By 1983, the 411 had suffered the same fate as many of the drive in theaters across America. The theater closed and left to rot, the screen grew into disrepair and the 411 Drive In theater was all but forgotten. Time had claimed yet another victim.

Eighteen years later, Emory’s sons Rex and Carl decided to revive the drive in, much to the joy of not only their own family, but the community as well. The 411 was completely restored, rejuvenated, revamped, and reopened in July of 2001. By the summer of 2008, the 411 was given an additional screen, upgrading the capacity of the drive in to 400 cars. While they were deeply saddened to see it go, the old concession stand was torn down, but a new restaurant facility was added in order to provide even better snacks for their customers.

The theater is open on the weekends year round and 7 nights a week starting on Memorial Day until Labor Day. For just $15 per carload, I am sure you will enjoy viewing the double feature at the 411 Drive In!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo credit

“Blood Fare” (http://bloodfare.warriorentertainment.com) is a Civil War ghost story with a modern twist, with filming in Utah, Washington, DC and Northern Virginia. It is the story of Corporal Henry Trout (S. Edward Meek), who in 1861 fought valiantly in a forgotten skirmish after the first battle of Bull Run. In 2011, he will come face to face with his descendants as the battle for blood continues on a haunted battlefield. Tyler and her brother Chad, Henry’s fifth generation grandchildren, will challenge the very legend of Charon the Ferryman, as the lines between the living and the dead become blurred. Gerard will play the character of Professor Meade, mentor to the protagonist Tyler, with principle photography in late September in Utah. Additional talent will be announced in the next few weeks.

Also, Chris Hanson, one of the most recognized special makeup effects artists in Hollywood has joined the crew of “Blood Fare”, as the Special Makeup Effects Supervisor. He demonstrated his unique creativity in “Hellboy”, “Underworld”, “Men in Black”, “Men in Black 2”, “The Green Mile”, “The X-Files”, “The Faculty”, “Spawn” and many other productions.

The “Blood Fare” crew includes the dedicated members of the Utah Civil War Association (UCWA), a re-enactment group. UCWA member Amanda Bowman Jones will be composing the soundtrack, along with Rob Lambros of “The Street” band, who provided the music for Steel’s third feature “Denizen”, winner of the Park City Music Film Festival Bronze Medal for Excellence. Steel rounds out her production team with co-producer Christian K. Koch and executive producer Jessica M. Bair, veterans of past Steel projects.

Fans of Steel and Gerard can support the independent movie “Blood Fare”, and receive limited edition rewards, through Kickstarter (http://www.tinyurl.com/bloodfare) and/or IndieGoGo (http://www.indiegogo.com/BLOODFARE).

About J.A. Steel:
Steel is a director, producer, actor, videographer, editor, fight choreographer and stunt person, in addition to writer and composer … and even a distributor … a unique woman in Hollywood.

“Blood Fare” is Steel’s fourth feature film. Her action horror shocker “Denizen”, her action supernatural thriller “Salvation”, and her action feature “The Third Society” reflect in many ways Steel’s real life hobbies of Muay Thai kickboxing, cave diving, motorcycle riding, firearms and edged weapons. All three movies are available on Amazon.com.

Steel lives in Los Angeles and Salt Lake City, but prefers the peace of Utah and mountain scenery for her screen writing.

About Tunis Productions, Inc.
A sister company of Warrior Entertainment, Inc., Tunis Productions is bringing A List action to independent film on a micro budget. http://www.warriorentertainment.com

Background information on Steel’s career:
Director’s Reel – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3-BqNZxPrk
Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JA_Steel
IMDB – http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0003888/

Recent reviews of “Denizen” and interviews with Steel:
DVD Snapshot: http://www.dvdsnapshot.com/8Aug10/Denizen.html
B-Movie Man: http://bmovieman.com/Denizen.aspx
FilmSnobbery: http://filmsnobbery.com/review/denizen/
Anything Horror: http://anythinghorror.com/2010/06/16/indie-horror-round-up-the-city-2009-escape-2010-denizen-2010/
Muskogee Phoenix: http://muskogeephoenix.com/features/x1687719842/-Denizen-premieres-at-Bare-Bones-Film-Festival
Fatally Yours: http://www.fatally-yours.com/interviews/interview-with-filmmaker-j-a-steel/

A question: should you accept the opinions of film critics without wondering if they might be wrong? My answer: no, you should not. I came to that answer when I was 14 and I chose to ignore the negative reviews surrounding the theatrical release of Stanley Kramer’s “The Runner Stumbles.” In a recent revisit to the film, my answer was reaffirmed.

“The Runner Stumbles” was based on a mildly successful 1976 Broadway play by Milan Stitt. Its odd title was inspired by Isaiah 40:31, which is crucial to the plot concerning a priest accused of murdering a young nun with whom he had a romantic affair.

Set in a rural section of Washington State in 1927, “The Runner Stumbles” focuses on a small parish run by Father Rivard. The priest sees his geographically isolated posting as punishment for an earlier espousal of ideas that were considered radical by his superiors. The young Sister Rita arrives to help run the parish school, and her optimistically cheery personality has a marked effect on the somewhat dreary parish. But things get thorny when the elderly nuns in the parish convent develop tuberculosis.  Sister Rita is moved from the convent into Father Rivard’s rectory, and suddenly they become the source of town gossip due to the amount of time they spend together. When Sister Rita is found dead, Father Rivard is arrested as the likely killer.

As with the best of the Kramer canon, “The Runner Stumbles” puts questions of morality to responsibility to the test, and the results are harsh and cruel. It is not an anti-Catholic film, thankfully, but it raises questions of religious dogma and whether the clergy should be held to a different set of standards.

Throughout his career, Kramer had a penchant for offbeat casting – witness his use of Fred Astaire in “On the Beach” or Judy Garland in “Judgment at Nuremberg” – and he continued that tradition in Dick Van Dyke to play the tormented Father Rivard.  Considering that Van Dyke’s that his reputation rested on his classic sitcom and 1960s musical films like “Mary Poppins” and “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang,” the casting was more than a little daring. Yet Van Dyke responded with a beautifully measured performance that carefully mined the priest’s inner tumult. His character’s transition out of rigid self-doubt into a wider scope of emotions is presented with a dramatic subtlety that would be difficult for any classically trained actor – and all the more surprising for someone with very little experience in straight drama.

As Sister Rita, Kathleen Quinlan rivaled Van Dyke for capturing the depth of emotional struggle. Quinlan came to “The Runner Stumbles” after an astonishing breakthrough role in the 1978 “I Never Promised You a Rose Garden,” and this film showed her ability to spin gold from difficult parts. (Sadly, her subsequent roles never matched the level of intensity of these back-to-back triumphs.)  The rest of the film’s ensemble – Maureen Stapleton as the priest’s unbalanced housekeeper, Beau Bridges as his dubious lawyer, Tammy Grimes as an illiterate townie, and Ray Bolger (of all people) as an icy monsignor – were top-notch.

Kramer was never a favorite of the critics during his peak years, but audiences came out for his work. By the 1970s, however, Kramer lost his rapport with audiences and the critics seemed to go out of their way to barbecue his late efforts. When “The Runner Stumbles” appeared in 1979, it was lambasted with such comments as being “old-fashioned” (Variety), “silly” (Roger Ebert) and “dispirited” (New York Times).

“The Runner Stumbles” was Kramer’s last film, and the negative critical reaction ensured he would not work again. (Kramer died in 2001.) I am glad that I ignored the critics and caught the film during its brief release; it later appeared on VHS video in 1985, but the film never turned up on DVD.

With luck, “The Runner Stumbles” can be given a shot at redemption – it is a beautiful little film that was unfairly kicked aside, and its return will catch many people with the positive surprise of its rich and provocative contents.

When the original owner, Sonny Stevenson, sold the drive in to the Lyles family in 1977, the name was changed to the Raleigh Road Outdoor Theater. The drive in was sold in 2004 to Vito Andragna who then put the drive in theater up for auction on Ebay.com.

That’s right. Current owner Jim Kopp came to own the Raleigh Road Outdoor Theater by winning an auction on Ebay in February of 2006!

Raleigh Road Outdoor Theatre has received many renovations since it has been in the Kopp’s ownership. They installed a new playground, landscaped the grounds, and completely restored the theater, snack bar, and the restrooms. The screen tower was also given a new look by painting it to resemble a strip of film. The Raleigh Road Outdoor Theatre also holds the title of the oldest operating drive in theater in the entire state of North Carolina.

Open 7 days a week during the summer (weekends only during the winter months), year round, admission for your double feature is only $6. The Moon-Glo stage, named such in honor of the original drive in, was recently finished and events are held often, including local music acts. Most of the regular patrons favorite event is watching the ball drop on the giant screen every New Year’s Eve. During the intermission, you are welcome and encouraged to tour the projection booth. As with most drive in theaters, the Raleigh Road Outdoor Theater stays alive and kicking by way of its concessions, so don’t forget to visit the snack bar for some Papa John’s pizza, a lean cheeseburger, popcorn, or even some homemade ice cream!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo credit

Award winning screenwriter Caitlin McCarthy sits down with FilmSnobbery Live! host Nic Baisley in their hometown of Worcester, MA at Worcester Academy’s austier Warner Theater to talk about her upcoming project WONDER DRUG. Along the way we get some great insight into the life of a screenwriter as well as some useful hints and tricks for others looking to sharpen their craft.

Download the audio version of this interview HERE

Follow WONDER DRUG on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/wonderdrugmovie
Check out updates on WONDER DRUG: http://www.wonderdrugthemovie.com

The beginning of the film where in we see not only a hint of their attraction between Chanel and Stravinsky but also the fiasco that is the opening of his show in 1913 is nothing short of riveting. However, making a compelling first act is not the difficulty it’s the other two that often present the challenge. This three-pronged beginning is worth noting though. First, there is the pre-show where we see not only him and Chanel but also his pre-show jitters and an intimation of what his family life is like. Second, there is the chronicling of what the show itself was like which is quite something because listening to the music with modern ears it’s difficult to see what is so offensive. The music is wonderful but ahead of its time and thus receives a negative reaction. The last part of the opening is also compelling as you see opposite sides of the then failed symphonic ballet pointing fingers at each other. You have Nijinsky blaming Stavinsky and vice versa with Diaghilev trying to play mediator.

The positive effect that the move to Chanel’s has on Stravinsky’s work is obvious. He is able to compose. The difficulty the film ends up having is in the conveyance of the affair. To be just it doesn’t seem to be unrealistic but that’s where the issues come in. It is possibly too realistic for there to be sustainable drama and conflict that is truly compelling.

The affair begins and they are secretive about it but of course they are discovered, not only do Chanel’s friends suspect, as one scene illustrates, but Stravinsky’s wife and oldest son find out. Not that things need to blow up into melodrama but not enough does happen. Stravinsky’s wife takes it for as long as she can. She confronts both her husband and Chanel but in very subdued ways not making any overt threats or fuss. Again realistic for period but not necessarily making for the best drama.

