Cashback (2007)

People are voting emotionally.

Good , But It Is Overrated By Some

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

Kill you as in RUIN the whole film. The beginning and middle are pretty good except for a bunch of bad acting side characters, so at least the film has that going for it. Just don't expect anything amazing.

Cashback takes a very enjoyable if somewhat unoriginal idea, dresses it up with a ton of skilled cinematography, and turns it into an hour-and-a-half long misogynistic piece that feels like it came out of a pretentious 18-year-old film student's notebook from a Themes in Cinema 101 class. That this movie has a decent score is beyond me.The film stars an obvious self-insert college student and focuses around his ability to stop time, which he uses to pass his time at his awful job at Sainsbury's by stripping the female customers and painting their nude forms. Not only is this vile act depicted as sympathetic, the film seems to argue that it's making some sort of deep and meaningful statement on the beauty of the female body. The main character is treated as a deep and misunderstood man who truly "gets it," like he understands that undressing women and appreciating their beauty is better than the middle school antics of his coworkers and best friend. Much of the film is, as the premise would indicate, devoted to describing the passage of time. The best moments come early on, when we find our main character contemplating the slowness of retail hell while still finding beauty in still images, even as simple as frozen peas spilled on the floor. But it also veers into the pretentious, with the monologues describing how "time just keeps passing, man" becoming increasingly unbearable. And, of course, when time does actually stop, it very often goes right back into treating non-consensual female nudity as the highest form of art.If there is one thing to praise Cashback for, it's the cinematography. Most of the scenes are framed and shot well, showing that a considerable amount of skill went into this. The best part comes during many of the flashbacks, as the transitions between them are carefully constructed into the present, done so in a way that is not only creative but is a lot of fun to watch. The film's message might be terrible, but hey at least it's shot well.If I were to pin down the principle problem of Cashback, it's that it reeks of self-importance. The film boldly declares that it's saying something deep and giving something to the medium when it's saying little more than "female nudity is deep and artsy, maaaan." I can respect enjoying this film for the cinematography, but honestly, it made me feel too disgusted to enjoy almost anything about it.

In his semi-autobiopic debut feature film Cashback (2006), writer and director Sean Ellis offers us an exclusive look inside a young artist's mind – his mind. His protagonist, Ben Willis (nicely played by Sean Biggerstaff), is an art student who decides to work the night shift at a local supermarket to overcome a recent breakup and an ensuing incurable insomnia. His lack of sleep develops an artistic habit of freezing time and seeing into the beauty of mundane surroundings that usually go unnoticed.A very promising premise that loses its rigor to narcissistic self- immersion.It is true that art is inherently narcissistic; it is all about the artist's vision of the world. The artist allows us to see things differently by shunning the familiar and comfortable collective outlook and assuming an individual perspective. Nevertheless, as the saying goes, it is takes two to tango, and the artistic process, even though innately egoistic, is not self-reflective. The audience is always an integral part.Much of the film's freshness and originality have been obscured by Ellis's aimless meandering through his vision as an artist. It is definitely wonderful that he shares his exceptional vision with us, but he ignores the refinement necessary for viewers' reception. The end result is a picture that lacks focus and purpose, and borders on infantile disarray. Although it clearly sets itself within the boundaries of metafiction, the tone comes off as distant and lofty (pretty much like Biggerstaff's face throughout the movie) that the comic and amorous elements have become irrevocably dissonant.I love films that leave me with mixed feelings. However, Cashback has left me with mixed feelings I cannot relate to or even attempt to understand. I do not think of myself as an artist but I cherish imagination more than words can say, and I know that confusion (the state of being confused and confusing) is one price to pay for this wonderful gift. It is the artist's choice though to either reach out or further distance him/herself. I mentioned earlier that the film is metafictional in the sense that Ellis's artistic choices in delivering the film to us is echoed by Willis's choices in trying to impart his art on the world around him. Both handle the outside world and its inhabitants as inferior subjects detached from the self to the extent that the humanity of the connection is reduced to a microscopic size; the human element in Ellis's picture is basically as emotionally aloof as the love relationship between Ben and Sharon.The artist's eyes notice things that we cannot see, and attract our attention to them. Ellis and Willis have got only half of their job done.

Heartbroken and suffering from chronic insomnia, an aspiring artist takes a night shift job at a local supermarket where he finds a hidden talent for pausing time, but is this gift real or imagined? With such an inventive premise, 'Cashback' opens with quite a lot of promise, but it does not always deliver. Purely metaphorical or not, the stopping time stuff is interesting as it gets our protagonist to wax poetic about time seeming to go too slow except for those brief moments that you only wish could last forever. There is also a lot to like in his philosophy that he might as well get a job to at least "get cash back" for his time spent awake at night. While he makes for an empathetic deep-thinking protagonist, Sean Biggerstaff never once acts like a true insomniac though and while his work colleagues get up to some comical mischief on the job, the film misses a ripe opportunity to look at madness spiraling from apparent sleep deprivation. The film's biggest drawback though is its over-reliance on sentimental voice-over narration; Biggerstaff tends to only talk in poetic clichés ("it felt like all the oxygen had been sucked from the room"; "what is love?") and a maudlin music score does not help matters at all. There are, however, sufficient comedic quirks to keep things afloat; Biggerstaff's recollection of looking at porn magazines ends with a hilarious gag and a seemingly superfluous sports match turns out to be very, very funny. A talent supporting cast helps too, with Stuart Goodwin getting the best laughs as a boss who tries just a little too hard to be hip all the time.