SUBJECT:The Independent & Underground Film Scene in 2003January 2004
- Some random thoughts.
My initial idea for my first column of 2004 was to repeat what I did last year, which was to give a "best movies of the year" list. However, upon considering the matter, I realized that I pretty much covered my favorite movies over several previous columns. The past year was such a great time for the horror genre that there was never any shortage of material to write about. I can only hope that the tide will continue into 2004. That having been said, I'd like to turn my attention now to the independent and underground movie scene in 2003.
While studio pictures like Freddy vs. Jason (see TFTM Dec. 2002 & Sept. 2003) triumphed at the box office, the independent movie scene flourished as well. Two notable independent horror films found wide theatrical distribution in 2003. The first was rocker Rob Zombie's House Of 1000 Corpses (see TFTM June 2003), a throwback to gritty 70's-style mayhem in the tradition of the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The second movie was Cabin Fever, from director Eli Roth. This also had the feel of a 70's-style picture, with liberal doses of visceral carnage thrown into the mix. These movies are proof that lower budget "hardcore horror" still has a place at the multiplex alongside slick studio fare.
Going down the budgetary ladder one step further, we come to what I like to call the underground movie scene. (This is where I and many other filmmakers reside.) The past year also saw lots of activity here. In my own area (Upstate New York) for instance, several filmmakers began work on new projects, finished and screened movies, or signed distribution deals for their pictures. (See the Links page to check out independent filmmaker sites including archangelproductions.org, fountainheadpictures.com,knightsfallproductions.com, and raisinghellthemovie.com, among others) I myself completed and premiered a feature, wrote and directed a short film, and edited two pictures for other area filmmakers. I look forward to 2004 when these movies will hopefully achieve wide distribution. (See "The Temptress" Page, the Upcoming Movies page,
In addition to all the film activity in my area, 2003 seemed to be the year when internet interest in underground moviemaking flourished. Several new sites spotlighting the independent and underground movie scene appeared on the web. * One example is microcinemascene.com (see the Links page). This site - "where moviemaking matters most" - is all about underground filmmaking. Here you can read up on the endeavors
of filmmakers and find out when new trailers are online. (I'm happy to be able to report that the announcement of the online trailer for my feature The Temptress was an early addition to their Media section). They also feature reviews of underground cinema, and have an extensive links page of independent production companies. I believe the best thing about this site however is that the people running it really seem to be dedicated to micro cinema movies. Not only does the sight provide promotion for filmmakers, but the writers and reviewers offer many columns that discuss in detail the various aspects of moviemaking at this level.
Many of the columns I've read have been very informative and useful.
While microcinemascene.com was one of the first sights dealing exclusively with underground cinema (that
I am aware of) to appear on the web, they are just one indicator that interest in this type of moviemaking is continuing to grow. I'm happy to say that over the past year I've corresponded with many diverse and
interesting people, ranging from independent filmmakers, actors, musicians and writers, to website owners and film fans. And most people seem to have the same goal: to have their voices heard and to get their work out to the world. I've always believed in what I call "the democratization of filmmaking", which is to say that filmmaking should be as democratic as everything else in our society. As I've discussed at length previously (see TFTM Oct. 2002), with all the digital technology available today, moviemakers can now produce high quality pictures that weren't previously possible. The next step is for the movies to be seen. Like Hollywood movies, underground cinema should have the potential to reach a global audience. I believe viewers will
always be hungry for new movies (and music, books, etc. as well). Websites such as ifilm.com that offer independent and underground movies for viewing illustrate this. ** I believe that in the future the underground movie scene will continue to expand and be more recognized by mainstream moviegoers who at present are only aware of what the studios are offering. Underground cinema can be seen not as a future replacement of Hollywood movies, but as another alternative for viewers. The goal is to expand the possibilities of cinema
and give viewers more diverse choices.
* Throughout the past year, many other sites primarily or partially devoted to underground cinema have also appeared on the web (see the Links page). Some of these sites spotlight all movie genres, while some focus on specific genres such as horror. One sight for example (unfilmable.com) focuses exclusively on cinematic adaptations of writer H.P. Lovecraft.
** For example, while there was a lot of independent film activity (some of which received media coverage)
in my own area over the past year, many people still don't seem to really understand it. This is probably because the concept of movies and moviemaking is so historically deeply tied to Hollywood (and only Hollywood).
SUBJECT: Fangoria's Weekend of Horrors convention highlightsFebruary 2004
This past January 9th, 10th, and 11th, FANGORIA magazine (see TFTM March 2003) teamed for the first time ever with Chiller Theatre to present Fangoria's Weekend of Horrors in East Rutherford, New Jersey. Previously, the Chiller Theatre show (see TFTM May 2003) and Fangoria's Weekend of Horrors were serious rivals, competing for the horror crowd each year. Having attended both conventions numerous times
in the past, I can definitely say that this new teaming was the best of both worlds.
My friend and I left for New Jersey on Friday afternoon and stayed until Saturday evening (the convention ran Friday, Saturday and Sunday), so we were there for most of the festivities. My favorite part of the Chiller convention is usually the dealer tables, while the biggest draw of Fangoria's annual show is the guests and panel presentations. We spent most of Friday evening browsing around a huge dealer room, before attending the panel presentations for the entire day on Saturday. This arrangement worked out really well because we were able to get all our shopping out of the way first, and then relax the next day and hear the guests speak. (Friday night had a lineup of presentations that we skipped due to shopping, while the much of Saturday's lineup is repeated - with some new additions as well - on Sunday for those who missed it). Fangoria had a table in the dealer's room where they were selling their home video releases for $15.00, which was a pretty good deal. I was also pleased to see quite a few independent filmmakers there promoting and selling their movies. Besides this there were the usual poster, video, and DVD vendor tables, where you can buy anything and everything horror-related. As I mentioned previously, the key is to look for out-of-the-ordinary and hard to find merchandise, because the more mainstream items are priced relatively similarly to what's in retail stores. There were some cool new posters this year including a European Jason X which I hadn't seen before, as well as some teasers for upcoming flicks. I also stared for a long time at several great foreign Nightmare on Elm Street posters, but by then I had already spent too much to be able to afford them. Oh well. All in all the dealer room offered a lot to choose from, which is what I've come to expect from a Chiller Theatre convention.