Also you have an issue in that the two protagonists are quite similar in many ways. They are both driven to succeed in their profession and both consider themselves to be instinctual artists. They are demanding and not very open but physically passionate. When you have two characters who do not wear their hearts on the sleeves you need more incisive, perhaps even intrusive, filmmaking than you get in this film. It is all surface, glimpses beneath are few and far between and the water is murky.

Though you do get interesting time cuts which allow you to see the two in their old age hearkening back to their tryst it doesn’t stir up much emotion because the dénouement in this film seems massive. Chanel and Stravinsky fight, essentially ending their affair but he has work to finish and stays until he does. She attends his opening and applauds as people now appreciate his work. However, their relationship is over and we know it. We also know they will not fight for it. Similarly, Stravinsky’s wife really doesn’t fight for him to come back but hopes that he will.

It is unseen but he does go back and there is another failing. You have here a triangle with no real tug and pull. He is never truly torn, we assume he will return to his wife who doesn’t struggle to get him back so aside from seeing the great work both he and Chanel create by the fact that they are mutual muses what else is the tale really telling aside from an interesting footnote?

At one point Stravinsky’s wife cites the effect of the affair on the children but we don’t see it. We take her word for it. On occasion we get a glimpse into how she feels but not enough and the fact of the matter is how she feels isn’t that unique either. She loves him, wants success for him, wants him for only her but knows she can only push him so far.

Whether through adding more points-of-view or perhaps exaggerating historical facts or hearsay something needed to be done to up the ante in this film because all through the film there just wasn’t enough conflict and the outcome of the tale was ultimately a bit too predictable.

Some good acting and interesting cinematography is ultimately wasted in service to a script that seems to never want to, and never does, go for the jugular.

This is all a credit to Solondz as basically he has created a work, in which despite the fact that these characters have prior celluloid history this tale manages to be self-contained and is not entirely dependent on the audience’s existing knowledge of the players in the drama.

What is also very interesting is that you have a cast put in a position where they must be very familiar with their previous moment, backstory or perhaps, in a few cases, react to a revelation not made on screen. There are quite a few examples, the first scene of the film between Joy (Shirley Henderson) and Allen (Michael K. Williams) is one that is in medias res in terms of the flow of the conversation. Immediately, we feel there is baggage there, they both come to tears in the discussion but we know not exactly what the baggage is right of the bat but it gets filled in later.

Similarly, Joy and her ex, Andy (Paul Reubens), have an odd late night encounter in a restaurant and nearly the whole scene plays out before our suspicions that Paul is no longer living are confirmed. All the scenes which Henderson and Reubens share are absolutely electric and the height of drama and if it was a two character film it would’ve worked just fine.

Not that moving out of this odd series of visions that Joy has harms the film necessarily. You also have in his own thread Bill (Ciarán Hinds), who in his own way is also a ghost, in as much as he has been considered dead by his ex-wife and she said as much to her children. It is a very Ibsenesque/Bergmanesque touch to have ghosts in this tale both literally and figuratively. What we don’t necessarily know up front, if we are only seeing this film, is what Bill’s crime is for which he is being released from jail and how he connects to the rest of the characters but sure enough the answers all fall into place, the haziness dissipates and things come into focus.

Then there is the family that Bill left behind lead by a matriarch Trish (Allsion Janney) and this thread focuses mostly on how she is not only dealing with her impending marriage to Harvey (Michael Lerner) but also her struggles with her son Timmy (Dylan Riley Snyder) who is about to have his Bar Mitzvah. The path they both take is ultimately the central focus as it closes out the film. The truth is disseminated by Trish but sanitized to an extent and causes some confusion. It throws the ultimate monekywrench into Timmy’s life as he was almost certain of what it takes to be and means to be a man. The nucleus also contains some of the most compelling performances of the film, Allison Janney is once again brilliant and newcomer Dylan Riley Snyder excels dealing with very difficult material and conveying, depending upon the situation, a different level of understanding of the given circumstances.

Much of the discussion with this film deals with the acting because it is a very character-driven piece, which also manages not to be dialogue-driven, again to its benefit. Ultimately, in nearly every scene we know the subtext or at least that there is a subtext being played. One particular example is Bill’s reunion with his older son, Billy, (Chris Marquette) who knew his father wasn’t dead and what he had done. There is palpable tension but there is also restraint and we can fill in the blanks of what they mean to be saying but are not. Even though Bill eventually reveals what he is trying to ascertain by his questions we know there is more to it.

The kudos for the cast could continue to include Helen (Ally Sheedy), the third sister in this tale, with whom Joy seeks a respite from her life. This is the kind of film that is most likely to grow upon second viewing as the first time around you are digging for answers if you don’t know them already but you are definitely focusing on what these characters are and are not saying to each other. It is a film with a social and political message to convey here and there but allows you to take it or leave it if you should so choose. It’s not an indoctrinating vehicle in the end but just a story about its people.

Todd Solondz’s latest is definitely a film worth seeing, if not once, then twice.

This film is one which has a multi-character narrative, the film derives its title from a drug which one particular character (Jessica, Emily Meade) becomes quite fond of. It is also at least the number of significant players there are to keep track of in this film. While that sounds like it may be a daunting task the characters are juggled well and intertwine such that it’s not the clustermug, to borrow a phrase from Stephen King, that one might think. In fact, the handling of these characters is quite deft.

Now one thing that is done to clear up the confusion is that there is significant usage of voice over narration which is provided in very entertaining fashion by Kiefer Sutherland. Typically voice over narration is a crutch, or can be seen as such. What is necessary is to make it a part of the fabric of the tale aside from just simple exposition and this film does that. The narrator who is highlighting the shadowy underbelly of the lives of these privileged kids is a part of the tale showing us what we do not usually see.

One of the more compelling aspects of this film is that it can be foreseen that these juggling characters and narrative threads are headed for a collision course and the journey and the results are equally engaging. Proof of that fact is that there is a point in which we are all indoctrinated enough in the tale that the narrator can be quiet for a spell. He is and the tale does tell itself for a significant portion and becomes rather more visual than it previously was.

Another thing that is refreshing about this film is that even though the film is essentially about rich kids behaving badly and an underworld counterculture it never seems like its being edgy for edginess’ sake. Nothing is gratuitous and everything functions in the film. All the abuse: substance, physical and emotional are on a collision course of destruction.

In that way and in many others it reminded me of James Toback’s underrated gem Black and White. There was a certain grounded feel and sense of realism to that film too as opposed to calculated attempts at provocation. Kudos are most definitely in store for director Joel Schumacher on another job very well done indeed.

The film is also benefits from the interesting dichotomy of the facts that even though there are many characters running throughout it there is a very microcosmic approach to the storytelling as all the characters are linked to or know one another in some way, shape or form. Facts that could blow up the scope of the movie are held very close to the vest allowing much inner turmoil for the actors to deal with such that for everything they say there is something to which they are reacting to or thinking of.

The editing of this film, along with some interesting and admirable production design choices, allow for this mind play to expand and for the story to develop its own momentum after the narrator got it started.

If one were to look at a synopsis of this film and sees it’s about a drug dealer they likely would skim over the rest of it disinterested. This is a film that does have its own inner-logic and brings you into the world of the tale one way or another either for you to observe, empathize or be disgusted by what is going on. What is best is that you will likely be one, all three, or more, through the course of the film. Twelve is a film that succeeds on many levels and manages to engage both intellect and heart throughout. It is a fascinating and compelling study.

Jake Stefanon was no stranger to the drive in theater business. In fact, he owned his first one in Altoona, Pennsylvania in 1949. By 1966, he had purchased the Silver Lake
Drive In while he was operating a few other drive in theaters in the Buffalo area. By 1970, he was able to devote the time and care needed to restore the Silver Lake, and to build it into his dream of a family entertainment complex.

Since he had already been in the business a few years, he decided to apply his accrued knowledge to the Silver Lake. He added a hot dog stand that eventually grew into the
Charcoal Corral, a sit down restaurant. Then, he added a pizzeria and an ice cream parlor. Mini-golf was the next arrival, along with an arcade and finally, an outdoor bandstand that nicely rounded out Mr. Stefanon’s family theme concept.

Jake Stefanon’s son and current owner and operator of the drive in, Rick, has worked in the Silver Lake since he was just fourteen years old. He has seen the many expansions and upgrades given to the Silver Lake, including the second screen addition in 2000, officially making it the Silver Lake Twin Drive In. Along with his wife, Susan, who runs the ticket booth, and his sister Ann who manages the restaurant, Rick manages to keep the many visitors to his fantastic venue very pleased. With an admission price of only $7 for a double feature, plenty of snacks and games to keep the children convivial, it is definitely worth a visit!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo credit

One of the less savory aspects of the independent film scene is the surplus of highly worthy productions that barely get seen beyond the festival circuit. And unless you’re lucky enough to be in the right festival auditorium at the right time, these films will remain unknown.

Michael Mongillo’s “Welcome to Earth” is typical of this scenario. The 2005 production played the festival circuit and it snagged an award at WorldFest Houston, but mainstream theatrical release never came about. The recent news of a DVD release seems like a happy ending to this elusive title’s journey for an audience.

“Welcome to Earth” has a very curious foundation. Extra-terrestrials have made their presence known to the world, and a special summit between our planet’s leaders and the so-called “visitors” is planned in Sri Lanka, with a live global TV broadcast of the event. In suburban Connecticut, however, a group of twenty- and thirty-somethings decide to have a party to celebrate the arrival of new neighbors from beyond the stars.

While much of the party’s conversation is, not surprisingly, about the extraordinary events that impact the world, the celebration’s focus slowly begins to drift towards the various idiosyncrasies, obsessions and disappointments that cloud the lives of the partygoers and their hosts. Relations and love affairs are held up for examination and criticism, long-quiet jealousies and anxieties receive time in the spotlight, and stifling expectations are challenged with a visceral fury.

In the course of the film, the “Welcome to Earth” title begins to take a sharp double-edged meaning: the obvious greeting of friendship to the highly anticipated extra-terrestrials and a harsh smack-in-the-face to the self-possessed partygoers who are forced to recognize that the universe doesn’t revolve around them. It is a daring dramatic effect that Mongillo (who co-wrote the screenplay with James Charbonneau) mines in varying states of sarcastic comedy, droll mind games, aching melodrama and deceptively quiet conversations.

Mongillo also takes a greater dare by placing the film’s least likable character, a hothead who is still stewing over his divorce from two years earlier, as the central focus. The character’s inability to reconnect – he is the only main figure in the film who is minus a significant other – runs the risk of leaving a sour residue on the proceedings (especially in a brief scene where he takes a video game much, much too seriously). Yet Zeke Rippy’s performance plays the risks flawlessly, offering a man who can attract and repel at the same time.

