$9.99 trailer $9.99 trailer
Feature Film

$9.99 trailer

Click control arrow to see the trailer for $9.99:

I caught an advance screening of Tatia Rosenthal’s $9.99 (Thank you, Asifa-Hollywood) a few weeks ago, and it’s a remarkable film. Smart, funny and at the same time, deadly serious – it stands with Ari Folman’s Waltz With Bashir, Bill Plympton’s Idiots and Angels and Nina Paley’s Sita Sings The Blues as the advance guard of the coming wave of independently made adult animated features.

The film opens Friday (12/12) in Los Angeles at the Laemmle Music Hall on Wilshire Blvd. It’s absolutely worth seeing and highly recommended.

(Thanks, Jake Friedman and Ken Priebe)

  • Stephen

    This looks like every other feel-good indie film, except it’s animated with awkward stop-motion puppets whose mouths don’t always seem to agree with their faces.

  • has this already gotten a distributor or do i have to wait a bit to see it myself outside of a film festival?

  • Stevo

    Holy Schnikes. Heh, its like the anti-Coraline (not that that won’t be awesome). At least in terms of feel and texture. Thats something that I saw right way. Very few films, both live action and animated have so quickly communicated a textured feel. I’ll Def. catch it when it hits my local artsy movie house.

    Even better would be if it plays FL Film Fest in April…

  • One wonders why this is animated in the first place.

  • Chris L

    Interesting connection is that the writer (Etgar Keret) wrote a graphic novel called “Pizzeria Kamikaze” that was illustrated by Asaf Hanuka, who was one of the artists for Waltz with Bashir.

  • elan

    If this was CG, the CartoonBrew community would be tearing it apart.

  • Bill Field

    Thank God that someone is attempting, as Ralph Bakshi did with American Pop, to tell stories through animation, that are typically relegated to live action.Whether it seems that it is a story that would work in any style, the fact that it was animated, is good news to the countless artists that give and give to an industry that seldom treats them with parity to their live action cousins.

    The bottom line is- does it entertain? It is the legacy of the Vintons, Bakshis, and Plymptons, at work here, and here’s to the future of the art/cinema form that we all are “drawn” to.

  • I’m deeply intrigued

  • Stephen

    I’m all for animated features that tell more realistic stories geared for adults, but from what I can see the animation does nothing to service the film. If this was made in live-action (and had American accents) it would be just another touchy-feely indie movie about “the meaning of life” and “coming of age” and “finding yourself/God” with multiple storylines that somehow come together in some poignant climax. And unfortunately, the animation doesn’t seem to make it any more than that. This trailer, sadly, hasn’t done much to counter this first review I read of the movie from Toronto http://www.avclub.com/content/feature/the_a_v_club_at_tiff_08_day_6/2

  • All I could focus on were the limited expressions on the characters’ faces. They weren’t subtle –which would be nice if done properly– just limited. As if the figures’ acting couldn’t sufficiently match those of the voice talent.

    Which is a shame. I hate to come down on a film that is a refreshing break from what we’re used to in animation. No, it’s not unique as far as indie films go. But it is when compared to other animated features being produced today.

    $9.99 should be supported. I want to see more films like this down the road. (With the animators proving that they can be every bit as nuanced/emotive as their live-action counterparts!)

  • They have mouths like Renee Zewegger´s

  • tom

    Hmm. I would definitely see this, and I’m sure it will be good, but I agree with some of the other comments that this doesn’t feel like it needs to be animated. And I’d have to say- it pains me to say- that if this had been CG, or if it had been a Linklater film, I doubt it would be as warmly received here as it has been.

    That will be the only time I’ll ever be even slightly critical of my beloved Brew.

  • The rigid faces and strange mouths bring to mind the “Super-Marionation” puppets of Gerry Anderson in the 60’s.

    I’ll have to take your word for it that it’s smart and funny and serious. Can’t tell from the trailer.

  • Yep, it looks like an interesting movie story-wise but the visuals are not very aesthetic.

  • CW

    “Kuleshov effect”- less is more (regarding the “static” faces). In various closeups during this trailer, I found myself drawn into the characters, BECAUSE their faces were hard to read, static. I prefer being an ACTIVE audience member, bringing myself willingly into the story. I like to read a face, to try to see into it, into its emotions, its inner thoughts, its inner workings. It keeps me engaged (much more than explosions in true 3d, sorry Mr. Katzenberg).

    Puppet theatre in all its forms around the world (and stop motion in animation, for the most part) don’t merely “accept” that their characters faces are static, they embrace this fact and use it to wonderful effect as a way of keeping the audience engaged. It relies on an audience that WANTS to be taken away, taken INTO another world, to believe that something inanimate and clearly NOT alive can, in fact, be alive in the projected world of the film. If you aren’t open to imagining that that these puppets are alive (not despite their stylized appearances but BECAUSE of them), then why are you watching in the first place?!

    For the nay sayers here, complaining that the faces are static and boring, that the mouths aren’t in sync, that the animation looks jerky, that question “why even do this in animation,” most of whom have not even seen the film, I have to say you have little understanding of stop motion as a medium (which can be forgiven) and that you are extremely eager to cut something down that just MIGHT be profoundly effecting… without even giving it a chance.Not so easy to forgive. I can’t imagine that a true lover of animation would be so short-sighted.

  • I’ll surely watch it, I think the story seems interesting, but that doesn’t change the fact that it doesn’t look especially aesthetic to me.

  • ““Kuleshov effect”- less is more (regarding the “static” faces). In various closeups during this trailer, I found myself drawn into the characters, BECAUSE their faces were hard to read, static. I prefer being an ACTIVE audience member, bringing myself willingly into the story.”

    Hey, I’m all about being an active audience member–I think most visitors to this site are–but I’m not sure the “less is more” argument really applies here. If it did, then the character designs would’ve been simplified to match the minimalist acting. (Or in more visual terms, styled more like Charlie Brown than ’80s He-Man)

    Because the characters are so specific in their design, so realistic in their features that I think the more appropriate term here would be the “uncanny valley.”

    Obviously I’m only basing my opinion on what I saw in the trailer. I’ll see the movie if it makes a stop in the DC Metro area and I sincerely hope it blows me away.