The Fangoria component of the convention featured some fantastic panel presentations which were hosted
by Fango's ever cordial editor Tony Timpone and managing editor Michael Gingold. The packed auditorium was first treated to previews for upcoming theatrical releases, video releases, and even new TV shows. One highlight was the trailer for the upcoming Spider-Man 2. This second entry in the series, once again directed by Sam Raimi, looks very impressive. The trailer is quick and action-packed, and to my delight they are putting Spider-man up against one of his more colorful enemies - Doctor Octopus.
The second trailer I enjoyed immensely is what you might call a Fangoria staple. It is the trailer for the cult film
I Drink Your Blood/I Eat Your Skin. This preview has been shown at previous Fango shows, and it is both disgusting and amusing at the same time. The movie is coming out on DVD from Fangoria home video
(a reissue I believe), so it should be interesting to see just how gross/funny this flick really is. As Mr. Gingold joked before running it, "watch out for the hose!" Some other trailers included Resident Evil: Apocalypse, and Broken Lizard's Club Dread. There was also a promo for a Fox TV show called Tru Calling, which stars Eliza Dushku.
The guest lineup for the remainder of the day did not disappoint. * Of particular interest to filmmakers like me was the panel presented by representatives of The Horror Channel. This fledgling cable network, which is set to debut later this year, will be the first channel devoted solely to our beloved genre. The representatives in attendance seemed to really be devoted horror fans who want our input in order to make the network the best it can be. They spent the majority of their time on stage taking questions and suggestions from the audience.
It was encouraging to hear that they appear to be open to all ideas (like eventually accepting submissions from independent filmmakers), and also that they are being advised by many of the big names in horror, ranging from horror's directorial masters to experts in the field like Fangoria's own Tony Timpone. Horror fans should definitely keep an eye out for this channel to see if it winds up becoming the success they hope it can become.
There were also the usual panels featuring actors, filmmakers and others promoting upcoming movies. Two
of these movies were the comic book derived film Hellboy and the upcoming (controversial) Dawn of the Dead remake (see TFTM Sept. 2002). While I'm not usually a big fan of comic book movies, actors Selma Blair and Ron Pearlman and comics' creator Mike Mignola were all very friendly and interesting to listen to.
It was particularly fun to hear someone like Selma Blair, who is not usually associated with the horror genre, talk about her comical experiences on set acting against effects that would be added into the movie later.
She seemed to genuinely be enjoying herself at the convention. Mike Mignola appeared thrilled (rightfully so) that his comic was hitting the big screen, while Ron Pearlman (with his low-key demeanor) is a screen
veteran always worth listening to. I have to say however that even though I enjoyed the panel and their enthusiasm about the movie, to me the trailer still makes the film look like mainly a CGI flick. I could be wrong though.
The Dawn of the Dead panel was very down-to-earth and friendly. They did their best to relay to audience members that they are horror (and George Romero) fans that have good intentions with their upcoming remake. ** I have to say that I have not been a fan of this (remake) idea since hearing about it, and the trailer shown didn't really do anything to change my opinion. However, the filmmakers and actors did seem sincere
in their intentions, and they apparently have the blessing of Tom Savini, who did a cameo in the new movie and sat in on the panel. During the Q & A the inevitable question came up of why they just don't call the movie something else if it is not a straight remake of Romero's original. The obvious answer was that the title
"Dawn of the Dead" is too valuable to give up. So, when all was said and done I hadn't been convinced to support the upcoming film, but I possibly had a bit more hope for good results. We'll still have to wait and see on this one.
Other entertaining guests included the one and only Joe Bob Briggs, and the director and some cast members from the upcoming sequel Return To Sleepaway Camp, who previewed some (rather extended) footage from the movie, which looks to be in the same vein as the original Sleepaway Camp. Actress
Felissa Rose was particularly energetic in talking about the new film and also her various upcoming projects.
Finally, the highlight of the show for me came in the last couple hours on Saturday in the form of a Friday the 13th extravaganza. First came a panel of Jason Voorhees movie actors featuring Ari Lehman (young Jason
in the original film), Warrington Gillette (Jason in part 2), C.J. Graham (Jason in part 6), and, or course, Kane Hodder (who starred as the masked man in parts 7-10). This was followed by the women of Friday the 13th, featuring stars Betsy Palmer & Adrienne King (Mrs. Voorhees and Alice, respectively, from the original film), Amy Steel (from part 2), and Lar Park Lincoln (from part 7). Next FX artist Al Magliochetti showed some extended footage from the ending of Jason Goes To Hell: The Final Friday. And finally, a star of that movie and of the Friday the 13th television series made an appearance. Actor John D. LeMay had lots to talk
about with fans of both incarnations of the franchise.
All of these panels were excellent. While the guys were great to listen to as they relayed stories about
shooting particular scenes (like Ari Lehman's famous shot coming out of the lake from the first film), and answered questions such as what their favorite kill scene was, it was the women who proved to be the most entertaining. As it turned out, the actresses who attended represented three of my favorite entries in the film series. It was exciting to hear Betsy Palmer speak, because I had read articles in the past that talked about how she really didn't like (to put it mildly) the script for the original classic, and how she only accepted the role in order to make money to buy a new car. I wanted to hear her talk about the movie in person to see if any of
it was really true. Well, she told it just like I had heard it, even confirming that she had indeed been asked to appear in one of the recent entries in the series, but had declined because they wouldn't give her what she wanted in return. However, Ms. Palmer was extremely pleasant and outgoing and went on and on happily with stories about the shooting of the picture. It was particularly amusing to hear that she had slapped Adrienne King when they were filming a fight scene, and Sean Cunningham had then stepped in to tell her that in
movies they don't really slap, they fake it. The actress who so many have come to know as Mrs. Voorhees (even though she's appeared in many other things on stage and on screen) actually had so much to say that
at one point I didn't think there was going to be any time left for the others to speak. But that was okay with
me. It was a joy to listen to her reminiscing.