If there is a slight drawback to the film, it comes in its denouement, which cannot be explained without an acute spillage of spoilers. What can be said is that the film is somewhat more generous to its characters than real life might be to people of similar temperaments and situations.

But even with that last-second hiccup, “Welcome to Earth” provides an original and invigorating meditation on where troubled souls fit in the wider scheme of things. The film is a provocative, original and entertaining work of art – and for those coming to it for the first time, welcome to “Welcome to Earth”!

Every now and then, film lovers develop a belated cult for a production that it is brutally clueless yet endearingly inept. Flicks such as “Reefer Madness,” “Plan 9 from Outer Space,” “Valley of the Dolls” and “Showgirls” achieved a level of cultural significance strictly for being so far removed from the basic tenets of artistic quality and intellectual depth. They could be called anti-classics – they have the love of the audience, if not its respect, yet their failures are cheered as if they were pure victories.

Joining this exclusive club is the first cult movie for this century: Tommy Wiseau’s 2003 “The Room.”  Barely acknowledged during its initial single-screen Los Angeles theatrical engagement, “The Room” has gained an astonishing word-of-mouth cred that has helped fuel sold-out midnight movie screenings – and that’s no mean feat, considering the film has been available for years on DVD and through bootlegged downloads. There is even an e-commerce site that offers t-shirts and knickknacks related to this weird offering.

On the surface, “The Room” is fairly simple: a San Francisco love triangle between a banker, his fickle fiancé and the man’s hunky best friend. We know this takes place in San Francisco thanks to travelogue-worthy shots that are inserted between most of the key scenes – and that’s helpful, since that is the only connection between “The Room” and any recognizable piece of reality.

Quite frankly, “The Room” exists in its own sphere of energy. Nothing connected to its characters, dialogue or actions has any parallel with the quotidian considerations of our daily world.  People abruptly appear and disappear without warning, ground shaking pronouncements are made casually before being immediately forgotten, and the web of human interactions are boiled down to sex accompanied with a light jazz soundtrack (for male-female relations) and fisticuffs or underhand football tossing (for all-male bonding).  Conversations consist almost entirely of non-sequiturs, which leads the viewer to wonder if the people of “The Room” suffer from an acute form of Attention Deficit Disorder or if Wiseau (who penned the screenplay) only became acquainted with English the day before shooting began.

There is also the problem of Wiseau’s performance as the betrayed banker whose world collapses in the course of a few days. A vampiric presence with ghostly pale skin and long jet-black hair, Wiseau addresses his surroundings in a sing-song voice laced with leaden Eastern European accent. His emotional range is stuck in neutral, so every line of dialogue – from his playful “Hi, Doggy!” greeting to a bulldog that is inexplicably sitting on a floral shop counter to his gut-wrenching “Everybody betrayed me! I fed up with this world!” – is delivered in the same low-level tone.

If Wiseau is unable to direct himself into a performance, his abilities to harvest genuine acting from his ensemble is far less successful.  Most of the actors appear to have been inspired by the marionettes and automatons of Disneyland’s “It’s a Small World” exhibit – one-note stereotypes (the menacing drug dealer, the busybody mother, the supercilious psychologist, the giddy best friend) that keep hitting their one note key in the vain hope of turning caricatures into characters.

And yet, “The Room” is such a well-meaning goof that it is impossible to hate the film. Wiseau’s endeavor could be viewed as a cinematic equivalent of folk art – primitive in design and execution, yet strangely charming in spite of its obvious shortcomings.  It is a prime example of enthusiasm outrunning talent. Though, ultimately, the film’s continued cult popularity might suggest that Wiseau is getting the last laugh – even if he doesn’t quite comprehend why people are laughing.

Cambridge, Mass. – The Filmshift Festival is coming this October 3rd, 7th, 9th and 10th to the Coolidge Corner Theater, Somerville Theater, and the Performing Arts Connection (Sudbury.) Filmshift is an independent film festival designed not only to entertain audiences, but to spark dialogue about green/sustainable issues as well as the essential role small businesses and local entrepreneurs play in strengthening our nation’s spirit and economy.

Filmshift is named after “The 10% Shift,” a campaign started by a group of local New England entrepreneurs and citizens to encourage consumers to shift 10% of their everyday spending to local business as a way to create new jobs for local communities and to stimulate economic growth. (www.10percentshift.org)

“I am convinced that local small businesses will save our country both from this current economic downturn and from losing our diverse national identity,” said Filmshift director and founder Jeremy Jed Hammel. “Since film crews began popping up more frequently in the Commonwealth, so did discussions about the economic impact movies would bring to bear, locally. The fact is, when it comes to the towns we work and live in, there is no more meaningful impact than the filmmaker who hires locally and hires small. So, we’ve designed FilmShift to highlight those who best exemplify this practice.”

Filmshift will showcase over 20 total films including features and shorts from categories as diverse as: drama, comedy, horror, animated, documentary, and environmental/local issues. Of Filmshift’s just announced first six films there is “Split Estate,” an eye-opening documentary about the effects on local communities of natural gas drilling by large corporations in our Western states. And, “Speaking In Code,” a locally-made documentary about a married couple’s mission to create a techno music scene to Boston. For a complete listing of the first films chosen, please visit www.filmshift.org.

In keeping with its theme, Filmshift has partnered with several local businesses for sponsorship of the festival and prizes for participating filmmakers. These companies are: Powderhouse Productions (Somerville), The Longfellow Clubs (Wayland,) Cambridge Naturals (Cambridge), Harmonix’s Beatles Rock Band, (Cambridge) Final Draft, Inktip, Script Magazine, Jungle Software budgeting, Script Pipeline, ProductionHub, Atomic Production Supplies, Bunch/Casseday, and Wooden Nickel Lighting.

Filmshift will donate 20 percent of gross ticket sales to two local non-profit organizations: Christopher’s Haven, a charity that provides low-cost housing to families of children receiving cancer treatment in Boston, and MetroWest Family Theater, an inclusive community theater group committed to casting roles regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, or the presence of a disability.

About Filmshift’s Founder
Jeremy Jed Hammel is a multiple award-winning filmmaker, (including Best Comic-Related Film from Comic Con 2010 for “The Legacy,”) and has produced projects for The American Film Institute, NBC’s national network show, “Later,” and 2006 Sansevierian Film Festival Best Feature winner, “Fishes.”

Hammel won a Golden Kahuna Award for Excellence in Filmmaking from the 2008 Honolulu Film Festival for his directing/producing/editing work on the music video for “The Night Divine” by international techno-music songstress, Lo-Fi Sugar.

A number of Hammel’s screenplays have won awards in screenplay competitions across the country, including the 2008 Woods Hole Film Festival and the 15th Annual Fade In magazine/Writer’s Network competition. One of his screenplays even made to the Top 15% (out of 5500) screenplays for The Academy’s 2008 Nicholl Fellowship.

Hammel has worked in every area of film/TV production, in nearly every capacity. His crew credits include the critically acclaimed hit series, “ER,” the Student Academy Award-winning film “Intermezzo,” Project: Greenlight script finalist, “The Achievers,” and the Sundance darling, “Next Stop, Wonderland,” which was filmed in Boston.

Hammel’s latest producing project, “The Legacy,” was accepted into the 2010 Cannes Film Festival Short Film Corner and won Best Comic-Related Film at Comic Con 2010. Directed by Mike Doto, has a teaser trailer online at: http://www.seasidepictures.com/thelegacy . Doto’s previous film, the award-winning, “Peace,” is available on iTunes and stars Kurtwood Smith from “Worst Week,” and “That 70’s Show.”

FilmShift has given Hammel the opportunity to bring together his love of film with his desire to make the world a better place.

By 1977, the Rodeo was sold to Cascade/Seven Gables Cinemas, a small chain in Seattle. Cascade/Seven Gables Cinemas later merged with Landmark Theaters which was then bought by Silver Cinemas of Dallas in 1998. In 1978, Cascade cleared the back of the property adding 2 fields, a new snack bar, and a new box office. Current owners, Jack and Cindy Ondracek, have run the Rodeo Drive In with their family since 1986. Now able to hold a capacity of up to 850 cars, this three screen drive in is the second largest outdoor theater venue and one of the oldest family run theaters in the Northwest.

As most modern drive ins, the Rodeo offers a swap meet seasonally every Sunday from 8am until 2pm. Starting the first Sunday after Mother’s Day through the last Sunday in September, the swap meet has been a tradition for many families for over 24 years. With the many bargains you are sure to find there, you could easily afford the $8 admission price for the double feature drive in later that evening. The Rodeo is also one of the few drive in theaters that use digital sound, broadcast through the FM dial of your car stereo. The theater is in operation from mid-March until Labor Day weekend (7 days a week starting in June) with gates opening an hour to an hour and a half before showtime (most shows start at dusk). Don’t forget to hit the snack bar for a delicious burger or the famously popular, Pizza Dog!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo credit

While this is a more sure-handed feature effort from Lisa Cholodenko than the disjointed and awful Laurel Canyon it is not without its serious deficiency. That deficiency to be discussed in full warrants a spoiler alert.

Having said that the major conflict of the film occurs when Jules (Julianne Moore) starts having an affair with Paul (Mark Ruffalo). At one point you think it may just be a one time thing but the film almost revels in showing the multiple relapses that Jules has and her enjoyment of this seemingly inexplicable affair. Your hopes that it will never surface are also quickly dashed.

Now while I will not dwell in the land of film theory in this review and speculate on the potential impact of yet another homosexual character engaging in a heterosexual tryst in a film it is also a plot contrivance that fails in terms of cinematic mechanics in several ways.

First, to simply state it it’s lazy. My major grievance with Valentine’s Day is that even with the sheer number of couples in that film nearly all of them were dealing with infidelity. Oddly enough that film deals with its one homosexual couple in a unique and taboo-breaking way and they have no issues.

While barring some other grievous offense this is the biggest cause of conflict possible it’s not one that had to be introduced just to create drama. While it does allow there to be a very emotional tearing apart and subtle reunion of the family as Joni (Mia Wasikowska) goes off to college one wonders if there would ever be a film that would ever do the opposite and get away with it. Would a man be able to have an affair with another man and be able to repair his marriage, family and have an audience believe it? Doubtful. However, here a gay couple faces the ultimate betrayal and while you want them to resolve things it doesn’t make it any less implausible that they’d manage to stay together.

Yet plausibility is overrated and almost anything can be accepted in a film if it is sufficiently set up but aside from the one cliché I-Hate-You-I-Want-You glance they exchange right before they kiss you don’t see it coming and further more when pressed Jules doesn’t have a satisfactory answer for Nic (Annette Bening) that would explain not only an extra-marital affair but one with the opposite sex. If that is going to happen in homosexual relationship more needs to be cited than a lack of attention. It’s not like flipping a light switch and while sexuality is between the ears and the affair doesn’t make Jules suddenly straight, this kind of thing does take convincing to make sense and it never quite does.

