SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

ChanFamous I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

Claire Dunne One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

VinnieRattolle I vehemently abhor reality TV, but was lured into "On the Lot" with the promise of seeing filmmakers at work. What I was treated to, however, was a slow-motion trainwreck that seemed to get worse with each passing episode... so of course, I found myself captivated by it! In the first episode, there was clearly potential in the show as filmmakers paired up and were forced to work together on a short film. However, I don't think the short they were working on was ever aired...The following week, "On the Lot" became a horrendous knock-off of "American Idol," and seemed to be retooled on an episode-to-episode basis. The new format was that filmmakers would make a short film each week (it was later leaked that the shorts were made before the show debuted), and get voted off by viewers. Although it seemed like the focus was supposed to be on the films they made, the show followed the standard reality TV format of making the contestants out to be heroes (visionary Adam Stein, family man Will Bigham, underdog Jason Epperson) and villains (tempermental Marty Martin) -- anyone who didn't get lumped into such a category stood no chance. Initial host Chelsea Handler was instantly replaced with charmless, clueless eye candy Adriana Costa, who emceed the show with all of the wit and charisma of an uncooked potato. Judge Carrie Fisher was there simply to be crazy, judge Gary Marshall came off like a sexist buffoon, and each week a different Hollywood director would sit in as guest judge -- most were obviously VERY embarrassed to be there. When ratings plummeted, the show was knocked down from two episodes a week to one, meaning viewers had to wait a full week to see who was voted off (though it was clear almost from the start who the three finalists would be). What's sad is there was obviously talent involved, and the shorts themselves were generally entertaining (I'd love to see all the shorts collected and released on DVD). The problem was that everything about the show EXCEPT the shorts was ill-conceived. And the biggest travesty is that most of the directors haven't done anything notable since the show left the air -- finalist Adam Stein, in particular, routinely turned out creative and entertaining films, yet he has no further IMDb credits.All in all, the show's most notable for being an unsightly pimple on the face of not only Hollywood, but also reality TV, which is a shame, 'cause it could've been so much more.

cowmant It's a better show than some of the other more popular reality shows out there. Sure it has its problems but the work produced by the filmmakers is great and its cool to see short films get screened to a large audience for a change. It's too bad audiences don't take too well to creative showcases such as short films. Some of the filmmakers have a lot of talent and deserve some exposure. I hope it lasts the season because if people watched for the films (not for the host or the characters/tension they try to create on reality shows) then it just might pick up some steam. Is it really that hard to have an attention span these days to sit down and watch a collection of fun short films each week....This viewer doesn't think so...Give this one a chance just for the short films.

drbutchermd If you want to see a good find a director through reality TV television show, skip this one all together and watch Project Greenlight. Or maybe even paint drying would be more interesting. They start out with fifty candidates vying for a spot directing a movie with a million dollar budget. They should have broken it down to twenty candidates before the show went on the air. There is just way too many people to keep track of. You don't care when people are sent home because you really don't know anything about them. Also Steven Spielberg produces but nowhere to be seen. They also dug up Carrie Fisher and Gary Marshall from the depths of Hollywood. Bret Ratner is also there pretending to be some kind of authority. If they were gonna make a not very good cop-buddy with one hundred crappy sequels than I say call Bret. Avoid at all costs!!

PaddyReagan Whether one enjoys American Idol or not, it is a high energy, high velocity, high volume exercise with ratings credentials to match. With 30+ million viewers in its wake, it is an incredible springboard for any new programming event that the Fox Network chooses to showcase. On Tuesday evening, all of the media and promotional planets were aligned to introduce On the Lot, the new reality show purported to identify the Next Big Hollywood Director through reality show attrition.I'm not a big fan of these reality adventures. I watched the original Survivor with interest. But every similar effort in its wake (and there have been plenty) has seemed to walk the same path, in the same stale footprints. Now, use of the term "voted off" stimulates some frantic channel surfing to separate myself from THAT reality.Still, the promo spots for On the Lot seemed intriguing. One doesn't often see flying saucers over the East River. Perfect timing! We're all currently immersed in an avalanche of "mini-movies" from YouTube and MySpace, and dozens of other mega-hit web sites. Our obsession with all things video has revealed some genuine, if in-the-raw talent. This viewer mind-set and a forum such as OTL should be fertile ground, an opportunity for would-be directors to excel and viewers to enjoy their challenges. Plus, the Spielberg/Amblin name on the marquee usually suggests a quality product.Unfortunately, an hour of YouTube's best would have been sensational compared to this lot. Because, in reality, On the Lot should have been called On the Feed Lot. It smelled terrible! Take all of the worst attributes of Survivor, American Idol, and The Apprentice, mix in Inside the Actor's Studio and Dog Eat Dog and you'll have the ingredients for this misdirected melange that managed to be, at once, too cerebral, too adolescent, too devoid of any compelling video or film to please anyone.With all of opening clichés out of the way (the only reality was bits and pieces of the Universal Studio Tour) we settled down to watch a series of pitch presentations by increasingly inept wannabes. Shades of the American Idol auditions but (unless you have a sadistic streak) with no entertainment value at all.Three judges, of course, with one female but lacking the good, the bad, and the ugly that sparks the process when AI's no talent shills are sent packing. I must say, Marshall, and Ratner are talented directors and Fisher is a fine author and a pretty good actor, though she will always be Princess Leia to Star Wars fans. The people who designed my car did a fine job too but that doesn't mean I want to see them on TV telling neophytes in the auto business where to install the fuel injectors.After a quick ejection of 14 for whom Andy's 15 minutes of fame fled too quickly, the remaining candidates arranged themselves in groups of three and were given their first movie assignments with actual cameras and actors. The final quarter hour of the show vacillated between Survivor beach scene angst, midnight hour confrontations ala Apprentice, and kindergarten playgrounds on no-nap afternoons. After a few minutes of personality conflicts, glowering, and shouts of "You're blocking my shot!" only white knuckles kept me from abandoning this ship of fools.How can people who have created such stunning successes miss the mark so badly? I suspect that by the half hour break, at least 80 percent of those AI viewers were gone and, by the end, maybe 10 percent had lingered. Worse news: most will never be back. One magnificent opportunity, wasted.For those of us with film and television experience, curiosity couldn't keep us away. For everyone else, the question had to be the same—"Where's the entertainment?!!"