Adrienne King was also an interesting guest who seemed to be grateful for all the success of the first movie. She, like Betsy Palmer, was energetic and could go on and on about her experiences. It was especially entertaining when she and Ms. Palmer would talk together about filming Friday the 13th. We also learned
that Adrienne basically dropped out of the movie scene after that film (despite her appearance in part 2) due mainly to a disturbing real-life experience she had. She was extremely emotional in talking about it, and you could see it was difficult for her. However bringing up the subject proved to be a good thing, because she was very happy to be at the show, and said that her attending the convention was a positive step. She thanked the fans for their support and for helping her to make her reappearance - so to speak. With any luck we will see her reemergence on the movie scene in the near future.
For those not familiar with the Re-Animator film series, the movies follow the horrific adventures of one Doctor Herbert West, played by genre favorite Jeffrey Combs. The good (mad?) doctor is on a never-ending quest to bring life to the dead. The original Re-Animator was based on a short story by writer H.P. Lovecraft called Herbert West - The Re-Animator. The first film came out in 1985 and was followed in 1990 by the sequel Bride of Re-Animator. Now, after a long wait, we finally have the 2003 release Beyond Re-Animator. While this movie doesn't quite compare to the original cult classic, it is, in my opinion, slightly better than the second entry in the series, and well worth watching.
Like Bride of Re-Animator, this third entry in the series was directed by Brian Yuzna. (The first film was directed by Stuart Gordon). The story starts with a young boy witnessing his sister being killed by one of
Dr. West's experiments gone wrong. He also witnesses Dr. West's subsequent arrest and finds a syringe of
the Doctor's reanimation fluid left behind. Needless to say this traumatic event has a profound impact on the kid's life. Following this pre-credit sequence we pick up thirteen years later with Dr. West incarcerated in a prison which is run by the somewhat sadistic Warden Brando. A new young doctor soon arrives at the prison,
as does a beautiful female reporter working on a story about the warden and the facility. After an incident with one of the inmates we find out that the young doctor is the kid from the opening scene. It seems the death of
his sister drove him to pursue a career in medicine in the hopes of saving people. And more specifically, he wants to work with Dr. Herbert West. After injecting the dead inmate with the syringe of re-agent (which the
kid held onto all those years) the two begin making up more fluid in secret. We also learn that through his continuing research (done secretly on rats in prison) Dr. West has identified an electrical phenomenon which
is discharged from the brain at the moment of death, and could be the missing link in his experiments. In other words, he may have discovered what some might call the soul.
While this movie is not without flaws, the picture has a lot going for it. First, for those who like their horror on
the visceral side with nothing held back, Beyond Re-Animator is just the ticket. From the aforementioned out-of-control prisoner chomping down on the arm of a prison guard before being subdued, to several other characters dying violently and being subsequently reanimated, to a rat's electrical "soul" being transferred into one of the reanimated characters, to a bloody prison riot towards the end of the film, this movie is a non-stop whirlwind of madness and carnage. Gore fans will not be disappointed as limbs, innards, and (of course) blood is strewn about everywhere throughout the proceedings. (One character also foams at the mouth through much of the film, which serves to make things even more disgusting). This is all in keeping with the style of the first film, which had a bloody and exciting finale as well. These excesses are also matched by a sufficient amount of
nudity and sex. Exploitation fans should not be disappointed by an extended topless scene, although I must say
it still doesn't match the memorable Barbara Crampton nude scene from the first film. And while you would think that the prison setting would naturally make the proceedings dark and serious, the movie still manages to have many fun, lighter moments. For example, after one junkie prisoner injects himself with too much reanimation fluid his innards explode out from his stomach. Moments later he pops up as a gore-covered skeleton asking
Dr. West for more drugs, to which West deadpans "I'd say you've had enough". These moments serve to keep things entertaining while being scattered about the film sparsely enough so as to never take the movie into the realm of outright camp. Put simply, this is a crazy, fun movie that should please hardcore genre fans at every turn.
Another interesting thing about the picture is how despite the new setting, the same basic structure from the first film is quickly and effortlessly set up. In the original Re-Animator Dr. West began working with a young doctor (Dr. Dan Cain, played by Bruce Abbott) who had a loving and devoted girlfriend. This created a tense situation because the young doctor became torn between his devotion to West and discovering the life and death secrets they were searching for, and his feelings for his girlfriend, whom West only saw as an obstacle in their path.
Here young doctor Howard Phillips meets the beautiful female reporter at the same time he meets Dr. West,
and quickly the same situation is set up. There is always a sense of dread because you know the girlfriend is in great danger, and that she will eventually become involved in West's experiments. And you also know that her boyfriend somehow won't or can't keep her away from the danger, and that eventually her only chance for survival will depend on the reanimation fluid. This triangle serves as good drama here just as it did in the first film.
A final strong point in this movie is the ever reliable Jeffrey Combs. While everyone in the film is generally good, it's Jeffrey Combs that really makes the movie worth watching. The actor makes Dr. Herbert West such an eccentric character that you never know whether to root for him or not. Comb's odd mannerisms and deadpan delivery are just plain entertaining to watch. I could go on and on describing him, but suffice it to say I really couldn't imagine anyone else in the role. Jeffrey Combs definitely falls into the category of great eccentric actors along with such luminaries as Crispin Glover, Jack Nicholson, and my personal favorite Christopher Walken.
As I stated previously, this movie is not without some flaws. I'd like to note however that most of the things
I found wrong with the picture are only flaws as compared to the first film in the franchise. First, I had a general overall feeling that most of the carnage and mayhem didn't have much point to it. As much as I enjoyed watching, it was really just spectacle. Put another way, while the action and mayhem were entertaining, the story surrounding it just wasn't as compelling as in Dr. West's first adventure. This probably had something to do with the cold and harsh (but still interesting) prison setting.
SUBJECT:Movie Review - "Dawn of the Dead (2004)" April 2004
Does the remake cut it?
