A turquoise screen doesn't mean anything.

Is just a turquoise screen.

There is nothing symbolic, deep or meaningful about a turquoise screen. Is just a turquoise screen.

Is delusional pretend it to be meaningful or symbolic. Is just a turquoise screen.

This is not a movie. Is just a turquoise screen. A turquoise screen. For 70 minutes. Nothing happens. There aren't characters, story or anything at all. Just a turquoise screen. No, I'm not making this out. That's the reality about this fake movie.

A turquoise screen shouldn't be considered a movie, and it doesn't deserves to be reviewed as one.

In 1993, the taboo shattering and groundbreaking English artist Derek Jarman created a film called "Blue". As the artist/writer/director almost completely lost his sight due to complications from AIDS, he felt it would be appropriate to make a film and let the world "see" things as he saw them, completely blue but with an ultra clear grasp of sound, the film is a masterwork.

Sadly, with only a turquoise screen and no sound, "A million little pieces" serves no purpose as either a work of art or a film. It has no sound at all and therefore is not a film. it is the same as staring at a wall for 70 minutes.

I am someone who appreciates art in all its forms but this is pointless. completely pointless.

When I first shelled out $9.50 cents to see Nigel Tomm's "A Million Little Pieces", I have to admit, I was a bit skeptical. I hadn't been too impressed with his previous artistic adaptations of "Hamlet" and "Oedipus Rex", having found an hour of pure white and red screen respectively to be a bit tasteless. But from the first moment of this movie, I knew it was going to be different. Turquoise, to be specific.

Made for a clearly well-spent $375 dollars, this movie masterfully kept me on the edge of my seat, like a child waiting for a school bell to ring, while moving along at a briskly rate I hadn't felt since watching the 324 minute cut of "Heaven's Gate", immediately followed by the 236 minute director's cut of "Dances with Wolves".

I don't want to give anything away, so I'm going to end my review before I burst of excitement. So as parting words I say, please do not denounce this film as a piece of flimflam, when it is clearly the work of a genius who totally didn't make it while sitting drunk one night in front of Windows Movie Maker with no footage to edit.

I give it a million little stars out of ten.

Again, this is equally artless to glueing random household objects together and calling it "art". there is no more to say to that, because it is just a cyan screen, i could get more fun out of staring at a darn wall for feature length than watching a million little pieces.