Unfortunately, this affair is a major event and does take up a significant portion of this film and thus this review. Ultimately, the audience is the determinant of meaning so it is the director’s job to convey that meaning clearly so we can see intent. I am quite sure that perhaps there was some symbolic or representational intent with the affair and that Cholodenko didn’t want it interpreted in a possibly negative way, however, whatever message or motivation existed there was not clearly conveyed.

The overall affect the film has on an audience is a positive one. It is a touching and fitting conclusion and Julianne Moore’s apology scene is a tear-jerker as is Laser’s (Josh Hutcherson) final assertion of why they belong with one another. It’s a film that makes it by on the strength of its actors and its finale it’s the journey I would’ve preferred changed somewhat. Perhaps the message lies in the title that the Kids Are All Right even if the adults aren’t but isn’t that an awfully dangerous mixed message?

August 5, 2010

Dear Colleagues:

As many of you may know, there is disastrous news on the front page of The New York Times today. Verizon and other mega-conglomerates have conspired to kill the last democratic medium: the Internet. It is imperative that we all take action immediately to fight for the only true agent of free information and diversity left in this country. Please spread my anti-mega-conglomerate PSA to all your contacts and post it on your blogs. Call the FCC and your elected representatives and urge them to defend net neutrality. Go to Save the Internet and contribute your thoughts. We must use the Internet to speak out on this matter while we still can.

Despite the limits these profit-hungry mega-conglomerates have placed on various media over the years, independent thoughts have triumphed and found another outlet on the Internet. Net neutrality has ensured that no particular type of content is favored over any other. As an individual, I appreciate the Internet’s existence as an instrument of personal expression. As Chairperson of the Independent Film & Television Alliance, I appreciate the necessity of its existence for all of us. But this democratic medium is being severely threatened. Verizon and Google are about to strike a deal which would allow Verizon to provide better, faster service to Internet content creators willing to pay. Thrown to the wayside will be independent artists and businesses that do not have funding. Specifically, a tiered payment-based system guarantees an end to any hope we have of Internet-based television or radio networks that don’t kowtow to these mega-conglomerates. Generally, it guarantees an end to the independent media voices of our country – a country that is supposed to be based on free thought and shared ideas.

We must act swiftly to stand up for the freedoms of speech, expression and information upon which our country was founded.

Very truly,

Lloyd Kaufman
Chairperson of the Independent Film & Television Alliance
President of Troma Entertainment and Creator of The Toxic Avenger

Predicting the future is never an easy thing to do, and looking back at futuristic films from distant eras inevitably gives rise to pinpointing various levels of prescience and absurdity – with the latter usually outscoring in the game.

Antero Alli’s underground landmark “The Drivetime” is somewhat unusual because its future was a mere four years ahead of its 1995 release date. But Alli found himself at the cusp of a significant societal shift, with Internet communications and D.I.Y. media barely beginning to take its first steps. He saw the future and knew something troublesome was coming. Even more chilling was Alli’s ability to predict U.S. government behavior in a manner that ultimately proved to be catastrophic – creating hoax crises to justify to overkill usage of military violence.

“The Drivetime” opens in the year 2023. A librarian named Flux lives in the Nostradamus Islands off the coast what was once the continental United States, which had been destroyed in a 1999 earthquake. A totalitarian government took control after the earthquake and commands all aspects of the mass media. However, there is a matter of missing video footage of a mass riot in Seattle prior to the earthquake – the government wants to locate it before it falls into the hands of its perceived enemies. Flux is sent back in time through a process called the Drivetime to 1999 Seattle, where he needs to locate the missing footage.

Coming back to 1999, Flux finds himself in a warped society. Webcam and instant messaging appears to have displaced telephonic and person-to-person communications – and in one of the film’s funniest moments, a character reacts in shock when a door opens and another person comes out to speak directly to him!

The search for the missing footage trips over a nasty fact that Flux did not previously know: the government of 1999 was manufacturing footage of non-existent riots as a means of establishing law and order. The videographer who shot the genuine riot footage finds himself in quandary: turn the footage over to his government employers, provide it to a pirate online media outlet that will make it freely available to the wider world, or hand it over to the unlikely time traveler.

I first saw “The Drivetime” when it was a new release, and I found its vision of a near-term future to be chilling and harsh.  Looking back at the film 15 years later, I am wildly surprised at how close Alli came to envisioning where U.S. society would progress: substitute the phony Iraqi weapons of mass destruction for the film’s imaginary street riots, insert bloggers and YouTube posting for the film’s pirate web station, and magnify the film’s computer obsessed characters to today’s iPhone/BlueTooth/Tweeting world and Alli saw the future.

For its day, “The Drivetime” was a unique presentation in mixed media formats – BETA SP, HI-8, VHS, C-VHS, SVHS and Super 8 film – and guerrilla filmmaking (a $5,000 budget). Alli brilliantly overcame his financial limits with a surplus of imaginary, particularly in the time travel sequence when audacious psychedelic colors and a deceptively haunting folk lullaby are used to simulate Flux’s absorption into the distant past.

Fifteen years later, “The Drivetime” has not lost its ability to challenge, provoke and (yes) entertain the viewer with its warning of a society speeding down the information superhighway into the wrong direction. It remains a classic of underground cinema and a crowning achievement in the prolific director’s innovative canon.

A hurricane destroyed the original screen in 1951. However, they rebuilt it keeping the original dimensions of 80 feet wide by 54 feet in height and that rebuilt screen is still in use today. The Northfield Drive In was purchased by the Shakour family in 1967 and has stayed in the family since. Today, Mitchell Shakour owns and runs the theater with his wife, Carla, while his son, Gabriel, and daughter, Lili help out at the snack bar and ticket booth.

Securing its place in Hollywood history, the Northfield had the fine distinction of three scenes from the 1999 film, The Cider House Rules filmed there on Halloween day in 1998. With its interesting history, great location, huge playground, and scrumptious snack bar, you might almost forget that you came to the Northfield to see a double feature for the low admission price of $9 for adults and $5 for children. When the sun goes down, and the stars come out into the night sky (and onto the screen), you will be glad you decided to visit this incredible venue!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

A documentary team follows a motley crew of filmmakers as they struggle to complete their inexperienced director’s magnum opus: a horror-musical-melodrama featuring vampires, zombies, and ninjas. Coming this October….

The movie looks great and is filmed well. Technically speaking there is little wrong with the film. While erring on the safe side and not really doing anything new, the cinematography is clean, well-framed, and pretty standard fare with proper, even lighting and good use of color and depth within most shots. The sound mix and overall audio is even and well integrated, and the set decorations and locations are rich, full, and real.

While I enjoyed the story overall, the acting was a little bland. That might have been just due to how the script was prepared, but I never really got invested into any of the characters. Even when the father and son were going at it, none of the scenes really jumped off the screen at me. I’m writing this review after a week of watching the movie and I’m even having difficulty remembering various parts of it that, in most comedies, the beats of the various scenes would generally give you points of reference. While I remember enjoying this film upon first viewing it, the movie wasn’t something that stayed with me. That being said, I can’t really fault the actors, director, or crew for my feelings about this. My blame falls to the script. Maybe if a few of the jokes were a little punchier, or the beats of the film a little more defined, then I might have invested a bit more emotion into the story and characters. One thing that somewhat bothered me too was the inclusion of the jewel-encrusted egg b-plot that, while I can see several uses for, ultimately didn’t really matter to the overall story. In a movie called FATHER VS. SON, generally all the audience wants to see is Grant and his father going at each other, and while we get this, it really doesn’t have the bite that it could have, and generally finds the two working together more often than working against each other.

While the movie has a lot going for it (I actually thought they were going to go in the direction of a DIRTY ROTTEN SCOUNDRELS for a little while when they included the b-plot with the Russian and the bejeweled egg), I think that another pass in the editing room might have been a good idea to just punch up a few of the jokes, and tighten the overall script so it flows a little faster and the beats come a little quicker. While not a bad movie at all, I think they’re audience would benefit from a little more edge.

Synopsis:
Growing up on Staten Island, filmmakers Joshua Zeman and Barbara Brancaccio had often heard the legend of ‘Cropsey.’ For the kids in their neighborhood, Cropsey was the escaped mental patient who lived in the old abandoned Willowbrook Mental Institution, who would come out late at night and snatch children off the streets. Sometimes Cropsey had a hook for a hand, other times he wielded a bloody axe, but it didn’t matter, Cropsey was always out there, lurking in the shadows, waiting to get them.

Later as teenagers, the filmmakers assumed Cropsey was just an urban legend: a cautionary tale used to keep them out of those abandoned buildings and stop them from doing all those things that teenagers like to do. That all changed in the summer of 1987 when a 12-year-old girl with Down syndrome, named Jennifer Schweiger, disappeared from their community. That was the summer all the kids from Staten Island discovered that their urban legend was real.

Now as adults Joshua and Barbara have returned to Staten Island to create Cropsey, a feature documentary that delves into the mystery behind Jennifer and four additional missing children. The film also investigates Andre Rand, the real-life boogeyman linked to their disappearances.

Embarking on a mysterious journey into the underbelly of their forgotten borough, these filmmakers uncover a reality that is more terrifying than any urban legend.

Watch the Trailer! – http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/independent/cropsey/

Follow them on Twitter! – http://www.twitter.com/cropseylegend

Become a fan on Facebook! – http://www.facebook.com/pages/CROPSEY/79662920621?ref=search

More information over at – http://www.cropseylegend.com

New York, NY: Empire 25 Theaters
New York, NY: Angelika Film Center (6)
Washington, DC: E Street Cinema

The film will open in Los Angeles and additional cities
next Friday, July 30th:

Berkeley, CA: Shattuck Cinemas 10
Hollywood, CA: Pacific ArcLight Hollywood 15
Irvine, CA: University Town Center 6 Cinemas
San Diego, CA: Ken Cinema
San Francisco, CA: Embarcadero Center Cinema 5
West Los Angeles, CA: The Landmark 12
Denver, CO: Mayan Theatre
Atlanta, GA: Midtown Art Cinemas 8
Chicago, IL: Landmark’s Century Centre Cinema
Cambridge, MA: Kendall Square Cinema
Royal Oak, MI: Main Art Theatre
Minneapolis, MN: Lagoon Cinema
University City, MO: Tivoli Theatre
Portland, OR: Cinema 21 Theatre
Philadelphia, PA: Ritz at the Bourse
Austin, TX: Arbor Cinemas at Great Hills 8
Seattle, WA: Varsity Theatre

For a full list of theaters, visit: magpictures.com



“GRIPPING. SPINE-TINGLING. It’s the rare piece of political filmmaking that could unite the left and the right. It makes getting rid of nuclear weapons as less a ‘cause’ than an imperative.”
– Owen Gleiberman, Entertainment Weekly

“A hair-raising look at nuclear proliferation from the producers of An Inconvenient Truth.”
– Anthony Kaufman, Wall Street Journal

“A nuclear wake-up call about the real threats we face and the urgent need for action”
– Joe Cirincione, The Huffington Post

COUNTDOWN TO ZERO traces the history of the atomic bomb from its origins to the present state of global affairs: nine nations possessing nuclear weapons capabilities with others racing to join them, with the world held in a delicate balance that could be shattered by an act of terrorism, failed diplomacy, or a simple accident. Written and directed by acclaimed documentarian Lucy Walker (The Devil’s Playground, Blindsight), the film features an array of important international statesmen, including President Jimmy Carter, Mikhail Gorbachev, Pervez Musharraf and Tony Blair. It makes a compelling case for worldwide nuclear disarmament, an issue more topical than ever with the Obama administration working to revive this goal today. The film was produced by Academy Award® winner and current nominee Lawrence Bender (Inglourious Basterds, An Inconvenient Truth) and developed, financed and executive produced by Participant Media, together with World Security Institute. Participant collaborated with Magnolia on last year’s Food, Inc., recently nominated for an Academy Award®, and the upcoming CASINO JACK and the United States of Money. Jeff Skoll, Diane Weyermann, Bruce Blair and Matt Brown are the film’s executive producers.

