While watching this movie, I came up with a script for a movie, called "The Making of 10 Items or Less":
Producer: I've got good news and bad news. The good news is, we can get Morgan Freeman!
Writer: That's great! But what's the bad news?
Producer: We can only afford to hire him for one day. I guess we'll have to get someone else.
Writer: So we hire him for one day. A movie is an hour and a half long. A work day is eight hours long. I fail to see a problem.
Producer: But... he'll have to spend time getting into character.
Writer: So we have him play a character who is essentially himself.
Producer: But he'll still need to understand his motivation and all that. You're not saying we have him play a big-name actor that's doing a low-budget movie, are you?
Writer: Why not?
Producer: That's ridiculous! But fine, at least we'll have Morgan Freeman in our movie. And I guess we have to set the movie in Los Angeles too.
Writer: Of course.
Producer: This script is a load of crap. We'd better make money on this. Just in case, have Morgan Freeman's character plug Wal-Mart or Target or one of those stores, so at least someone will want to sell the DVDs.
Writer: Sure thing!
Producer: Wait a second... what's this about a tiny bodega with a "ten items or less" express lane?
Writer: Oh, I guess that is pretty weird. But we can't change the title now!
I doubt my script actually bears much resemblance to reality, but then neither did "10 Items or Less". This is a case of good acting, but bad writing, and I hate to see it happen. When watching an independent movie, you expect it to try to convey some sort of message. I think they might have been trying for the tired old "don't let anything hold you back" message that has been done to death in much better films. In any case, with "10 Items or Less", the only message I got was "Look! Look at Morgan Freeman!"
Producer: I've got good news and bad news. The good news is, we can get Morgan Freeman!
Writer: That's great! But what's the bad news?
Producer: We can only afford to hire him for one day. I guess we'll have to get someone else.
Writer: So we hire him for one day. A movie is an hour and a half long. A work day is eight hours long. I fail to see a problem.
Producer: But... he'll have to spend time getting into character.
Writer: So we have him play a character who is essentially himself.
Producer: But he'll still need to understand his motivation and all that. You're not saying we have him play a big-name actor that's doing a low-budget movie, are you?
Writer: Why not?
Producer: That's ridiculous! But fine, at least we'll have Morgan Freeman in our movie. And I guess we have to set the movie in Los Angeles too.
Writer: Of course.
Producer: This script is a load of crap. We'd better make money on this. Just in case, have Morgan Freeman's character plug Wal-Mart or Target or one of those stores, so at least someone will want to sell the DVDs.
Writer: Sure thing!
Producer: Wait a second... what's this about a tiny bodega with a "ten items or less" express lane?
Writer: Oh, I guess that is pretty weird. But we can't change the title now!
I doubt my script actually bears much resemblance to reality, but then neither did "10 Items or Less". This is a case of good acting, but bad writing, and I hate to see it happen. When watching an independent movie, you expect it to try to convey some sort of message. I think they might have been trying for the tired old "don't let anything hold you back" message that has been done to death in much better films. In any case, with "10 Items or Less", the only message I got was "Look! Look at Morgan Freeman!"