Over several of my past columns I've given my thoughts on remakes of classic horror films, and I've also reviewed some of these remakes. *For those tired of reading about the topic I apologize. However this does seem to be a significant trend as of late, and since George Romero's 1978 zombie movie is considered such a horror classic by so many people (including myself), I felt compelled to write about the new film. With any luck this will be the last big remake for awhile (not likely), and this will be the last such review I'll write for awhile. That having been said, let's discuss the new Dawn of the Dead.
The plot of Dawn of the Dead (2004) is very similar to the 1978 version. For the unfamiliar, the basic story concerns a small group of people trying to survive a zombie epidemic. It seems the dead are coming to life around the world and attacking and killing people, who then also rise and continue the killing. A group of survivors in an American town make their way to a suburban shopping mall, where they spend most of the movie trying to keep the zombies out.
Let me start by saying that this remake had a lot of good things in it. The movie had solid performances throughout, some clever dialog, some good action sequences, and some horrific and gory moments.
For fans of the 1978 version, it also featured cameos from such luminaries as makeup effects wizard
Tom Savini and actor Ken Foree. Put simply, the remake provided a lot of fun entertainment. However, unfortunately, the movie was pulled down by uneven pacing, lack of drama or characters I cared about, and gore scenes that were (as stated above) good, but still nothing special when compared to those in George Romero's version. Let's take a look at each of these issues in turn.
When I say this movie had uneven pacing, what I'm referring to is an overall feeling of a "start and stop" quality to the proceedings. With the exception of the exciting opening sequence where we meet a nurse named Ana (Sarah Polley), and we see the catastrophe unfolding around her, things just seem scattershot throughout the film. It's something that's difficult to verbalize, but I distinctly remember several times beginning to get interested in some character or plot point, only to have the film quickly switch focus to something else. One example of this would be the story of Andre (Mekhi Phifer) and his pregnant girlfriend. After the group is in the mall there is a conversation between Andre and cop Kenneth (Ving Rhames), where Andre talks about wanting his unborn child to have a better life than he had. This is obviously the scene that is supposed to get the audience to care about Andre and his girlfriend. While there is nothing wrong with this scene (with the exception of it being a bit heavy-handed), not much else is done with this couple until we see the birth of the child. Numerous other characters are treated in the same way, which ties in with my next criticism about the movie having an overall lack of drama or characters I cared about. My guess is that the filmmakers wanted to give us a bigger group of central characters (than in the original version), so there would be more humans that could potentially be turned into zombies. However, I feel this just resulted in the audience knowing and caring less about each person. Although I suppose this could be forgiven somewhat considering that the emphasis was more on action and loud explosions, it's hard for me to ignore the fact that I remember some of the zombie "characters" in George Romero's movie more vividly than I do any of the lead human characters in this remake. Now let's discuss the makeup effects in the film.
There were enough visceral moments in this movie to please most gore hounds, and for the casual or more mainstream viewer the carnage should pack quite an impact. The opening scene in particular had some great moments, and there were also some nice shots later in the film where zombies were destroyed in various gruesome ways. I don't really have anything to knock about the makeup effects; however I wasn't blown away by them either. But this is because the effects sequences in the original version are just so memorable. Unlike in the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, where the blood and gore was a distinct difference from the (mostly bloodless) original version, here there really isn't room for improvement. While I think it's pointless to dwell solely on which movie had more carnage, I do believe that this film was more violent (in an action movie sort of way), while the original had more gore in it. (Some of those seventies movies just can't be beat in terms of gross-out images that we'll probably never see in theatres again).
So, given the above criticisms, I really can't say this was a great movie. While I found myself laughing at some of the clever dialog, and while I was definitely caught up in many of the action scenes with the new, speedier zombies, I wasn't captivated by the movie as a whole. That sense of unevenness - the feeling that the movie never established any rhythm - just didn't go away throughout the entire running time. The film basically just felt like a typical loud Hollywood action picture with a lot more blood and gore than we're used to seeing in the action genre. In fairness this may be due somewhat to my adoration for the original version, and a preconceived notion of how a remake should unfold. I kept hoping to feel a connection and intimateness with the characters like in Romero's movie, but this never happened. People unfamiliar with the first film may like the picture better because the action sequences and high gore content make things seem very cutting-edge and extreme. In fact, as of this writing, the remake has pulled in big opening weekend receipts, even managing to knock Mel Gibson's movie The Passion of the Christ from the #1 perch at the box office. As with all these recent remakes, this can be looked on as a mixed blessing. When horror movies succeed financially it helps the genre in that more horror films will inevitably be made. Of course on the other side of the coin this most likely also means that studios will be quick to produce more remakes rather than focusing on original material. If nothing else hopefully this remake will have the positive effect of moving people to go back and take a look at George Romero's classic 1978 zombie epic.
* See the September 2002 and November 2003 TFTM columns to read more of my thoughts on remakes of classic horror films.
SUBJECT: Movie Magic in the Age of Information.May 2004
Recently I was watching an independent movie with a friend of mine. This particular effort was a short, no-budget, shot-on-video picture. * Put another way, it was exactly the type of filmmaking I'm engaged in. What
I found most interesting however was not the film itself, but rather the fact that while the movie ran under a half hour, the running time on the tape was over an hour. How, you ask, is this possible? Well, the tape contained over a half hour of extras, the bulk of which consisted of behind-the-scenes "making of" footage. We were treated to watching most of the key sequences being discussed, choreographed, rehearsed, and taped. I've noticed that this is becoming an increasingly popular trend in underground and independent cinema, as well as with mainstream Hollywood movies. While we were viewing this particular movie on VHS, the trend is most common with DVD/DVD-R, where additional material is today almost expected by audiences. What's good about behind-the-scenes (or bonus) material is that audiences can learn about, or at least get a brief look at, the different processes involved in creating motion pictures. Chats with writers, directors, composers and other key players give the viewer insights they wouldn't have had otherwise. The filmmakers in turn get to talk about what they do. (I know that I for one always enjoy talking about my filmmaking activities.) On-screen demonstrations of such processes as makeup effects also enlighten the viewer as to how things are done. Additionally, this type of material is obviously entertaining to audiences, as the demand for it illustrates.