The Dry Land Official Movie Trailer from Dry Land on Vimeo.

I like the understated, almost webcam-y way that the series was shot, and when the camera does actually move it actually took me out of the scene for a brief moment. It was almost like I had to get my bearings and figure out what I was watching again. The distinctive style was a great way to shoot something like this, and the only criticism that I can really offer on the cinematography is that they should have found a different way to cut away from the webcam scenes rather than just panning the camera up or away. The only other thing I can say is that the lighting in the first couple of episodes could have been better. On a related production note, getting rid of some of the background audio (it just felt a little noisy in the background) would have made the experience more enjoyable. Even though it was produced for the web, scrubbing the “room tone” out of the background would have really allowed me to focus on the characters from frame one.

The acting really stands out in this show. Actresses Zoe Di Stefano (Jessie) and Julie Brett (Lucy) are both charming, witty, and very expressive performers who are able to take a simple shot and really work the camera well. Zoe and Julie have excellent comedic timing and really do the dialogue justice. Speaking of the script, the writers of this series should be commended for writing believable high school girl dialogue. They were able to mix the vibe of a Diablo Cody-like teen girl flick but were able to leave out the ridiculous colloquialisms that she tried to inject in every sentence. The character’s feel real and the leads sell the series with a mixture of vulnerability and sharp tongues.

There are many ways you can spend your time on the internet. Checking out this series should be one of them. If you don’t you’ll probably go to hell or something. So just take the safe route and devote twenty minutes or so to having a laugh and enjoying JESSIE CHRIST.

Nowadays, the 1975 film “Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” is chiefly remembered as a trivia answer: it is one of only two films where the full cast was nominated for Academy Awards. The other film was the 1972 “Sleuth,” a two-man film starring Laurence Olivier and Michael Caine.  The cast of “Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” was half the size of “Sleuth” – James Whitmore was the sole performer on screen.

The film’s Oscar nomination actually created something of a controversy, since “Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” is a filmed record of a stage performance – some naysayers felt that Whitmore didn’t deserve the Oscar nod since he didn’t technically give a film performance.  The hair-splitting was actually nonsensical, since Whitmore’s performance as Harry S Truman was one of the astonishing presented in any medium.

“Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” was written by Samuel Gallu as a tribute to the indefatigable spirit and tenacity that Truman brought to the world.  The show involves Truman recalling a skein of challenges throughout his life, from the World War I battlefields to an encounter against the Ku Klux Klan to the tumultuous highs and lows of his presidency.  A great deal of the show is taken from Truman’s speeches and memoirs, though a fair degree of creative license is also employed (especially in the digs against a certain Congressman from Whittier, Calif., which were clearly planted to amuse the post-Watergate audiences).

Whitmore may have seemed to be an odd choice to play Truman – the physical resemblance, despite a great deal of make-up, was superficial and the vocal impersonation never truly nailed the Missourian’s distinctive manner of speech. Furthermore, putting the full burden of a show solely on Whitmore – a serviceable character actor that never truly carved out a landmark role to call his own – was asking a lot.

But Whitmore delivered with a full-throttle gusto that brilliantly recalled Truman’s spunk, sincerity and intelligence.  Whether doing battle against an insubordinate General MacArthur or calling a music critic to task for belittling his daughter Margaret’s concert performance, Whitmore caught the complexity of Truman’s personality.  Whitmore also overcame an unsubtle stage device of holding conversations with unseen people to expand on Truman’s deep emotional reserve – from his sympathetic conversation with Herbert Hoover regarding postwar European deprivation to a feisty exchange with his equally tough-talking secretary, Whitmore’s Truman comes across as a full dimensional force of energy.

The vibrancy of the stage work was imaginatively captured by nine cameras shooting the film in a real-time single performance before a live audience. “Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” was shot in a videotape process called Theatrovision (a successor to the ill-fated Electronovision process of the 1960s) and was later transferred to 35mm for its theatrical release. (Another trivia point: this is the first shot-on-video motion picture to receive an Oscar nomination.)  The film adaptation was helmed by Steve Binder, who directed Elvis Presley’s stunning 1968 comeback special and later directed the infamous “Star Wars Holiday Special.”

“Give ‘Em Hell, Harry!” has been out of circulation for many years – there was a VHS video release in 2002, but so far there is no DVD version available. I hope the film finds its way back into home entertainment release, because it deserves to be appreciated as more than a tricky trivia question.

Among Orson Welles enthusiasts, the 1948 film version of “Macbeth” has never truly found a great deal of love.  But, then again, the general public was never truly enamored with the film. But while “Macbeth” is admittedly not a classic, it is a fascinating endeavor that shows what can be achieved in the most modest of circumstances.

And, indeed, “Macbeth” had the most modest of roots.  Shot in 23 days on a shoestring budget at Republic Pictures, a B-level studio that specialized in Roy Rogers’ Westerns, “Macbeth” was prestigious only in concept. Blatantly theatrical sets, a mishmash of weird costumes suggesting everything from Vikings to Mongols, and a less-than-choice ensemble called attention to an on-the-cheap production.  When compared to Laurence Olivier’s high-ticket “Hamlet” from the same year, “Macbeth” looked shabby to 1948 audiences.

But today, “Macbeth” can be seen as a bold experiment in low-budget filmmaking. Its harsh deep-focus cinematography by John L. Russell (he would later shoot “Psycho”) and Stygian production design thrusts Macbeth into a hellish environment. Long takes at distorted angles, framed in medium and close-up, emphasized the psychological off-balance of this world, while unexpected fourth wall-breaking techniques (Macbeth thrusting his bloody hand into the camera and later staring directly into the lens while his world swirls in madness) showed a degree of daring unusual for 1940s cinema. 

The most remarkable aspect here was the use of the witches, who are only seen in hideous silhouettes against ashen white fog.  The imaginative use of a grotesque clay doll created in the witches’ bubbling cauldron as a symbol of Macbeth’s rise and fall provides a starling visual element to the film’s supernatural plot line – as well as a censor-evading technique in depicting Macbeth’s decapitation. Welles rewrites Shakespeare to return the witches in the drama’s final moments, with simple yet devastating results.

Welles’ Macbeth never gained the same level of critical acclaim as his Kane, Harry Lame or Falstaff. Yet his brooding presence and state of constant agitation is a stunning dramatic achievement.  Whether hypnotized by his own doubts and jealousies or bullied through the shrill machinations of Lady Macbeth, Welles’ Macbeth emerges as a full-textured force of nature that embodies both strength and weakness – and his eventual collapse into madness creates a throbbing state of tragedy. In a subtle touch, Macbeth’s brief relapse into sanity – the “Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow” soliloquy – is presented with Welles’ voice on the soundtrack while elusive wisps of white clouds sway across the screen.

Welles would later remark about his work: “”My purpose in making ‘Macbeth’ was not to make a great film – and this is unusual, because I think that every film director, even when he is making nonsense, should have as his purpose the making of a great film. I thought I was making what might be a good film, and what, if the 23-day day shoot schedule came off, might encourage other filmmakers to tackle difficult subjects at greater speed. Unfortunately, not one critic in any part of the world chose to compliment me on the speed. They thought it was a scandal that it should only take 23 days. Of course, they were right, but I could not write to every one of them and explain that no one would give me any money for a further day’s shooting. However, I am not ashamed of the limitations of the picture.”

Nor is there any reason for shame. “Macbeth” represents a triumph of artistic imagination over financial austerity. And on its own terms, it is a highly entertaining spin on Shakespeare. It may not be great art, but it is great fun.

This major sponsorship from the winery owned by Academy Award-winning director Francis Ford Coppola (“The Godfather,” and “Apocalypse Now”) is significant validation for the independent, non-profit NH Film Festival, which started in 2001 as a local film expo. Francis Ford Coppola Winery branding will be featured on all 2010 NHFF marketing materials and Coppola wines will be featured at events throughout the festival.

“Francis Ford Coppola Winery is proud to be a major sponsor of the 2010 New Hampshire Film Festival,” said Francis Ford Coppola Winery General Manager and Director of Winemaking Corey Beck. “This is an exciting combination of award-winning wines and award-winning films.”

In addition, NHFF will partner with Francis Ford Coppola Winery and the NH State Liquor Commission to offer a promotional contest through Aug. 1. The contest features a pair of NHFF VIP passes and hotel accommodations as grand prize as well as six pairs of NHFF weekend passes as second place prizes.

“We are honored to welcome Francis Ford Coppola Winery as our lead sponsor for our very special tenth anniversary,” said NHFF Executive Director Nicole Gregg. “This is a remarkable opportunity for NHFF to continue to bring the finest independent film to the Granite State and to New England. The support of Francis Ford Coppola Winery is invaluable.”

Gregg credited Van McLeod and Matthew Newton of the New Hampshire Film & Television Office, and the NH State Liquor Commission for being instrumental in facilitating the Coppola partnership. Peter Emery, vice president and general manager of Southern Wines and Spirits of New England (a Francis Ford Coppola Winery distributor) said NHFF’s status as one of the top independent film festivals in New England made the winery sponsorship and promotional tie-in with the NH State Liquor Commission a tremendous opportunity.

“I think the growth of the New Hampshire Film Festival obviously warrants support of this type and we’re fortunate to be working with Francis Ford Coppola Winery to support the arts,” Emery said. “Because of the tie-in with the film industry, working with the NH State Liquor Commission as a medium to promote the event is a great fit.”

