Focus Features | Release Date: March 31, 2006
7.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 175 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
133
Mixed:
22
Negative:
20
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
AndyM.Jun 9, 2008
This movie is best described as a bunch of 25 year-olds, acting like 17 year-olds, acting like 35 year-olds. It's ridiculous. This isn't high school, and it never will be. It tries to be original by placing a 50-years-late, This movie is best described as a bunch of 25 year-olds, acting like 17 year-olds, acting like 35 year-olds. It's ridiculous. This isn't high school, and it never will be. It tries to be original by placing a 50-years-late, washed-up detective genre into a high school setting, and it comes off as plain absurd. As the Wall Street Journal puts it, "It's original, yet it's not". No high school is filled with smooth talking, drug-running teenagers, who spit 1940's lingo like it's the normal thing to do. If you like detective stories and you just HAVE to have a new angle, despite the complete lack of believability, then this is for you. The movie isn't a bad one, don't get me wrong. The writing and the confined presentation just prevents it from being the amazing movie it desperately wants to be. And I mean desperately. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
0
MichaelM.May 21, 2006
This film is what you would get if you gave a bunch of talented 10th grade students unlimited access to the school's audio visual department. But unfortunately, even the most talented 10th graders can't make a watchable commercial This film is what you would get if you gave a bunch of talented 10th grade students unlimited access to the school's audio visual department. But unfortunately, even the most talented 10th graders can't make a watchable commercial film, except maybe a film made for other 10th graders who happen to go to the same school. It seemed that the screenwriter's goal was to pack the dialogue full of as much cool-sounding slang as he could, whether it got in the way of writing a good script or not. This drivel was muttered nearly unintelligably by all the "actors" in this children-trying-to-act-like-grownups mess. How anyone could rate this over a zero is a total mystery to me--I assume it was a gift, so as not to discourage the budding young talent. I had exactly the same feeling about this film as I did about Dogville, except I felt much worse about the latter, because it was made by adults who had no excuse. Come to think of it, if you loved Dogville, you will probably love this film.--please rush out and buy a ticket so I won't feel so bad about wasting my own money. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful
3
MarcH.Apr 10, 2006
Boring! Very difficult to follow. I fell asleep 3 times, which never happens to me. (Perhaps I'm just not a fan of the film noir genre.)
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
DavidH.Sep 24, 2006
While one is hard-pressed to write off the allusions to hard-boiled film noir as inaffectionate or insincere. The end result is still insipid and incapable of retaining interest. The villain known as the
0 of 1 users found this helpful
2
deebbeebOct 1, 2009
Too painful to watch, I could only withstand about 30 minutes of this comic caper. No character development at all, I wished the main protaganist would die horribly.
0 of 1 users found this helpful
0
BrittaL.Jun 12, 2010
The plot is inexpressibly below the belt. Another boring college setting. Young spoiled students meet each other at school yards, bee eaters and in upperclass parties and try too much to look like "we make an independent film", but with good The plot is inexpressibly below the belt. Another boring college setting. Young spoiled students meet each other at school yards, bee eaters and in upperclass parties and try too much to look like "we make an independent film", but with good looking girls and with extraordinary pseudo-intellectual dialogs. But they are not intellectual, not even pseudo. It looks like college kids are trying to be Wim Wenders, David Lynch and Stanley Kubrik all together. It makes me feel embarrassed for somebody else. What next? A John Cassavetes wanna-be film with preteens? C'mon! Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
3
rdaviesNov 5, 2010
I am a big fan of film noir and I am open to the concept of neo-noir but this didn't do anything for me. It seemed to be off the pace that it should be keeping up with and although it has some good noir elements to it it didn't provide muchI am a big fan of film noir and I am open to the concept of neo-noir but this didn't do anything for me. It seemed to be off the pace that it should be keeping up with and although it has some good noir elements to it it didn't provide much entertainment value.----
ACTING was all round quite odd. The characters seemed pretty unrealistic and dull to me, although there was some good acting. I have to be honest, Gordon Levitt was more or less abysmal. ----PLOT. All the characters seemed dark and there was constant themes of mistrust, which is obviously in keeping with the noir side. Except, film noir was made at a dark time (40s-50s) and I think that now, it is irrelevant to use the same plot devices and themes. It just doesn't work, especially with a colour picture. ----DIRECTING. It was OK, but it didn't save this film from being a drag. ----CINEMATOGRAPHY: Well, a dark theme film and there is a dark tone to it, but I think the film was too active and full on as oppose to being kept subtle with clever fighting scenes blended in, like a noir film should be. ----Overall, I thought the idea of basing a noir in a high school COULD have been good, but was ultimately risky and in the end I think it just didn't work. A modern day Noir (neo noir) shouldn't stray too far away from the old 40s/50s films, after all, it is based on them. Too many elements were changed in Brick and the elements that remained didn't fit it as a result of the off-pace story and the unnecessarily unspecific character depth. Remember, characters like Sam Spade were dark, suspicious and cynical, but not completely distant to the point where we can't relate to them. ----Final thought: Brick tries to borrow from the classic noir but by trying to make it too modern it's changed the dynamic and become a failure.
Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
10
DavidP.Feb 22, 2008
i think it is sad people rate this so low, mainly due to the fact that they have no mental capacity to truly understand the plot and all the little subtle clues. not to mention they speak the way they do because it is a take on a film noir i think it is sad people rate this so low, mainly due to the fact that they have no mental capacity to truly understand the plot and all the little subtle clues. not to mention they speak the way they do because it is a take on a film noir movie neo-noir if you will, the movie is well produced and shot, not to mention the actors delved deep into their characters making the film noir theme show through better. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
EricSFeb 5, 2009
I thought everything about this movie yelled class (dialog, story, ambiance, costumes, direction) even though most of it takes place in a middle / lower-middle class environment.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BradCFeb 18, 2009
Amazing movie. Quite different from other high school or murder mystery movies.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
theGuardianMay 9, 2009
Brilliant film and an excellent way to bring noir to the kids that are missing out on it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
DeunneroMay 29, 2009
A great movie for a Friday night after a gruelling week of work. A throwback to films of old. I thought this had simliar tones to "The Night of the Hunter" personally. Highly recommended.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MatthewF.Jun 15, 2009
My favorite movie of all time.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
SethPJul 21, 2009
A damned good neo-noir.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
TarkoB.Mar 31, 2006
Pretty damn amazing when it works.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
LenW.Apr 4, 2006
The coolest hard-boiled teen crime drama of this or any year. Joseph Gordon-Levitt continues to turn out astonishing performances.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
RitB.Apr 10, 2006
Highschool kids talking and acting like 1940's gumshoes. Silly? --- yeah, maybe --- but it works very nicely and it's preferable to having to listen to teens say 'like' and 'you know' four hundred times an hour. Highschool kids talking and acting like 1940's gumshoes. Silly? --- yeah, maybe --- but it works very nicely and it's preferable to having to listen to teens say 'like' and 'you know' four hundred times an hour. You'll strain your ears trying to follow the smart dialog and your brain will work at hyperspeed in order to grasp and interpret it all but it's all worthwhile. Fun movie that keeps up a good pace --- check it out. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ChrisK.Apr 10, 2006
This is an extremely entertaining and well-written film highlighted by yet another first-rate performance by Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
RichardW.Apr 10, 2006
Great movie, but you have to pay attention and really think about what you are seeing. If you just loaf along and expect everytihng to be painfully obvious, like on most TV shows, you won't get it, and you won't like Brick. But if Great movie, but you have to pay attention and really think about what you are seeing. If you just loaf along and expect everytihng to be painfully obvious, like on most TV shows, you won't get it, and you won't like Brick. But if you like getting into movies that force you to think, you'll love Brick. I liked it a lot the first time, and loved it the second time and got much more out of it. Gordon-Levitt is amazing. Hard to imagine it's the same actor as on 3rd Rock or Mysterious Skin. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MaxF.Apr 15, 2006
I'm an age of "hard to please", and this gem pleasured me and two fellow film goers to the brim.. Screen play, direction, acting, and photography excelled. A lack of gutter words and the intro of new lingo added to the pleasure. Still a I'm an age of "hard to please", and this gem pleasured me and two fellow film goers to the brim.. Screen play, direction, acting, and photography excelled. A lack of gutter words and the intro of new lingo added to the pleasure. Still a conversation piece days later. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
DWillyApr 24, 2006
A great idea with a lot of nice directorial flourishes and always entertaining. There are real limitations with some of the actors and major confusions, but I guess this could also be considered consistent with the noir genre (I've A great idea with a lot of nice directorial flourishes and always entertaining. There are real limitations with some of the actors and major confusions, but I guess this could also be considered consistent with the noir genre (I've heard it said that "The Big Sleep" flat out doesn't make sense). Well worth seeing. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
TrevorB.Apr 24, 2006
Joseph Gordan- Levitt has come along way, from 3rd Rock from the Sun. He's on well on his way to becoming a movie star. Rian Johnson has an uncanny ability with language that you don't hear everyday. I can't wait to see his Joseph Gordan- Levitt has come along way, from 3rd Rock from the Sun. He's on well on his way to becoming a movie star. Rian Johnson has an uncanny ability with language that you don't hear everyday. I can't wait to see his follow up film. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JulioF.May 12, 2006
Noir to its teeth. It's spectacular, consistent, and compact -- no small feat -- and the whole things plays out very nicely on screen.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
SeamusM.May 17, 2006