While the above points are valid and true, recently I read an article in which somebody expressed a different view on the subject. I was reading a newspaper interview with a somewhat famous cult actress. One question
put to her was what she thought about a recent DVD release of a famous movie she had starred in. I was somewhat surprised that this actress seemed to have mixed feelings about it. Although she said some positive things about the benefits of DVD bonus material, she also thought this type of material could be viewed as lessening the art form in a way. I wondered after reading the interview if that case really could be made. Does a step by step breakdown of the processes involved in producing motion pictures lessen the art form? In addition to seeing how things are done, today we get to see footage that was not used in the director's (artist's) final vision. Does seeing this cutting room floor footage take away from the finished product? If the footage wasn't chosen for the movie, is it really something that should be seen? This is definitely something to ponder, and these questions are what inspired the title of this column.
I believe that "movie magic" today is not what it was in the past. Gone are the days when audiences would sit
in wide-eyed wonder at the sights in front of them on the big screen, such as giant insects or space creatures rampaging through city streets. Today when viewing such images people immediately want to know if the bug was computer-generated or done mechanically. Audiences now need to be "in the know" about such matters. The magic and wonder of the movies has been replaced by our need for knowledge. While there's nothing
wrong with this, it's interesting to note that this need to be "in the know" not only applies to the mechanics of motion pictures, but also to other aspects of the movie industry as well. For example, the (supposed) antics of celebrity couples take up time not only on entertainment programs, but also on regular television newscasts. (How much of it is true and how much is manufactured by the media - and maybe the persons involved - for public consumption is the only thing that is still a secret.) This gossip is also prevalent in countless magazines and on the internet as well, and public opinion of celebrities often has an impact on the performance of motion pictures at the box office, which in itself is frequently a big topic of discussion. Today people will often spend as much time discussing how much a movie cost to make as what it was about. This is a result of the information age we live in.
When it comes to the topic of DVD extras, I think that regardless of what the entertainment value of all this behind-the-scenes material is, the learning aspect is just too much of a plus to ignore. While initially having mixed feelings myself about DVD extras, I now see the value of them. Learning about the technology of motion pictures is just another type of learning. Movies have always been a mixture of art and technology (and commerce), and today the technology involved in producing motion pictures is also part of their appeal.
* I generally divide my time between working on features and short pictures. However to date they all have the similarity of being no-budget productions.
SUBJECT: Independent Film in the Hudson Valley June 2004
by guest writer Jessika M. Pasko
**The June 2004 column is an essay contributed by Jessika M. Pasko, who is a writer from Upstate New York's Capital Region. I'd like to thank Jessika for including me as a featured filmmaker in this piece.**
(And for anybody who may be wondering, it's not a typo: Jessika's name is spelled with a "k", not a "c". )
As the media world becomes more and more monopolized, it can seem that even some art is not sacred. Hollywood and corporate control of the distribution and presentation of film can often be limiting, particularly to independent film projects. Fortunately there are many who refuse to let corporate influences keep them down, and so independent film continues to thrive in many communities. The Hudson Valley region of New York State is just one example of an area with a growing community of filmmakers and film fans pursuing independent film projects.
In many ways, the Hudson Valley area has become a breeding ground for independent film projects, film locations and even a renowned film festival, the Woodstock Film Fest.
Begun five years ago, the Woodstock Film Festival has established itself as one of the best independent film events in the country. Since its founding by husband and wife duo Laurent Rejto and Meira Blaustein, the event has gained more prestige and importance each year. The festival is one of the largest truly independent events of its kind, as well as being a first-rate opportunity for young filmmakers to gain exposure. The festival's board of advisors includes journalists, directors, composers, and even actors such as Ethan Hawke and Griffin Dunne. Each year the festival features a panel of guest speakers and participants. In past years, guests such as actress Parker Posey, and actors Stanley Tucci and
Tim Robbins have been included amongst the many.
"Our purpose is multi-fold," said WFF co-founder and executive director Meira Blaustein. "We bring great indie films into the Hudson Valley. We also supply a platform to the filmmakers, and give them an excellent arena to show their films, as well as chance to network." In fact, many films screened at the WFF go on to become prominent films, such as recent hits "Shattered Glass," "Pieces of April," and "Far From Heaven," all of which were screened at the festival.
Blaustein also added that her company works to facilitate film production in the area through the Woodstock Film Commission. This is an organization that they run to provide a complete source guide for filmmakers that provides listings for and assistance with technical crews, locations, equipment and professional crews. It attracts filmmakers from all over the world.
The Woodstock Film Festival is far from being corporate and prides itself on being fiercely independent, said Blaustein. However, she was careful to point out that the supposed commercialization of some indie film festivals is a bit of a misnomer. Most film festivals and independent films are non-profit, but in order to stay afloat, many are forced to turn to corporate sponsorship, she said. Still, certain film festivals definitely have more cachet than others, such as Sundance and Cannes; while Woodstock is beginning to gain some of this cachet, it still has less corporate sponsorship.
The Woodstock Film Festival also sponsors year-round events throughout the Hudson Valley, including screenings of short films and presentations by independent filmmakers. They also provide internships for local college students, offer a variety of classes and maintain a newsletter to keep members abreast of current projects and news in local film.
The 2000 Oscar-nominated independent film "You Can Count on Me," starring Laura Linney and Mark Ruffalo, was shot partially in Margaretville and Phoenicia, N.Y. Written and directed by Kenneth Lonergan, the film was a huge hit at the Sundance and Cannes Film Festivals, considered by many to be two of the most prestigious independent film festivals. "Personal Velocity," filmed locally in New Paltz, Pine Bush and Rosendale with the help of the Woodstock Film Commission, was first previewed at the 2001 Woodstock Film Festival. It later went on to win the 2002 Sundance Festival Award.
"The film community in the Hudson Valley is growing a lot - that growth is multi-fold. We have a lot more productions coming into the area. We have more people getting involved in film - either working on it or making their own projects. Most of them are not going into film schools," Blaustein added.
"I think it (the Hudson Valley) is a great place to engage in filmmaking and video production. The Woodstock Film Festival is a great place to start," said J.C. Barone, a communications and film professor at Mount Saint Mary College in Newburgh, N.Y.