As part of its 10th anniversary festivities, NHFF will also launch a preferred restaurant program this year to highlight the portfolio of Coppola wines, as well as other potential beer and spirits sponsors. Interested sponsors of any NHFF activities should contact Nicole Gregg by email: Nicole@nhfilmfestival.com.

About Francis Ford Coppola Winery
Francis Ford Coppola puts it best, saying the winery is “a wine wonderland, a park of pleasure where people of all ages can enjoy all the best things in life – food, wine, music, dancing, games, swimming and performances of all types. A place to celebrate the love of life.” Francis Ford Coppola Winery is located at 300 Via Archimedes in Geyserville, CA accessed from US HWY 101 at the Independence Lane exit. Among the many unique attractions at the property, Francis Ford Coppola Winery features a wine tasting bar, two restaurants, swimming pools, movie memorabilia, a performing arts pavilion and a park area with game tables and bocce courts. Francis Ford Coppola Winery opens at 11 a.m. daily. For more information, call (707) 857-1400, toll free (877) 590-3299 or visit www.FrancisCoppolaWinery.com.

About NHFF | The New Hampshire Film Festival is a four-day cultural experience set in the fall foliage of picturesque Portsmouth, NH. One of the largest film fests in New England, NHFF draws celebrities, Academy-Award winners, film industry veterans and local film lovers. NHFF offers workshops and discussions for young and new filmmakers to interact with industry pros and to learn the art and business of film. Held the weekend after Columbus Day, NHFF drew an estimated 9,000 attendees and 80 films in 2009. Further information available online at www.nhfilmfestival.com. Advertising and sponsorship opportunities are available by calling 603.647.6439.

Final Film to Make World Premiere at 2011 Sundance Film Festival

LOS ANGELES, CA (July 7, 2010): YouTube joins world famous filmmakers Ridley Scott and Kevin Macdonald in asking people around to world to help them create the first user-generated feature-length documentary film shot on a single day – July 24, 2010. Life in a Day is a historic global film experiment that enlists the global community to capture a moment of their lives on Saturday, July 24 and to upload that footage to www.youtube.com/lifeinaday.

Academy Award-winning director Kevin Macdonald (State of Play, Last King of Scotland, Touching the Void) will direct, bringing together the most compelling footage into a feature-length documentary film. The project will be executive produced by Ridley Scott (Robin Hood, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down) and produced by his company Scott Free Productions. Individuals whose footage makes it into the finished film will be credited as co-directors and 20 of these contributors will be flown to the 2011 Sundance Film Festival for the film’s world premiere.

Life in a Day is one of several efforts by YouTube to push the boundaries of music, art, and now film. YouTube Symphony Orchestra and the recently announced YouTube Play partnership with the Guggenheim are examples of the convergence of online video with traditional arts and Life in a Day takes this effort into the cinematic realm. LG Electronics is supporting Life in a Day as a key part of its long-standing Life’s Good campaign and to support the creation of quality online content that can be shared and enjoyed by all.

The director, Kevin Macdonald says of the project, “Life in a Day is a time capsule that will tell future generations what it was like to be alive on the 24th of July, 2010. It is a unique experiment in social filmmaking, and what better way to gather a limitless array of footage than to engage the world’s online community.”

“Over the past five years, You Tube has changed the way media is created and consumed,” said Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, YouTube’s parent company. “We’re thrilled to give our community the opportunity to work with Kevin Macdonald and Ridley Scott and are grateful to our long-term partner, the Sundance Institute, for their support of this global initiative. I can think of no better place to premiere Life in a Day than at next year’s festival.”

“A vital part of our mission is to support individual storytelling around the globe and to provide a platform for expression and experimentation,” says John Cooper, Director of the Sundance Film Festival. “This is a great way to engage the You Tube community and to also provide Festival audiences with something new and unexpected.”

“LG believes in enriching people’s lives through technology and saw complementary objectives in the Life in a Day project,” says Dermot J. M. Boden, Chief Marketing Officer at LG Electronics. “For LG, this project is a fantastic opportunity to engage with You Tube users on a personal and emotional level that’s both rewarding and enjoyable. This initiative is perfectly consistent with our brand promise of “Life’s Good”!”

Scott Free will work with Rick Smolan, creator of “A Day in the Life” and CEO of Against All Odds Productions, a California-based organization that specializes in the execution of large-scale global projects that combine story-telling with state-of-the-art technology, to distribute cameras to individuals in remote regions of the world in an effort to ensure that the film is as inclusive and representative as possible. To learn more, and upload footage shot on July 24, 2010, please visit www.youtube.com/lifeinaday.

About YouTube
YouTube is the world’s most popular online video community allowing millions of people to discover, watch and share original videos. YouTube provides a forum for people to connect, inform and inspire others across the globe and acts as a distribution platform for original content creators and advertisers large and small. YouTube, LLC is based in San Bruno, Calif., and is a subsidiary of Google Inc.

About Ridley Scott, Producer
Ridley Scott is a renowned filmmaker who has received three Academy Award nominations for Best Director over the course of his distinguished career, most recently for his 2002 film BLACK HAWK DOWN. Additional credits include GLADIATOR, which won the Academy Award, Golden Globe and BAFTA for Best Picture and THELMA & LOUISE, which brought Scott his first Academy Award nomination for Best Director in 1991. Other films include AMERICAN GANGSTER, BODY OF LIES, A GOOD YEAR, the groundbreaking film BLADE RUNNER and the classic ALIEN. He most recently directed the hit film ROBIN HOOD. Scott, along with his brother Tony Scott, is the founder of Scott Free Productions, a company that produces a wide range of film and television projects. In 2003, Scott was awarded a knighthood from the Order of the British Empire in recognition of his contributions to the arts.

About Kevin Macdonald, Director
Kevin Macdonald is an award-winning filmmaker, whose first feature film, ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER, supported by the Sundance Institute Documentary Program, won an Academy Award for Best Documentary in 2000. His second feature, TOUCHING THE VOID, premiered at the Telluride Film Festival in 2003 before becoming the highest-grossing British documentary in UK box office history. Kevin’s first dramatic feature, THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND, starring Forest Whitaker, also premiered at Telluride before winning a BAFTA for Best British Film and Best Adapted Screenplay; Whitaker also won an Academy Award and a BAFTA for his role in the film. Kevin is currently working on his next feature, EAGLE OF THE NINTH, starring Channing Tatum, Jamie Bell and Mark Strong. In addition to being a filmmaker, Kevin is a journalist whose work has appeared in numerous publications including the Guardian, Observer and Telegraph.

About Sundance Institute
Founded by Robert Redford in 1981, Sundance Institute is a not-for-profit organization that fosters the development of original storytelling in film and theatre. Internationally recognized for its artistic development programs for directors, screenwriters, producers, film composers, playwrights and theatre artists, Sundance Institute annually presents the world-famous Sundance Film Festival and has nurtured such projects as Angels in America, Spring Awakening, Boys Don’t Cry and Born into Brothels.

About LG Electronics, Inc.
LG Electronics, Inc. (KSE: 066570.KS) is a global leader and technology innovator in consumer electronics, mobile communications and home appliances, employing more than 80,000 people working in over 115 operations around the world. With 2009 global sales of 55.5 trillion Korean Won (43.4 billion US Dollars), LG comprises of five business units – Home Entertainment, Mobile Communications, Home Appliance, Air Conditioning and Business Solutions. LG is one of the world’s leading producers of flat panel TVs, audio and video products, mobile handsets, air conditioners and washing machines. LG has signed a long-term agreement to become both a Global Partner of Formula 1™ and a Technology Partner of Formula 1™. As part of this top-level association, LG acquires exclusive designations and marketing rights as the official consumer electronics, mobile phone and data processor of this global sporting event. For more information, please visit www.lg.com.

Set in 1862 Kentucky, the film is centered at the small farm of Sarah Anders (Patricia Clarkson).  Her husband is off fighting for the Confederacy, and the tragedy of her young daughter’s death is aggravated by Yankee sympathizers who dug up and vandalized the child’s grave.  She is alone with her 11-year-old son when a five-member squad from the Union Army arrives at her farm to steal her livestock and supplies; in the logic of the Civil War, the families of the rebel troops are also enemies to the Union and, thus, must be punished.

But when one of the Union soldiers is injured in a freak accident on the farm, Sarah finds herself housing these blue-tailed flies until their comrade is able to travel again.  The squad’s captain (Chris Cooper) finds himself attracted to Sarah, despite the fact that she’s made it clear that her sympathies (both emotional and political) lie elsewhere.

“Pharaoh’s Army” is unusual in its depiction of the Civil War’s ravages on the lives of ordinary people.  Forget about Rhett and Scarlett – the muddy, dreary Anders farm and the dreary toil in planting corn and feeding chickens is closer to the rural Dixie reality of that tumultuous era.  Henson’s unadorned screenplay and  Doron Schlair’s cinematography may seem bleak at first, but it brilliantly mirrors the harshness of this environment and the frictions experienced by those caught up in its tumult.

“Pharaoh’s Army” takes a unique approach in putting its focus on a human drama within a wider conflict.  Throughout the film, its characters often wonder what the war is all about: the captain’s farming background puts him closer in kinship to Sarah, while one of his men (a Polish immigrant) doesn’t seem to understand why so many men would sacrifice their lives for the sake of freeing the “nigs.”  Sarah’s ambivalence to her unwanted guests ebbs and flows from hostility to indifference to brief flashes of maternal warmth and then back to frustration-laced anger. Her son – whose occasional narration through an elderly man’s voice of recollection holds the narrative together – is both baffled and upset by the intrusion into his life, and his pilfering of the injured soldier’s revolver early in the film plants the anticipation of a violent climax (the act of gunplay is inevitable, but its results are highly surprising).

In case you are wondering where the title comes from, it is from an Exodus passage cited by a humorless, pro-rebel preacher (Kris Kristofferson in a small but pivotal role that could have snagged an Oscar nomination if the film had any marketing muscle behind it).  The odd title may have doomed the film’s commercial chances – it suggests an epic greatness that has nothing to do with this small, beautifully crafted work of emotional art.

Next year marks the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War, and hopefully “Pharaoh’s Army” will be dusted off and reconsidered as part of this event.  It is a remarkable, mature and powerful production that is in need of rediscovery and celebration.

The first thing I want to address is the acting of his lead actors C.J. Moebius and Michael Ryan (who also happens to be the co-writer of the film). C.J. has the comedic timing and look of a young Ben Affleck (yes that IS a compliment), and Michael reminded me of a more front-man version of Will Friedle. Acting-wise the supporting cast was so-so but certainly not horrible. It is obvious though that the right decision was made when casting the two leads who had to carry the film though. The references and colloquialisms the two bantered about are spot on and were a lot more original than most referential dialogue spoken in most flicks (the jokes had me at a Doug cartoon reference complete with theme song rendition). The story between the two friends, and the subplots around them interweave nicely and everything gets resolved at the end satisfactorily.

