Well, it certainly took me a while before this movie and I could hook up in the cinema, but I'm a persistent little bugger.
Throughout the film I thought the grading and film quality were very good. Vibrant color and very easy on the eyes. Spot on.
Acting - one of the better performances I've seen on FXhome cinema submissions was turned in by the guy playing the government (?) agent. The guy who wisks the protatgonist away in the car and offers him the bearer bonds. Very good job there. Everyone else offered very credible roles also.
Given that this entire thing was assembled in 24 hours, it was a pretty professional production, so under those restrictions it was a worthy effort.
There were a number of things about the film, however, which caught my attention in the other direction.
*****SPOILER ALERT. STOP READING NOW IF YOU HAVEN'T WATCHED THE FILM ****
First, the story. Assuming I was following the plot correctly, I wasn't really buying into it. So there was an explosion at an art gallery. And the government was responsible? And they're forcing the art gallery to sell the statue for man millions and.... what? keeping the money? And there's radiation at the site of the blast? Could anyone really mistake a nuclear exposion for a gas line leak and explosion? I either wasn't getting the plot right or it was just too much to believe.
Camera work. While some portions of it were strong, such as the interviews in the hospital, some other portions where hand held shots were done were just dreadful. In particular, the filming of the conversation in the car between the protagonist and the government guy. The camera was shifting up and down and when it tried to track to keep on the conversation, it was slowly lagging behind the changes in speakers. Drove me to distraction. If that was done intentionally to achieve some sort of effect, it definitely didn't work for me. The framing of the actors at the blast site was really uncomfortable also.
The sound. This was already mentioned, but I was listening in headphones and that drove me nuts. Not in a good way, either. Give me *some* sound in the other channel.
The required line. (i.e. "That's what I'm talking about") You've got it stuck in twice, once at the beginning and once at the end, and in both cases it left me boggling. I was like, "huh? What?" Neither seemed to fit in with the story. It seemed almost as if the filmmaker forgot they had to include that line and then shot it twice and tacked it on to meet the contest requirements.
All in all, I have to admire anyone who can pull off a production of that size in 24 hours, and it did have a couple of nice, strong points as I mentioned in the beginning. But with the plot, the sound, the camera work and the tag line, the film left me rather unsatisfied.
A 2 out of 5, though, for the good acting and solid, overall film quality, particularly on such a tight schedule.