Search - CQ on DVD

K. K. (GAMER)
Reviewed on 1/31/2019...

Very strange movie. Hit the 120X FF around 30 minutes in since it was just too strange for me.

0 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.

Larry N. from BEALETON, VA
Reviewed on 1/30/2016...

I found this to be an odd movie without a lot of substance. It's about a filmmaker juggling the making of his own film, directing a low budget sci-fi movie, his relationship with his girl friend and his infatuation with the starlet of the scf-fi movie. It's very disjointed by constantly jumping between "real life", the two movies, the movie sets, and his dream sequences and fantasies. It almost seems like it was pieced together with clips from four movies. I found it hard to stay focused on the movie.

The sci-fi featurette, Codename: Dragonfly, is included on the DVD and I found it to be almost better than CQ itself.

2 of 2 member(s) found this review helpful.

CQ, Dragonfly, & A 1st Time Directors' Vision

Roger Shreeve | North Yorkshire, England, UK | 10/08/2002

(3 out of 5 stars)

"Cheeky, cheesy, funny, and thoughtful! I discovered this small gem of a film and rented it w/no idea of it except for what the back cover disclosed. Upon initial reading, I thought it might be akin to the "Matt Helm" or "Flynnt" films of the 1960's with a twist or a spoof of the spy film genre. I was wrong.
It's Roman Coppola's (Nicholas Cage's cousin) sentimental treatment of his early movie-watching experience as well as the personel odyssey of a first time director against the backdrop of the making of a late 60's/early 70's spy film. The idea of a film within a film is not new and could be confusing; however, Mr. Coppola's use of the technique works for him here. Though it is not the best film of 2002, it is an intelligent, thought-provoking, and entertaining little movie.
The caliber of talent Mr. Coppola assembled in Jeremy Davis, Elodie Bouchez, Angela Lindvall, Giancarlo Giannini, Gerard Depardieu, Jason Schwartzman, John Philip Law, and Dean Stockwell go a long way in making this a little gem and not a lump of coal. The choice for casting worked nicely for this 1st time director. The confusion and searching portrayed by Davis' character kept me interested in his trials and tribulations as he tries to find truth through the media of movies in his life. It is his search that ultimately made me like the film. This main character is neither good or bad, but a man trying to find his way in the world he has chosen, meanwhile, like the rest of us, he still has a day job [sound editor-turn-director] to contend with while searching. It is Mr. Coppola's handling of this character that will either keep or lose you in the film. His first outing shows he has definite potential and not just b/c of family ties. As his first directorial movie, its likable.
On a secondary note, the music and cinematography are reminiscent of the times. The Dragonfly visual sequences and soundtrack provided by Mellow almost take you back to those psycodelic times. Compare the Dragonfly scenes w/movies of the same period and you will notice how well the cinematography was done. The background music, though could sound cheesy, comes across authentic. In both categories, Mr. Coppola did nicely. It would seem his choice of music was influenced by his sister's "The Virgin Suicides" OST, except the dark electro-synth sounds of Air are replaced in "CQ" with the dreamy, relaxed sounds of Mellow.
In conclusion, if you're looking for a little movie done sentimentally, but not sappy about a person searching for truth to the background of some laid-back sounds, then CQ is the film for you."

Lost in Distribution

Trevor Willsmer | London, England | 03/19/2006

(4 out of 5 stars)

"Sofia Coppola may have got all the kudos with The Virgin Suicides and Lost in Translation, but, from a 60s movie buff's point of view, the other Coppola kid, Roman, turned out an even more enjoyable feature, CQ. Shame that no-one saw it. Barely released in the US (and not released at all in most countries), it's an engaging little number that pits underground cinema against Eurotrash moviemaking at a time when people still thought even pulp cinema could be the stuff of revolution (1969-70 to be precise).



A riff on Sullivan's Travels and 8½, it sees Jeremy Davies' editor of Franco-Italian co-pro 'Codename: Dragonfly' struggling to come up with a new ending while making his own personal film with borrowed equipment. Oh, and falling in love with the fictional main character, confusing film and reality (not only is he too busy documenting `the truth' of his life to see it around him but he even enters the film to sort out a plot hole) and possibly being targeted for retribution by Gerard Depardieu's fired firebrand director. (The door panel that Depardieu breaks that is later framed and given to the editors is actually one that Francis Ford Coppola smashed on one of his films!)



Filled with sly 60s cinema references from Fellini to Warhol (even the trailer he cuts for the film is inspired by the one for Dr Strangelove) and with some character touches straight out of James Joyce, the visual influence is much more Danger: Diabolik than Barbarella (John Phillip Law even appears in the film within the film), and Dean Tavoularis' spot-on production design and Robert Yeoman's superb photography are both pitch-perfect. Davies, so irritating in Soderbergh's disastrous Solaris, is quietly fine here, Jason Schwartzman has fun as a bizarre hybrid of a young papa Coppola mixed with Roger Corman via Austin Powers, Giancarlo Giannini does Dino de Laurentiis to a tee (with Sofia Coppola cameoing as his mistress), and there's good work from Dean Stockwell and Massimo Ghini as well. At the end of the day there's not much there, but Coppola's love of moviemaking makes it surprisingly joyful to watch if you're in a receptive mood. And MGM's DVD is filled with extras, both interesting and appropriately self-indulgent.

"

Pseudo 60s fun

Charles Burgess | sunny FL | 06/17/2005

(5 out of 5 stars)

"Bought the DVD after remembering the photo of a space-suited Angela Lindvall in a magazine the year the movie was released. Money well spent. The recreation of late 60s Europe is well done as is the purposely cheesy film-within-the-film. Perhaps it will lead to "Danger: Diabolik" and other genuine 60s films for you."