lines, all of this in an attempt to help the producers that were in attendance guide the film to a positive completion. Since it was so early in the process, they do not have a release date, but hopefully they will be able to complete a finalized print soon.
As an experience, I have to rank this pretty highly. It may not be the best movie I've ever seen, but it was fun to be a part of it. So, if any of you get the opportunity to be in a test audience, I say go for it.
The reason I didn't review the film is at the request of the producers, looking to keep the film quiet while they continue to work it up. I respect that. Perhaps when the release rolls around, I will be able to share my thoughts on this work print compared with the finished product.
Article comments
1 - Phillip Winn
This is fascinating! I'm tempted to be snooty about the editing-by-committee approach, but I know I'd jump at a chance to attend something like this, so I'll just be amazed instead.
2 - Eric Olsen
this rocks Chris, fascinating, thanks!
3 - Scott Butki
If I knew my film trivia better I would try to guess the actors you gave clues about... but I won't.
Good post.
Thanks for sharing an interesting experience with us.
4 - Triniman
Very interesting post, Chris! Now you've got me trying to guess who the actors are.
5 - Matthew T. Sussman
Don't lie to me, Chris. Was this movie Snakes on a Plane?
6 - JELIEL³
I wonder if they knew you were a BC would they have still selected you?
I wish I could get into screenings also. Sounds cool, all insidery...
7 - JP
I'd attended a couple of these, while working for AMC (our theater hosted several as well) - this is how "alternate endings" on a DVD usually come about, or rather the process by which they pick the one they'll eventually use.. fun to be a part of.
8 - Ty
That is so cool that in NYC you can do this sort of thing.
Most people in America want to do so, and a scam company TELEVISION PREVIEW, an arm of an ad company, takes advantage of this desire and scams you into watching crummy shows to see and review commercials.
9 - Tyler
By the way, the movie is obviously
"The Pleasure of Your Company "
Starring Jason Biggs (American Pie Trilogy) and Isla Fisher (from Wedding Crashers, highest grossing comedy of 2005)
Plot Summary:
THE PLEASURE OF YOUR COMPANY is a comedy that shows us that love has nothing to do with perfection. After losing the woman of his dreams, Anderson (Biggs) is convinced he'll never fall in love again. But at the urging of his best friend, he spontaneously proposes to a dissatisfied waitress named Katie (Fisher) and an innocent dare evolves into the kind of love that both have been looking for all along.
IMDB link
10 - Ty
The writer/director is Michael Ian Black, who you might know from the DUMB recent Sierra Mist commercial at airport security with Kathy Griffin (Michael Ian Black is the victim in the commercial of Griffin's stupidity)
11 - Sterfish
This "non-review" is a lot better than some actual reviews I've read. Great job!