The first half hout or so i thought the film was really pretentious and boring. Then it gathered pace. i didn't think the dialogue was very realistic. Surely nobody talks like that.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JarodC.Jun 14, 2006
Enjoyable...however, dialogue tended to be extremely annoying in parts, not because of the slang etc. but because it just dripped with effort. It seemed like this guy wanted to make his characters sound quirky for the sake of it. Some of it Enjoyable...however, dialogue tended to be extremely annoying in parts, not because of the slang etc. but because it just dripped with effort. It seemed like this guy wanted to make his characters sound quirky for the sake of it. Some of it was just laugh-out-loud awful. Other than that, the story seemed to flow well after slowish start. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
M.S.Jun 17, 2006
I've got one word for this film...awsome. This was a superb film I must say. The dialog alone was worth the ticket price and the hype but what is good dialog without an incredibly endearing and believable cast? This cast really pulled I've got one word for this film...awsome. This was a superb film I must say. The dialog alone was worth the ticket price and the hype but what is good dialog without an incredibly endearing and believable cast? This cast really pulled their weight, every single one of them acting as a cohesive ensemble and with it, creating an aura of fun suspense and mystery that can only be found in black and white noir mysteries of a similar nature. The camera work was wonderful and the story was incredibly well written. The characters were totally engaging, I even felt a pang of sorrow for Dode when he got killed even though he was a slime bucket! I found it incredibly fresh that they would take the nostalgia of the eighties and highschool culture and food chains and use it as a play ground for a mystery. I also liked how it was all highschoolers in this underground society of misfits who were involved with crimes and investigations and research, it gave the film a refreshing authenticity rarely found in films today. To all of those who scorn it for doing what (literally) no noir mystery has done before...forget you. This was a seriously entertaining and effective film!. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
JustinS.Jun 30, 2006
The acting was very good, but this movie has a number of flaws. For example, I found it hard to believe the Pin, a major figure in the local drug trade, still lives with his mother, How old is he supposed to be? I also had trouble following The acting was very good, but this movie has a number of flaws. For example, I found it hard to believe the Pin, a major figure in the local drug trade, still lives with his mother, How old is he supposed to be? I also had trouble following the plot except for its most basic outlines (perhaps it was too complex). It didn't help that I couldn't understand the dialog (I thought the actors were mumbling most of their lines or maybe I'm just not up to speed with the latest street slang). I'm going to have to rent the dvd so I can catch what all the actors are saying and what it means. Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
TheConundrumJul 10, 2006
A great first effort. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, even when not being able to follow the tortuous plot. Yeah, yeah, some people won't be able to buy into the conceit of SoCal high school kids mouthing Raymond Chandler dialog, but A great first effort. I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, even when not being able to follow the tortuous plot. Yeah, yeah, some people won't be able to buy into the conceit of SoCal high school kids mouthing Raymond Chandler dialog, but that's their loss. A hard-boiled film noir in sunny Orange County -- pure gold. Ther are some great comic moments, too. Admittedly, the film is a little rough around the edges, and the acting is inconsistent, but do you expect from a movie made for about $37.98? One last caveat: Although I want to encourage people to support the artists by seeing the movie an a theater, it would actually be better to wait for DVD and rent it. That way you'll be able to go back and catch some of the denser dialog you may have missed, or just pause the action to try to figure out what the heck is going on. I'm sure it would reward many viewings. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
MattC.Jul 24, 2006
A very good film, overall, particularly for a first effort. The performances by Joseph Gordon-Leavitt was particularly powerful, appropriately, while Lukas Hass was very good and Nora Zehetner was breathtaking. The issue that people complain A very good film, overall, particularly for a first effort. The performances by Joseph Gordon-Leavitt was particularly powerful, appropriately, while Lukas Hass was very good and Nora Zehetner was breathtaking. The issue that people complain about, not being able to understand the language? That's really more of an issue with them, not the movie. I was able to understand it perfectly. My only real complaints would be: It could have stood being tightened up. When a 110 minute movie feels more like 180, you know it drags in places. Additionally, I felt the music could have been more agressive throughout the film. While I understand the usage of the jangly was supposed to convey a certain mood, the language and subject were more than enough to evoke that, and the soundtrack contributed, I think, to the feeling over of-length. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
R.ThomasJul 24, 2006
If your clever enough to follow the film and understand it, you'll love it. However it can be hard to do so, so don't bother unless your ready to sit down and get absorbed in it.
0 of 0 users found this helpful