I first saw Michael Pitt in 'Funny Games US'. He portrayed a character so dislikeful , that I wanted to see the otherside of his acting range. He surely did not disappoint. This guy is a wonderful actor and not that popular yet. I do not want to give him all the credit in JAILBAIT. Stephen Adli Guergis was awesome as well . The movie played like a Broadway Play with a low budget for actors . Thus most of the movie was dialogue . That was very OK though. These actors had great chemistry and I believe the realism of a jail cell was portrayed accurately. Basically it was an alpha dog that took charge of a meek individual and thus the psychological and sociological ramifications of the movie were explored . The movie did not break new ground I must admit as some other reviewers brought to light. The movie did show , in entertaining fashion , I might add , the dynamics of an individual prison cell. This was a tasteful movie with some untasteful , but realistic manner of what goes on in 'said' prison cell. Where the movie was different than most was that it explored the individual cell , with just the 2 characters , as opposed to most prison movies that basically involve the whole penitionuary. From that aspect the movie did differ. In summation, I recommend this movie at optimum alertness and revel in the great acting while you are watching.

I started watching this movie with no pre-conceived notions. (I only decided to see it based on the presence of Michael Pitt, who has proved himself to be a very capable young actor, and that it was produced by the same producer as L.I.E. I had heard nothing about it.)I wish I had read a review before hand and saved myself some time and money. (Though the review I read here for it wouldn't have stopped me from seeing the film. They seemed to think simplicity means "art".) The acting was surprisingly good. That I am willing to say. If you want an acting class on how to react silently on film, Pitt's performance is sublime. Sadly, those moments do not save this clunker of a movie.Some times you see a movie that was based on a play and you can feel the story not fitting the medium of film. This was a very similar experience to that. It was like watching a badly lit stage play with close ups. You are robbed of the joy of going to see a play while also being robbed of the pleasures of film. They are two completely different mediums and this movie fit neither one.If it was play at a local theater, I would recommend it solely based on the mental exercise that would accompany the play on the ride home. But as a film, I must say this movie left me feeling flat. The camera felt intrusive. The pace felt forced. The violence seemed tame and unreal. Even the dialouge seemed as if it were written by someone who had never seen the inside of a prison. (Or if they had, it was in 1957.)The actors clearly did the best they could. They had to take this job for the chance to do good work and not for money, but sadly the direction and script didn't allow them to make a movie you don't forget about ten minutes before the credits even start.

... but most of all, I was mad.I have only posted here a few times and only when I feel compelled to do so. This movie deserves some attention. I am not a film major, or a self-proclaimed expert. Thank god. I don't need to be taught how to enjoy something. I listen to instinct and emotion. This movie is a solid 8 out of 10 for a number of reasons.I thought the acting was superb! The main stars cell mate Stephen Adly Guirgis (Jake) was awesome! All the acting was phenomenal. The entire movie, for the most part, takes place in a cell, but you are kept on the edge of your seat from the start. I can't help but wish there was a little more interaction with the prison and it's inmates, but the simplicity of this movie is part of it's appeal. Like a Clerks. Smart writing, sound and directing make this movie feel quite real. I also can't help but be a little let down with the ending. One of those endings that left me with my mouth wide open and saying, "what! it's over!", but then settling happily for an open ending that leaves you thinking, what next?I will say though, that I am left wondering, is Michael Pitt (Randy) a little odd in real life or is he that good an actor? I am also a bit angry that he did not try to defend himself. If you read The Kite Runner, I was left with a similar feeling. How could he stand there and let these things happen? Enjoy.

This movie is extremely good, with pitch-perfect performances by Stephen Adly Guirgis and Michael Pitt. I mean, this ain't Christmas WITH THE KRANKS, and it can be difficult to watch at times, but only because the writing and directing are so intelligent and emotionally jarring that you sort of feel behind the same bars as the characters are stuck behind. It's a visceral experience, and as I was watching it, I noted how rare that is in cinema these days. Brett C. Leonard never delves into melodrama, as a writer AND director. He lets his actors do the work but with excellent cinematography in a small space, and the mental/physical domination unfolds in unexpected ways. I hope this film gets the recognition it deserves!