The film looks pretty good despite its obvious low budget nature. I really enjoyed the use of varying locations rather than just relying on one location for the office and one for their home. IT was nice to see that the offices they used actually had some production value to them and didn’t just look like the same offices shot from different angles. They were distinctive and felt branded like real places. The cinematography overall is pretty standard, but not sloppy either. The editing is fairly consistent throughout with a few issues towards the end where a few seconds could have been shaved off a few reaction shots. The sound mix was also fairly well done. There weren’t too many times when the any ADR was noticeable, and the music used felt pretty well in tune with the tone of the movie. The only thing that took me out of the film occasionally was the ringers on the guy’s cell phones, which aren’t on any REAL phone in the entire world, and seemed very repetitive over the course of the movie when the story relied on them using their phones.

LAID OFF was one of the funnier indie movies I’ve seen this year so far. The writing and direction of this movie is solid and it is one of the few times where a smaller budget probably helped the film more than hurt it. Great characters, great plot, and great writing. What more could a reviewer as for?

Streisand’s character is typical of her early films: a brassy, indefatigable ball of energy that is not quite as clever as she imagines. Her Brooklyn housewife Henry (short for Henrietta) becomes determined to raise $3,000 to help her struggling cabdriver husband play a commodities market tip that could help finance his stalled college education.  She borrows the funds from a loan shark, but is unable to repay on schedule.  Thus, Henry’s “contract” is passed around several shady operations, where she is expected to work off her debt.

Yet Henry’s indignities create more embarrassment for everyone around her.  Initially required to work as a call girl from her apartment, she accidentally breaks the nose of her first client and drives her second (and last) client to cardiac arrest when her husband returns home unexpectedly.  Her next assignment finds her delivering a package for a pair of mobsters, but her mission goes thoroughly awry when she is pursued through the subways by a police dog.  If that’s not bad enough, she then gets corralled into driving stolen cattle into New York in an RV.  Except the cattle get loose and…

Structurally, this is a bizarre film. The first half of the film puts too much focus on situational comedy (with some dated comedy of a politically incorrect nature). But when the situational contrivances become too forced, the second half abruptly shifts gears with big slapstick chases. While the cartoonish nature of these scenes give the film some much-needed energy and offers Streisand a chance to show her flair for physical comedy, the weird split between the two halves gives the impression that two different screenplays were uneasily grafted together.

Yet if “For Pete’s Sake” never soars, at least it hums along with a cheery, sloppy abundance of goodwill.  To its credit, the film never takes itself seriously – even the cast seems to be struggling to keep straight faces – and Yates somehow manages to tone down Streisand’s larger (and louder) than life screen persona to create a character that is genuinely charming in a light, kooky manner.  Indeed, Streisand seems more relaxed here than in many of her films, and she even allows some larcenous steal stealing from Estelle Parsons as her insufferable sister-in-law and Molly Picon as an unlikely madam (named Mrs. Cherry!). 

The one catch here, though, is Michael Sarrazin as Henry’s husband. The man is good looking, but he is so dull and indifferent that it makes little sense that she would be so enamored with him to the point of risking her own life.

Today, “For Pete’s Sake” comes across like an old-fashioned comedy.  For those who aren’t expecting too much, some entertainment can be mined from its silliness.  But if anyone comes to it expecting huge laughs, it never truly delivers the goods.

*****

Lisa Vandever / Cinekink

Lisa Vandever Interview Part 2

KF: Non-erotic indie filmmakers generally plan to take their films on the film fest circuit or start looking for distribution / VOD options early on in their filmmaking journey.  Do you see this as the common trajectory for erotic / porn filmmakers as well?  If not, what do they usually plan to do with their films? Also, do you think it’s easier for erotic / porn filmmakers to make money from their films than other filmmakers?

LV: A digression… this question sent me into a bit of an existential tail-spin, since it contains some very slippery words that I also use all the time:  porn, erotic and indie.  All of which, if you think about them too closely, don’t really hold any useful meaning.

But to plow on… I don’t really know that’s there a similar, common trajectory for erotic/porn filmmakers.  There’s certainly not the same type of a festival circuit that exists for non-erotic/porn, indie filmmakers.  Occasionally dubbed the “Sundance of sex,” CineKink is the oldest of the sex-focused film festivals and there are several other great ones that have cropped in both the states and in Europe – along with the Feminist Porn Awards in Toronto.  But we’re still few and far between.

For those filmmakers who aren’t working directly with one of the many porn studios – “mainstream” (hmm) and otherwise – the best bet really seems to be to set up one’s own distribution.  So most filmmakers will sell DVDs and, increasingly, downloads from their own websites.

But keep in mind that a top-selling porn DVD will number only in the tens of thousands of units. And the porn industry is so murky as a business – no one can even cite a reliably consistent figure for annual revenues as a whole – it’s hard to say if porn/erotic filmmakers make more money. I would guess that it’s easier to draw a particular audience – and porn consumers are more used to paying for (non-theatrical) content.  There’s also, since there’s not as much emphasis on exclusivity/originality, the opportunity to sell content to what’s known as “secondary producers,” for online distribution.

KF: Do you think there’s anything porn filmmakers can teach other types of indie filmmakers about distribution, marketing, promotion, etc?

LV: I know that when I think of DIY filmmaking, one of the first filmmakers who comes to mind is Tony Comstock, whose wonderful film, ‘Damon and Hunter: Doing it Together,’ played at CineKink a few years back. He and his wife, Peggy, have been producing and distributing explicit documentaries for the past decade – and they regularly top Amazon sales lists for number of DVDs sold. Obviously, they’re doing something right – during a recent distribution/marketing panel I attended, Tony was tweeting me from a sailing excursion through the Caribbean, prodding me to ask the participants how many of them owned a yacht.

Overall, I think Comstock Films exemplifies how many filmmakers on the “porn/erotica” side have—largely through necessity—become proficient in getting their work out there and noticed once it’s been produced.  Rather than waiting on the hope of some distributor picking them up, the need is there to reach out to an audience directly, bringing with it a front-running understanding of all the tools necessary to do so, especially staying on top of reaching out through the internet, including supreme mastery of SEO and finding ways to circumvent the many technical road-blocks that are intended to inhibit sexual content.

KF: Who are the up-and-coming porn filmmakers that we should keep our eyes on?

LV: Not necessarily up-and-coming and overlooking many fine directors… coming from definitely more of a porn mode, since that’s the emphasis of this column, there are several that we’ve featured in ‘Bring It!,’ our adult cinema showcase competition –  our most recent winner, Tristan Taormino, along with Madison Young, Carlos Batts and Courtney Trouble.  Shine Louise Houston, Maria Beatty and Anna Span have also done some amazing work.  And I’d love to see Porno Jim do another movie.

With even more of an emphasis on the narrative drive, my particular soft-spot, while still incorporating explicit sex, there’s Jennifer Lyon Bell, Erika Lust and Ovidie, whose feature ‘Stories of Sexe,’ will be released soon in the US. And again, and though he keeps threatening to retire, there’s Tony Comstock for some beautifully explicit documentary work that focuses on the real-life sex of real-life couples.

KF: What’s the next stop for the CineKink 2010 tour?

LV: We’re still pinning down our dates, but it’s looking like we’ll be up next in Boston, along with appearances in Portland, Seattle, San Francisco, Chicago and DC.  I’d love to work out Austin.  And, fingers crossed, we finally seem to have landed a venue in elusive Los Angeles.

We’re still booking appearances for the rest of the season, which will run through October.  Inquiries are welcome!

KF: What’s one thing a curious filmmaker should know if they’re interested in submitting something to CineKink 2011?

LV: Don’t let the kink part of our name scare you off!  It’s not uncommon for filmmakers to feel their work is too tame for us – though porn garners much of the attention, it typically accounts for a small percentage of the festival programming.  Really, just about anything (see above) celebrating sex as a right of self-expression is fair game. Please send it along!

Our call for entries will go out mid-summer.  If you’d like to subscribe to our list for first notice, the address is: http://www.cinekink.com/list/. You can also keep up with us on Twitter and Facebook.

KF: Well, we wouldn’t think to miss Cinekink 2011. We had so much fun with you in Vegas. Thanks so much for answering our questions, Lisa, and here’s to the 8th year of Cinekink!

End of Interview

******

Our heartfelt thanks goes to Lisa for helping us out with this interview.  We can’t wait to bring Cinekink to Chicago, and we’re already working on a short for Cinekink 2011. We wouldn’t even think of seeing another year of Cinekink pass without being a part of the fun!

The Vineland Drive In and Swap Meet opened on April 15, 1955. Originally, the theater only had one screen and, of course, did not have a swap meet on the grounds.

During the 1980s when most drive in theaters were sadly closing down, the Vineland expanded to four screens, one at each corner of the lot. The theater holds a capacity of up to 1500 cars and is owned by Pacific Theaters. Both the theater and the swap meet, which first began in 1984, are open daily, year round. Movie admission price is only $8 (kids aged 11 and under are free)!

All four screens at the Vineland Drive In were recently upgraded to permit the use of Technalight technology. The Vineland is still seeing a lot of business today, especially on the weekends. The entrance line starts forming at around 6:45pm but the box office generally opens around 8pm. Grab some snacks at the concession stand or bring your own and enjoy your double feature under the stars!

Click here for video of the Vineland Drive In courtesy of The Southern California Drive In Movie Society

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

I sincerely hope that many aspiring filmmakers in pursuit of comedy production will seek out Cliff Cronan and Michael Angelo Centeno’s award-winning 2002 short “The Lucky Penny,” which returned to big screen circulation in last week’s Ideat Village Film Festival in New Haven, Connecticut. Made on a $300 budget, this 15-minute film represents one of the most inventive and delightful indie comedies of the past decade.

One reason why “The Lucky Penny” works so well is that it draws its inspiration from a rich source: the landmark silent comedies of Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, Harold Lloyd and their 1920s peers.  Cronan and Centeno use a black-and-white silent film approach, with a vibrantly funny piano score by Henry Iglesias to complement the fun. Without a reliance on dialogue (a crutch that too many indie films use, often badly), “The Lucky Penny” requires inventive visual comedy to score its points.

Cronan is cast as Luckless, a Keatonesque figure who seems out of touch with the basic ebb and flow of the world.  His initial appearance, where he attempts to gain entrance to a strangely stubborn elevator and winds up tumbling head-first down a staircase, sets him apart as a wonderfully oddball character.

