What is it about? Here are the first sentences from the IMDB Plot Summary:
Brick, the dynamic debut feature from writer/director Rian Johnson, won the Sundance Film Festival's Special Jury Prize for Originality of Vision. Brick, while taking its cues and its verbal style from the novels of Dashiell Hammett, also honors the rich cinematic tradition of the hard-boiled noir mystery, here wittily and bracingly immersed in fresh territory - a modern-day Southern California neighborhood and high school.
Sounds cool, yes?
It also makes me realize how many film reviewers don't watch TV. I GoogleNews-ed Brick and noir and got 31 hits; adding Veronica Mars brought it down to 1, an article from the Guardian Unlimited.
Some people like movies; some like TV shows; some like both. I'm using this non-mention of VM as a starting point of a rant about why, still, watching TV is looked down on but watching movies, not so much. It's equally true inside the entertainment industry. Film stars are viewed as better than TV stars.
And the difference between film and TV is?
Yeah, I don't see a big difference either. Answers to the differences between the two may point to how the story is told, or the budget for the story, or production issues. But I cannot think of a single answer that translates into one format being inherently superior to the other. Yet as I read the reviews of Brick, and get excited about seeing it, I can't help but wonder that the reason Brick is described as a "genuinely inspired conceit" is because those who review film don't see what is on TV and even if they are aware of current programs, they don't see TV as important. If it hasn't been done on film before, it's inspired; it doesn't matter whether or not it's been done on TV.
Nothing against Brick; I'm can't wait to watch it. I think it's one of those interesting coincidences that it and VM are being done at the same time. But I think my viewing experience will be richer and fuller from knowing Veronica.