Sindre Kaspersen Director and screenwriter Carlos Brooks' feature film debut which he wrote, is inspired by an idea he had. It premiered in the American Spectrum section at the 24th Sundance Film Festival in 2008, was shot on locations in USA and is an American production which was produced by producers Sarah Pillsbury and Midge Sanford. It tells the story about a man with a paraplegic injury he got from an auto accident in the late 1980s named Isaac Knott who lives in New York, USA and who works for a radio company called Pure and Wise. After being informed by his co-worker named Edie about a caller whom has requested to meet him, Isaac begins working on a story about people who wishes to have their body parts amputated so that they can live their lives in a chair like he does. Distinctly and subtly directed by filmmaker Carlos Brooks, this quietly paced fictional tale which is narrated by the main character and mostly from his point of view, draws an understanding portrayal of an American radio host whom during his investigation of people with several forms of a psychiatric condition called Body integrity identity disorder, acquaints a single woman named Fiona who tells him that she specializes in Chinese art and ice cream. While notable for its distinct and atmospheric milieu depictions, reverent cinematography by cinematographer Michael McDonough, production design by production designer Roshelle Berliner and use of sound, colors and light, this character-driven and narrative-driven story about wannabes, pretenders and persons who for some reason think that the only way they can achieve completeness as human beings is by having an arm or a leg surgically removed, self-deception as a means for self-preservation and possibly sickly or irrational pangs of conscience, depicts a singular study of character and contains a great and timely score by composer Mark Mothersbaugh. This densely psychological, naturally humorous, cinematic and philosophically conversational indie from the late 2000s which is set during an autumn in America in the 21st century, where incomplete fictitious characters makes utopian deals with each other and where a man who claims that his ex-girlfriend named Raine broke up with him because he is a person with a disability and who although not believing in hope, hopes that he will walk again someday, finds a pair of effective shoes and a quid pro quo girl who not only has no apprehensions about him being in a wheelchair but also wishes to be in his situation, is impelled and reinforced by its cogent narrative structure, substantial character development, subtle continuity and the involving acting performances by American actor Nick Stahl and American actress Vera Farmiga. A serene, romantic and surreal narrative feature.

MBunge This is one of those "puzzle movies" where all the pieces of the story are supposed to come together at the end and blow your mind. Unfortunately, some of the pieces to this puzzle don't fit and some of them are missing.Isaac Knot (Nick Stahl) was paralyzed from the waist down in a car crash that killed his parents when he was eight. He's working for a New York City public radio station when he receives an anonymous tip about a man walking into an emergency room and asking a doctor to cut his perfectly healthy leg off. While investigating, Isaac is led to a very weird support group. It's for healthy people who want to be paralyzed. These folks are described as "paralyzed people trapped in the bodies of walking people". Now, the movie doesn't make any attempt to explain this condition, except to make pretty darn obvious analogies to being homosexual or transgendered. If you find the comparison of being gay or the need to become the opposite sex to wishing you were crippled to be somewhat insulting, you definitely want to avoid Quid Pro Quo.Anyway, Isaac eventually meets his anonymous tipster. It's a woman named Fiona (Vera Farmiga). She wants to be paralyzed and reaches out to Isaac to try and understand her own desires. The two of them start a romantic relationship, during which Fiona gets closer and closer to "coming out" in public with her paralysis compulsion and Isaac finds a pair of magic shoes that allow him to walk. No, I'm not joking. He finds a pair of magic shoes that allow him to walk. If you stop reading this review right now because you've decided there's no chance in hell you'll even watch this film, I'll understand.Fiona steals Isaac's magic shoes and says she won't give them back unless Isaac fulfills her need and helps paralyze her. At this point it becomes clear that this story was only ever about the bizarre and mysterious relationship between the two lead characters and not the subject of paralysis. The whole sub-culture of paralysis wannabes was nothing more than a red herring. There is an actual disorder about folks who wants parts of their body cut off, but apparently the whole "wanting to be paralyzed" thing is completely made up.I'm now going to reveal Quid Pro Quo's really big plot twist. If you weren't turned off by the whole "paralyzed=gay/transgendered" thing and still have any desire to watch this film, stop reading now. After I go into this story element, there will be very little left about the movie for you to possibly enjoy.Ready?Isaac isn't physically paralyzed. It's all in his head and is referred to as "hysterical paralysis". The shoes aren't actually magic, they're just a excuse his brain locks onto to stop pretending. This is where we get into this film being a puzzle that's incomplete and unfinished. The revelation about Isaac is supposed to be a big deal, like the whole Keyser Soze bit in The Usual Suspects, where you suddenly look at the story in a totally different light…but it isn't. That's because there's no explanation for why Isaac reacted to the crash that killed his parents by deluding himself into being crippled and there's no explanation for why a pair of shoes breaks down that psychological barrier. Those are hugely important pieces to this puzzle and you can't help but notice they're missing. So, while the movie thinks it's wowing you with its finished puzzle, you're not sure exactly what you're supposed to be impressed with. This film is like a guy with a Rubix Cube who has only got one side all the same color but tells you he's solved it.There is another twist in the real connection between Isaac and Fiona, but I'll let the movie keep that secret. You'll probably see it coming anyway.As far as the acting goes, Farmiga is fine in her individual scenes. Her character of Fiona, however, doesn't really add up. Isaac is more fully formed, but Stahl's performance is far too passive and empty to make us care about him. I think he was trying to pace himself, so that when Isaac does show some life it's more striking. The character spends too much time being so calm and placid in the face of the odd and disturbing, though, that the audience has mentally disconnected from him before he ever acts up.This story might have made a great half-hour episode for a Twilight Zone-type show. In that format, its shocking twist might have hit with enough force to keep you from noticing that it's pulled completely out of the filmmaker's butt. To stretch Quid Pro Quo out to over 80 minutes, so much superfluous, go-nowhere crap is chucked into the story that by the time you get to the be reveal…it no longer has any power and leaves you wondering why you wasted your time on this film.

