"A Reader's Digest version of today's young talent."
First off, forget about all the critics who make themselves sound knowledgable about film by claiming that it's a "Pulp Fiction" rip-off.Maybe it does borrow from Tarantino; so what? What movie doesn't nowadays? Psycho? My Favorite Martian? Wing Commander? Every movie is ripping off SOMETHING these days. It might as well be borrowing from a good source. Besides, movies like "Things to do in Denver When You're Dead" and Tarantino's own "Four Rooms" are excellent examples of the fact that ripping off QT doesn't guarantee a good movie. There has to be some amount of skill involved.
I was extremely thankful for this movie, because it gave me a chance to see a lot of actors that I like in small doses in small roles. If they ever try to build a movie around Breckin Meyer, I'll shoot myself. Too many studio execs are giving entire movies over to unproven young talent. Do you think Katie Holmes can carry a movie by herself? What about Jay Mohr? Did you even see "Picture Perfect"? Maybe in a few years, Timothy Olyphant will be able to carry a movie. But in this movie, he's perfect in the small role given to him. Sarah Polley has already done some excellent acting in "The Sweet Hereafter", but this movie should prove to be her most accessible project to date.
The movie does give itself over to a bit of overtly Tarantino-esque filmmaking at one point, re-visiting the same scene three times to start three seperate stories. Although I'm not a big fan of this technique (The only time I didn't feel that seeing the same scene multiple times was pointless was Groundhog Day) it works in this flick. It was a good idea to set the three storylines apart, as one of the stories (The fateful trip to Vegas) wouldn't be helped by constantly cutting away from the action. The middle section of the film is one of the most entertaining. Desmond Askew (in his film debut) and Taye Diggs, two young lads up to no good in Vegas, come out as the breakout stars of the film. Askew in particular manages to be both charming and slightly goofy - how he missed out on "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels" is beyond me. "Go" builds up a fair bit of suspense at times, and it manages to keep the audience interested for the most part. Only the dinner scene with Jay Mohr and Scott Wolf caused me to check my watch.
Dismissing this movie as a "Pulp Fiction" rip-off misses the point. "Go" has an original view of LA at the millenium, and pulls off the nifty trick of being fun to watch as escapist entertainment and as quality indie filmmaking. Sure, it borrows from the book of Quentin once in a while. It's an indie film; that's like criticizing Scorsese for using Orson Welles' old tricks. Just think: Doug Liman could have made "Swingers 2" and made a ton more money. Applaud him for trying something different.Lack of peppy new catch-phrases aside, a bold and exciting entry into the teen movie genre. It certainly beats the shit out of "She's all That".