In addition to the Woodstock film festival, many filmmakers, both amateur and professional, have begun to establish the area in terms of independent film. According to Blaustein, there is a definite growth
in people realizing that film is "definitely a great way to spend your life, to make a living. More people are interested in filming in this area."
Jeff Kirkendall is one of those people. Kirkendall, a filmmaker who runs Very Scary Productions, has written, produced and directed six movies, using digital medium. He also collaborates with other local filmmakers, editing their films and assisting in production. Kirkendall began making films in 1996, right after graduating from the College of St. Rose with a B.A. in communications.
"I know several filmmakers in the area, and I would say that we are keeping true to the spirit of independent filmmaking. Most of the productions I've been involved in have been for little to no money, by people who have a serious love for filmmaking. This is what true independent filmmaking is all about," Kirkendall said in a recent interview. Although he collaborates with other filmmakers on their projects, for his own he tends to work by himself on his own projects, often serving as the writer, producer and director.
Kirkendall's current project is editing a short film that he made last summer. "Of Theatre & Bikinis," his first non-horror effort, is the story of a college-age girl living in a small suburban upstate New York town who wants desperately to be an actress, and who goes on a crazy quest to meet a Hollywood director, according to Kirkendall. "It's a very lighthearted PG-13 style comedy-drama. Hopefully this movie will be out sometime in the fall," he added. Kirkendall often screens his films at various locales in the Albany-area, including colleges and independent movie theatres. Hudson Valley Community College in Troy, N.Y. often holds showcases of independent films, of which Kirkendall is a frequent participant.
He has worked on several short and full-length films, including his latest feature film, a vampire movie called "The Temptress," in early 2003. He is looking for distribution options for the film as well as working on his own short films and editing the works of others. Two feature films that were edited by Kirkendall, "The Edge of Reality" and "London After Midnight," are scheduled to be released on DVD/VHS in the upcoming months. He also runs a Web site in hopes of encouraging correspondence with other filmmakers and fans
of underground/independent cinema.
Some filmmakers turn to teaching in the course of their pursuits, such as Dr. J.C. Barone. A full-time professor of film at Mount Saint Mary College, he has also worked on many film projects and is currently working on a video about interpersonal communications for the Allyn-Bacon textbook company. Next year, he will be working on documentary about the Dominican sisters of Hope of Newburgh, N.Y. In the past, he has produced music videos and local commercials. Barone prefers digital video for his projects.
"When I was a grad student at Syracuse University, my fellow students would put down video saying it would 'never' be as good as film, that it was basically, 'crap.' I disagreed with them then and I'm gloating now," Barone said. Digital video is now employed by filmmakers such as Steven Soderbergh, who won acclaim for the films "Traffic" and "Erin Brockovich," and is considered by many to be one of the most influential modern directors in independent film, he explained.
Barone believes that the area is a great place to engage in filmmaking and video production,
because of its proximity to New York City as well as the growing local arts community.
One of Barone's assistants in the Allyn-Bacon projects is his student, Kevin Johnston, a junior majoring in communications with a concentration in film. Johnston is an aspiring filmmaker who hopes to pursue editing of music-related projects such as music videos and documentaries.
He is currently in the planning stages of a short film of his own, using a variety of digital techniques.
At this point, he has little interest in Hollywood business and says that he wants to pursue film for the sake
of art, a sentiment he feels has begun to dwindle.
"Independent film should remain independent at all costs. There's no disputing that. The more that corporations dip their tentacles into independent filmmaking, the more the spirit of independent filmmaking will be compromised," he said.
Speaking on the local independent film scene, Johnston said, "In general I'd say that there's great support for grassroots projects like documentaries featuring local festivals and the like." This can be seen not only in the Woodstock Film Festival but also in smaller film festivals, the support of local arts magazines such as the Chronogram, based in New Paltz, and venues such as Upstate Films, a non-profit, member-supported arts organization.
Upstate Films, located in Rhinebeck, was opened in 1972 as an alternative to mainstream film exhibition. In addition to showing old and new independent film showings, the theatre also facilitates discussions with directors, filmmakers, authors, actors and other guests. The theatre attracts young, old
and middle age, according to employee Janice Sandwick with a laugh.
Upstate Films often works to incorporate advocacy by coupling screenings of documentaries with discussions led by political and community activists. This past Sunday, May 2, 2004, Upstate Films hosted a new documentary, "Leaps of Faith: Views on American Power and the War in Iraq," filmed in Poughkeepsie, N.Y.
Basically, we just interviewed people on the streets of Poughkeepsie, said the film's co-creator Andrew Davison, a professor of political science at Vassar College. Davison said that for he and Benjamin Kalina, a fellow Hudson Valley resident, the decision to make such a documentary "was made from the moment of the Presidential ultimatum (to go to war.)" The actual filming was done on three separate days, right before the one-year anniversary of the Iraq invasion. Davison has no background in film, other than a few amateur efforts from when he was a teenager, he laughed.
Upstate Films gladly hosted the documentary and its makers, as part of their ongoing attempts to raise local awareness.
"We bring arts and culture to a community so it can thrive," said Sandwick. "We want to bring good movies and we spice things up a little. And we like working here."
Her words sum up the true sentiment of local independent film. Those involved in any facet most certainly have the desire to spread art and culture, but above all, they do it for the pure enjoyment. Can we say the same about most of Hollywood? Probably not.
SUBJECT: Vampire Hunters - Modern Day Heroes July 2004
Plus: A review of "Van Helsing"
Of all the classic monsters in cinema history, it can easily be argued that the vampire has always been
one of the most enduring. While other screen menaces such as werewolves and mummies seem to run
in cycles, remaining popular for a number of years and then fading away for awhile, vampires consistently maintain a strong presence on movie screens both big and small. This is evidenced by the continual stream of bloodsucker pictures produced by both large Hollywood studios and independent filmmakers alike.
