Steineded How sad is this?

GazerRise Fantastic!

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Sabah Hensley This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

kingchoc I actually felt like taking time out of my day, to sign up, and review this steaming turd because it was that awful. If writers/directors can get funding and sell this film to premium cable movie channels I might just be the next Quentin Tarantino. This film's script is what really chaps my doughnut more than anything else. This person (whoever it is, I don't care) must be completely alienated from the real world not to mention he must be absolutely clueless when it comes to the world of crime. The lines are so terrible, wow, the characters are so unbelievable, the lines sound like they were written by a 45 year old woman with a wrong impression about what these 'criminals' talk and do everyday. Absolutely no research into the topic of field. The characters look/act like nerds who dressed up and used bad words for the first time since they smoked that joint behind the dumpsters when they were 15. Most nerds I know are more gangster than these guys. An attempt at creating a terrible Guy Ritchie ripoff that bombs terribly. Yes, the director attempted to get that 'Guy Ritchie' feel for a bit, then it just goes into 'The Wire' from hell. Completely unfunny diatribe. Sickening, if whoever gave these schmucks money wants a proper script give me a call, we can do lunch. The moral of the story? Write what you know, don't write a crime story when you know **** all about crime.

biggusdickus-1 Like the previous poster, I was lured in by the high score and the lone (as of 2/2012) external critic's review, a rave recommendation whose author I now realize was either bribed by the filmmakers or mentally impaired.It's not a truly terrible movie, but if you're a fan of this genre, trust me, there's nothing and I mean nothing here that you haven't seen better elsewhere. And if you're not a big fan, there's nothing much here for you at all.I tried my damnedest to suspend disbelief enough to buy the cornfed doughboy star as a hardcore ex-con bad-ass, but neither of us could make the woeful miscasting work for a second. The lonesome solo guitar score borrows heavily from Amores Perros and a dozen other indies, the myriad dispensable peripheral characters are quirky knockoffs of the Boondock Saints knockoffs of Reservoir Dogs, and the picture has been run through some sort of artsy-fartsy digital filter to give the whole movie a drab urine-bathed look. In all fairness, it's obvious this movie was made by well-intentioned and possibly talented young folks with big dreams but small money. And if they keep working at it, these guys might go on to make some fine movies in a few years. For now, tho, they simply lack the judgment and vision to rise above their lo-rez limitations.I don't regret watching Donkey, but I also never intend to watch it again nor to urge my friends to see it. Unless you're related to somebody on the crew or on a mission to watch every single low-budget crime movie ever made, you're probably better off finding some other way to fill your time. peace--Big Gus

TJGeezer-870-280815 With a budget of $5k dollars, how'd they get an actor the caliber of Adam Beach involved? That was the first itch I wanted to scratch. How'd they even get a working script for that? Had to be a college class project. Right? Hand-held camera, a mocumentary shot without a script on a lark, something like that. Blair Witch Project, grist for the fad mill maybe.Still - Adam Beach? So I found a copy and watched. It surprised me - far from an embarrassment, the movie actually worked. As a story, it was stuffed full of every trope you could think of (what, they should "be original" on a $5k budget? really?) but it all jostled together in a way that made sense. Plus, there were some very well acted death scenes, and nicely played supporting parts, and at the end I had the weird feeling I'd just seen what happens when a spaghetti western meets Hamlet at Miller's Crossing. And I'm pretty sure that's the kind of feeling the makers wanted to leave.Visually it was muddy, forgivable on that budget maybe, but I took off some points for not trying to correct it with high contrast development or something. The writing was full of familiar memes, sure. Call 'em clichés if you want to sneer. But the thing is, it entertained me when I expected it would put me to sleep. That's worth 5 points right there. Another point for the actors, who gave the material respect and pulled out some pretty intense moments as a result. A budget in the millions wouldn't have done what simple respect did. So a point for the actors, who not only knew to do that but then pulled it off.Ultimately, I had fun watching it. That's worth another point by itself, so I just changed my rating from 6 to 7. It won't pull a Sundance Spirit Award but I've enjoyed megabuck movies a whole lot less. Recommended with popcorn and cheerful suspension of disbelief.

jeparks1 I watched the movie because of the high rating... was I ever disappointed... this would be noteworthy if it was the result of a high school film class project. Clichés abound, the acting is poor, and the lead proves an unworthy Michael Madsen wannabe (and with a few exceptions, that's nothing to aspire to). There is nothing here that we haven't seen before that was done so much better. Hate to be so negative, but don't expect much of anything at all here. With all due respect to those involved in the project, it's best to bring something original to a flick of this caliber... makes me wonder what the point of the entire exercise was. Sorry