burnste329 This was probably the worst movie I have seen since The Arrival. And one of the worst films I have ever seen in my life. Having been suckered into renting this horrific piece of garbage, i left the movie experience feeling ill- literally. Horrible screen writing, atrocious acting, contrived bullshit plots, and unbelievable characters. Magic Shoes? Ginger Jake? Am I expected to believe that somebody who has been in a wheelchair for 20 years could just get up and start walking. Somehow I don't think the human body works that way. If they wanted to make a sci-fi movie maybe they should have contacted Spielberg. How could Vera Farmiga go from being in The Departed to being in this horrendous crap pile of a movie. She should shoot her agent. And anyone who liked this film should shoot themselves.

jaywindley I saw this film on the closing night of Sundance, mostly because all the other films I wanted to see were sold out. I'm glad I went. Nick Stahl and Vera Farmiga dance adeptly around and through the film's premise, which is coaxed pleasantly out of a screenplay that writer-director Carlos Brooks has polished over seven years.Stahl plays a public radio reporter confined to a wheelchair since a childhood accident. While following a lead in a bizarre story, he meets Fiona (Farmiga), a mysterious woman who leads him into a reclusive subculture. At first, microphone in hand, he wants the story. But then a trip to a second-hand store for some shoes convinces him the story isn't what he thought it was.The Sundance catalogue billed it as a "psychological thriller," but in my opinion that misses the mark. Yes, we're introduced to some oddly quirky characters along the way. But Brooks bills is as a detective story, and that's how I think it's best approached. It's an exercise in restrained exposition that keeps the viewer guessing right up until the film's final scenes.As with most independent films, this one makes good use of small-scale locations and intimate moments. Even the Manhattan exteriors favor enclosed sidewalks and narrow passages. The cinematography, done on high-definition video, is crisply executed and richly textured with subtle but effective details. (The lustrous wallpaper in Fiona's apartment actually has its own screen credit.) The camera spends a great deal of time at the eye level of a wheelchair occupant, emphasizing the point of view and expanding the small spaces in which many of the film's scenes take place.Stahl and Farmiga drive a substantial portion of the film by themselves. Brooks admits that the their story took over the film as he shot and edited it. As a result the supporting ensemble retreats to the distance, a position from which performances from James Frain (as Stahl's mentor) and Michal Leamer (Fiona's mother) can give brief but memorable performances.Vera Farmiga creates a complex character whom you can't help loving, hating, and fearing all at the same time. Nick Stahl's performance stays even and understated until his veneer breaks apart and the detective story comes full circle.The only negative aspect to the film is the frank treatment of the subculture that frames the principal characters, not because the treatment is unfair or poorly executed, but because it's likely to take the average viewer by surprise. Look for wide release in May 2008.