The history of vampire movies has been discussed in depth in numerous articles, publications, books and videos, so I will not delve into that subject here. However, what I would like to talk about is the enduring popularity of a related horror icon - the vampire hunter. With the recently released Universal Studios
monster epic Van Helsing, and the upcoming Blade: Trinity, not only do vampires continue to retain their hold on audiences, but now it appears the vampire's counterpart - the vampire hunter - is taking center
stage as well.
What I think is most interesting about vampire hunter characters in recent movies is how they are really an odd mix of the old and the new. They still battle classic creatures, but at the same time the movies are fast-paced, with lots of action and elaborate visual effects. This is especially true of the recent Van Helsing, where the (re-imagined) famous vampire hunter not only battles his arch nemesis Dracula, but also has to deal with classic monsters such as the Wolf Man and Frankenstein, as well as Dracula's flying vampire brides. These creatures are greatly enhanced in this film by modern CGI (computer generated images),
in addition to elaborate makeup effects. This technology essentially brings a classic character like Van Helsing into the arena of today's modern-day horror scene. *This is necessary to attract the youth audience, an audience that has already seen ultra-hip horror films such as Scream. Obviously the filmmakers hope a movie like Van Helsing will also appeal to long time fans of the character as well.
Besides being a mix of the old and the new, another interesting aspect about vampire hunter characters
is their dual nature. Often these characters are portrayed as anti-heroes. They frequently have a dark past, sometimes having done terrible things in their lifetime. To use the new Van Helsing movie as an example once again, the advertising for the film spotlights the fact that the character is called a murderer by some and a hero by others. An example from independent cinema would be the character of Shadow Tracker from the 1998 film Shadow Tracker: Vampire Hunter.** In this movie Shadow Tracker is a Vietnam War Veteran who is in pursuit of his old war buddy Jonathan Stokes, who is now a ruthless vampire. However
for all his ruthlessness, Stokes is portrayed in an almost heroic manner, having a charming and civilized demeanor. In his hunt for Stokes, which is all consuming, Shadow Tracker winds up killing a young couple whom he believes to be vampires. As it turns out, the young man is not a vampire, but rather just someone who is trying to save the woman he loves. However he is in the wrong place at the wrong time and gets staked by the vampire hunter. In this way, Shadow Tracker can be seen as being more of an anti-hero in the film. Perhaps these types of depictions are in a sense more believable than heroes who are totally virtuous. And perhaps audiences are attracted to these characters precisely because of their dual nature. Now on to the review of Van Helsing...
In Van Helsing, the title character is portrayed much differently then he has been in the past. In previous film versions Van Helsing has appeared as an aged, often ragged-looking gentleman who fights Dracula mainly by brandishing a cross or other holy implements. Here he is an action hero capable of going at it head to
toe with the famous Count and the other monsters involved in the film. Add to this the aforementioned CGI effects, and what we have is a fast-paced and visually exciting action/horror flick.
In general I enjoyed Van Helsing. The movie begins especially well with a lengthy scene that is basically a reenactment of the famous scene from Frankenstein, where the villagers try to break down the doors to
the castle where Dr. Frankenstein and his monster reside. This film makes the story even more interesting by throwing Count Dracula into the scenario and proposing that he was at least partially responsible for the creation of the creature. This opening is visually stunning and lots of fun to watch. It starts the movie out
with a bang and should be greatly appreciated by fans of the classic monster movies. It was definitely my favorite part of the movie. While I have to say that the rest of the picture never really matched the excellence of this opening, it still held my interest throughout.
Van Helsing is basically a giant popcorn movie that is not without its flaws, but is nonetheless good fun. Hugh Jackman plays the title character competently enough as the man-of-few-words-type action hero.
*** Kate Beckinsale is appealing as heroine Anna Valerious, displaying a talent for convincing European accents, and the supporting cast members give strong performances, especially Richard Roxburgh as Count Dracula. However, the real stars of this movie are the visual effects, which effectively enhance the various monsters. After the opening scene described above, there is a relatively brief scene where Van Helsing battles the Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde monster. This part of the film actually had me worried it was going to be all downhill for the remainder of the running time, because the CGI looked glaringly obvious and was way too over the top. However, luckily, after this the effects start to fade into the background and do what they should do, which is to effectively (and seamlessly) enhance the visuals and action. Sure the effects were still evident in some scenes, such as those where the werewolf moved at lightning speeds, but they never seemed intrusive like in the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde scene. I should also note that these types of fast-paced chase scenes really dominated the movie. In fact, this movie hardly gave viewers a minute to
breathe. Just when I thought we were in for a lengthy dialog sequence, another creature would jump out of the shadows triggering another extended action sequence. The film really kept me on the edge of my seat and because of this I recommend it. Make no mistake, Van Helsing is basically a big-budget action picture that you probably won't be thinking about the next day, but it's also a highly enjoyable way to spend a couple hours.
SUBJECT: Movie Review: "The Village" August 2004
A look at M. Night Shyamalan's latest.
The latest film from suspense master M. Night Shyamalan is a brooding drama called The Village. The movie has a top-notch cast, including Joaquin Phoenix, Adrien Brody, William Hurt, Sigourney Weaver, Brendan Gleeson, and Bryce Dallas Howard in the pivotal role of Ivy Walker, the daughter of one of the
town elders. The story is set in the small, quiet town of Covington Pennsylvania, which is surrounded by large and foreboding woods. The people of this isolated town live a simple and pleasant life; however
they also live with a deep fear of the mysterious creatures that are said to reside in the nearby woods.
When a headstrong young man named Lucius Hunt (Joaquin Phoenix) ventures into this unknown territory,
it appears he has upset the long-standing peace between the villagers and the creatures. His actions may have changed the fate of the village and its people forever.
Generally when I write a movie review I start with the positive aspects (if any) of the film in question. This time I think it would be appropriate to begin in just the opposite fashion. Let me say right off the bat that
I believe some viewers who are expecting a certain type of film are going to be very disappointed with
The Village. As mentioned above, M. Night Shyamalan has become known as a master of suspense, and his name is also mentioned quite a bit in horror film circles as well. This is because his past movies have involved supernatural chills and thrills. Also, people have come to expect a huge revelation, shock, or twist ending in his pictures. This is due largely to the fact that such was the case with all his previous movies, including Unbreakable, and, most notably, The Sixth Sense. A very high bar has indeed been set by these previous features. Without giving anything away, it's fair to say that the big revelation in The Village moves the movie into a completely different direction than one would expect or, possibly, hope for. I'm calling this a negative aspect of the movie because I, being one of those people expecting a certain type
of film, felt disappointed at what was revealed. While I wouldn't go so far as to say it completely ruined my enjoyment of the movie, it certainly wasn't in the neighborhood of what I had hoped for.
The above comments notwithstanding, this picture really does have a lot going for it. First and foremost it has excellent acting and high drama all wrapped up in a fairly original story idea. I was very involved with the characters and their plight. Adrien Brody and William Hurt are standouts as a somewhat retarded young man and a wise and thoughtful town elder, respectively. However the real star of the movie is Bryce Dallas Howard as Ivy Walker. She plays the role of a young and sensitive blind woman very convincingly, giving Ivy strength and more insight into things than any other character in the film. We see much of what happens in the film from her point of view. There are also some nice humorous moments thrown into the proceedings that lighten an otherwise serious mood. In addition, the movie has a very menacing atmosphere and great outdoor photography. The foreboding woods easily become a character in their own right.
It's hard to recommend or not recommend this movie. Generally speaking I'd say I liked it primarily for its originality and because of the fine cast. While many movie reviewers and moviegoers (probably younger audiences in particular) will most likely direct heavy criticism at the revelation in the film, I really give
Mr. Shyamalan credit for having the guts to go in the direction he did with the story and stay true to his vision. Looking at things from the perspective of a horror/suspense fan however, I was disappointed.
M. Night Shyamalan has become a specialist at the PG-13 thriller, but whether this movie will satisfy
fans of that genre, considering the direction it moves in towards the end, remains to be seen.
SUBJECT:Euro-Horror and the films of Dario ArgentoSeptember 2004
An alternative to the mainstream
This month I'd like to discuss a topic that many horror fans are already very familiar with. Euro-horror is a term used to categorize horror movies made in the European film community. Some writers limit the definition of the term to only include movies produced in that region between the late sixties and the early eighties, but many also apply it to films made in the present day. Before going any further with this discussion, I'd like to freely admit that I am not what you might call an expert on the subject. I know people who are much bigger connoisseurs of this horror subgenre than myself, and therefore are much more knowledgeable about it as
well. However that having been said I have, over the years, developed a taste for Euro-horror, and find it to be
a nice alternative on occasion to American fright films. It is from this perspective of the casual viewer that I offer the following observations on the subject.
One thing that has always struck me about Euro-horror films is their emphasis on visual detail. These movies frequently take the time to highlight rich, lush visuals and fine detail, rather than being primarily concerned with propelling the plot along at a snappy pace. Another way to say this is that in Euro-horror the camera spends time focusing on things that are not usually emphasized in American films. Some good examples can be found in the films of Italian suspense master Dario Argento. For those not familiar with Argento, he has been responsible for many films which are today considered classics of the horror genre, such as Deep Red and
the surrealistic Suspiria. In the serial killer movie Sleepless (one of his more recent efforts) we see a rather lengthy extreme close-up of the inner mechanisms of an answering machine. We see the parts of the machine moving as a message is recorded. This is used to effectively illustrate the importance of the machine and the message being left. The device almost becomes a character.
The Argento classic Deep Red offers another example in a sequence where a professional medium is demonstrating her talents of telepathy to a live audience. She suddenly senses evil emanating from one of
the audience members and is visibly shaken as she proclaims this person has killed and will kill again. Here Argento uses extreme close-ups on her face, showing water dripping out of her mouth and down her chin
(from her drink) as she makes her revelation. These shots make the scene incredibly unnerving and dramatic, highlighting her terror at what she senses. Extreme close-ups on body parts such as eyes (and gruesome things being done to them) have in fact become a stylistic trademark of Dario Argento movies. Such emphasis on artistic visual detail gives Euro-horror films a look, feel and intensity all their own.
A second observation I've made is that Euro-horror films seem to be overall less commercial in nature than their American counterparts. Although by strict definition all films that are made for profit can be called commercial in nature, Euro-horror films share several traits that put them more squarely outside the mainstream. As mentioned above, they often have an intensity that stems from their rich visuals. To use Dario Argento as an example once again, his movies usually include violent, gore-filled death sequences which are seldom seen in American mainstream horror cinema. These mise-en-scenes (as they are sometimes labeled) are typically elaborate and detailed, and very often overshadow plot and character, frequently slowing down pacing as well. Such characteristics serve to distance Argento's work from the American tradition of speeding films along rapidly towards a conclusion. Add to this the fact that Euro-horror films rarely feature big-name celebrities like in Hollywood (often because of their relatively smaller budgets), and it's easy to see why they have less mainstream sensibility than American studio films.
The above observations really just scratch the surface in describing Euro-horror. The characteristics I've discussed are those that have stood out most prominently to me when watching these productions. I've used some films from Dario Argento as examples because he is one of the most well-known Euro-horror filmmakers, and because I've seen more of his movies than those from anyone else in this subgenre. It's also worth noting that my comparisons and contrasts between Euro-horror films and American horror cinema are not meant to be negative towards either category. Both have their strengths and weaknesses and serve to
offer diversity to the horror genre in general. For me Euro-horror is what I'd call an acquired taste. Being someone who grew up watching American-made horror films, it took me quite awhile to come to appreciate and understand Euro-horror. I liken it to the difference between popular (pop) music and jazz music. Both musical styles have their own appeal, but for many who are accustomed to mainstream popular music, jazz music can be difficult to grasp at first. In the future I'd like to write more on the subject and discuss specific
films in greater detail. For now let me wrap up this writing by recommending a movie to those who may be interested in getting their feet wet for the first time in Euro-horror. One of my favorite efforts was produced by Dario Argento and directed by Lamberto Bava. In the 1985 film Demons (Italian title Demoni), several people are invited to the opening of a new movie theatre, where they are shown a violent horror film. As the movie progresses the events on-screen (the m