Despite his discovery of the eponymous coin, Luckless manages to live up to his name. His attempt to fix a broken stiletto heel for a pretty female pedestrian is interrupted when he sits her on the trunk of an automobile that takes abruptly motors away – with the fair lady as its unlikely passenger!  An attempt by Luckless to exact revenge on a mean-tempered superintendent results in his accidentally swatting a cop with a broom.  A second cop joins in a chase, and the chaos of the day gets wildly out of hand.  Luckless winds up scaling and falling from an apartment building, disrupting a kiddie soccer game, rolling down a huge sandy hill and crossing paths with a pair of gun-toting bank robbers.

Cronan, a Hollywood stuntman, brings a remarkable physical grace to his work.  Not unlike Keaton, he presents an unpredictable quality that makes every outlandish pratfall and crash seem utterly natural.  His aforementioned fall down a steep hill is a true take-your-breath-away scene, with Cronan spilling in perfect (yet seemingly uncontrollable) circular rolls that become larger and more frenetic with each revolution.

While clearly gaining inspiration from the best of silent comedy, “The Lucky Penny” establishes its own distinctive personality.  The presence of a friendly Amazonian woman who aids Luckless during his pursuit by the cops is a wonderfully off-kilter sight gag, while the bandits (played by Centeno and Ryan Johnson) make their presence known by unexpectedly cartwheeling into the movie. And the beautiful Cheryl Watkins, as the appropriately distressed damsel who accidentally gets hijacked on the back of a moving car, gamely offers herself as a delicious sight gag.

“The Lucky Penny” inspired a 2004 sequel that brought back the characters of the original short. Since then, however, Luckless and his friends have been off the screen – Cronan has pursued a music career and his collaborator Centeno has no additional credits cited on his IMDb page. However, both “The Lucky Penny” and its sequel are on YouTube, and the return of the original short to festival viewing should help it find a new audience while offering inspiration on the correct way to create a wonderful comedy film.

As co-founder and director of CineKink, Lisa Vandever curates and oversees the annual film festival as well as a touring series, both designed to promote and showcase works that encourage the positive depiction of sexuality in film. A producer and consultant with over twenty years of experience in film and television, Vandever has directed programming for a regional network of public television stations, worked as a development executive for two New York-based independent production companies, and served as an associate producer for the Sundance award-winning feature film, “Songcatcher.”  Vandever holds an MFA in Film and Video from Northwestern University and a BA in Telecommunications and Film from the University of Oregon. She is currently producing and directing her own documentary, “A Public Voyeur,” a profile of photographer Barbara Nitke and her landmark legal challenge against the federal government’s CDA obscenity law.

Meeting Lisa is one of the best things that happened to us this year (and it’s been a really good year).  We had a blast hanging out with her at Cinekink Vegas.  Her deep knowledge of film and sexual politics combined with her film fest organizer’s POV makes her a perfect fit for PEEP SHOW.

Lisa at Cinekink Kick-off

LISA VANDEVER INTERVIEW PART ONE

KING IS A FINK: First of all, congratulations on a successful CineKink Vegas showing.  We understand that CineKink is in its 7th year.  Can you tell us a little bit about why and how you started CineKink?

LISA VANDEVER: Thanks so much!  Vegas was a lot of fun – and it was especially enjoyable to have you and a few other filmmakers along for the tour.  It makes a big difference to me as an organizer, and to the audience, to have the creators in attendance for our screenings.

When CineKink came into being, I had recently stumbled into a personal involvement in S/M – and was meanwhile toiling away in indie film development.  I originally became involved in co-founding and helping produce a previous event, the New York S/M Film Festival, for a local S/M organization – and the experience of having everything all come together and actually happen, after years of giving notes on scripts that would never see fruition, was SO incredibly exhilarating.

It was also a delight to have found a way to combine two of my primary interests… film and sex. (Hmm… interesting.  Note that I said “film” first.)  I noticed that the scripts I was drawn to and the films I sought out at festivals generally had a strong sexual component to them. When the name “CineKink” popped into my head one day, I promptly ran home and snagged the domain.  I originally contemplated using it for a production company devoted to NC-17ish type film projects, though didn’t quite have the nerve to push forward with that in a tightening indie market. I also really loved the idea of an expanded festival that would cover and celebrate a wider gamut of sexuality – and moved forward with that instead.

KF: We know that running a festival isn’t easy.  What are some of the behind-the-scenes tasks that you do that we might not know about?

LV: Most of it’s not all that different from producing a film – much is just figuring out who you need to contact to make such-and-such happen. Or, more often, just doing it yourself.  There’s securing funds (or not), finding a location, sorting through and selecting content, tedious details like insurance and rentals, pulling together a crew, wondering why the hell you ever thought this was a good idea, somehow making it to the actual thing itself… then surviving and hopefully celebrating.

What’s perhaps different is the marketing component.  A great deal of effort goes into finding an audience and trying to get them into the damn seats.  Until recently, filmmakers haven’t had to put so much thought into that part – though it’s certainly apparent at a festival screening when a filmmaker has been working at engaging a potential audience beforehand.

Also possibly not apparent is how much thought and time actually goes into selecting the films for the festival.  And how hard it can be declining a particular project.  No matter how good it might be, there are often times when a film doesn’t match up with the themes that are coming together in one season.  Or there’s something else too similar.  Whatever the reason, the filmmaker is usually going to take that as a personal rejection of their work.

KF: We saw a wide range of topics and film styles explored at CineKink Vegas.  What are you looking for in terms of movies for CineKink? Are there any topics that might get a movie kicked off the list?

LV: Just as with any festival, we’re looking for films that tell a good story, that engage, that communicate.  Our focus, though, is on celebrating and exploring sexuality – be it through explicit means or not. We generally look for works that are sex-positive, with an emphasis on “consenting” and “adults.” Striving to create a space that encourages a conversation about sex, desire and pleasure, our topics have run the gamut from BDSM and fetish, to swinging, polyamory and non-monogamy, to gender-bending and just general issues of sexuality.

KF: Obviously CineKink is a kinky film festival and, therefore, attracts certain types of entries. Do you think there’s something unique about filmmakers who make kinky movies as opposed to other types of movies?

LV: It’s hard to say. For many of our filmmakers, the project that ends up at CineKink is just one kinky and/or explicit endeavor of a varied portfolio.  Others have made a conscious decision to focus on sexuality as their primary subject – and still others, because there remains such stigma around sex and porn, have a created a separate pseudonymous identity for such projects, so they’ll exist outside of their mainstream and/or corporate work.

What is unique is the type of audience you’ll find at CineKink. One of my favorite things is the sense of community that comes together when a filmmaker is able to attend our screenings and directly connects with a smart, open-minded and generally very appreciative audience.

KF: Can you share any humorous stories about (anonymous) entries that didn’t quite fit what you were looking for (either too “out there” or “too tame”)?

LV: Because not everyone grasps the consensual aspect of S/M, we’ll frequently get films that simply combine sex and violence.  Our first year we received a wonderfully produced short about a man who lured a fetching young woman back to his apartment, bludgeoned her to death, then had his way with her.  I was a little terrified when the filmmaker emailed, asking what we’d thought of the film – but he was terribly sweet-mannered and didn’t try to murder me at all when I explained why it hadn’t been selected.

On the flip side, a good quarter of our Withoutabox submissions contain virtually no reference to sex whatsoever.  I imagine this is just people blindly submitting to festivals, guidelines be damned.  My favorite was the filmmaker who wrote asking for an entry waiver for an animated short – for children! He would have had a nice surprise if we’d actually programmed it.

KF: If this ever happens again, Lisa, please tell us you’ll add the film. And call us so that we can be present for the screening.

Cinekink Vegas: UNLV Prof. Lynn Comella, Julie & Jess (King is a Fink), Lisa Vandever, Tess & Dee (Tied Up Events) & Sexologist Carol Queen

***End of Part One***

Big thanks to Lisa for answering our questions. In the second half of her interview, in which:

• One of our questions sends Lisa into “a bit of an existential tail-spin”
• Lisa shares her thoughts on what non-porn indie directors can learn from indie porn directors
  
• The future of Cinekink is revealed

So…are you ready for Part 2?

UNDERTOW (directed by Javier Fuentes-Leon) and MAO’S LAST DANCER (directed by Bruce Beresford) tied for the HBO Audience Award Best Narrative Feature

WASTE LAND (directed by Lucy Walker) won the HBO Audience Award Best Documentary Feature

COME ON DOWN (directed by Joseph Laraja) won the HBO Audience Award Best Short Film

SHE’S THE FOX (directed by Cameron Sawyer) won the Student Film Grand Jury Prize (sponsored by Final Cut Pro User Group)

As previously announced, the 2010 Filmmaker on the Edge Award was given to writer/director Kevin Smith (CLERKS, MALLRATS, CHASING AMY, DOGMA, JAY AND SILENT BOB STRIKE BACK, JERSEY GIRL, CLERKS II, ZACK AND MIRI MAKE A PORNO, and most recently, COP OUT). Academy Award winning actor Tilda Swinton (EDWARD II, ORLANDO, BURN AFTER READING, MICHAEL CLAYTON, and the soon to be released I AM LOVE) received the Excellence In Acting Award and the Faith Hubley Memorial Award (sponsored by the MALLRD Foundation) was given to the Academy Award winning directing team of Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman (COMMON THREADS: STORIES FROM THE QUILT, THE CELLULOID CLOSET and the soon to be released HOWL).

The Provincetown International Film Festival (PIFF) is dedicated to showcasing new achievements in independent film and honoring the work of acclaimed and emerging directors, producers and actors. PIFF is equally devoted to expanding the audience for independent film and to serving our Provincetown community by filling the void for annual film programming and reflecting the community’s rich diversity in our selected films and honorees. An integral part of PIFF’s mission is to contribute to the economic and creative vitality of America’s oldest art colony.

Presenting Sponsors of the 2010 festival were Art House Cinemas, Crown & Anchor and HBO. Other Sponsors of this year’s Festival include Amtrak, Bank of America, Cape Air, Icelandair, Jacob’s Creek Wines, Kodak, Perrier-Jouet, Peroni, SVEDKA, San Pellegrino

PIFF 2010 was also supported by grants from The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, the Massachusetts Cultural Council and the Provincetown Tourism Fund.

http://www.ptownfilmfest.org

Luci loses her job and times are tougher than ever. Unable to sleep, she begins an after-hours journey embarking on a series of strange encounters as she wanders the dark metropolis. During one unforgettable night, Luci comes face to face with her innermost fears and desires as she tries to find her way back home.

When Casey moved Kevin to the country, she hoped hed find peace and quiet; instead he found new things to worry about: zombies, hitchhikers, and chocolate cake.

What went wrong? For starters, Broadway director Harold Prince was unsuited to take this strongly theatrical Stephen Sondheim-Hugh Wheeler creation into a cinematic adaptation – his only previous film directing was the obscure 1970 “Something for Everyone.”  The innovative staging on Broadway gave way to quotidian filmmaking, turning a magical piece of theater into an ordinary movie.

But even if Prince had the experience and comfort level to helm the film, a reworking of the property mistakenly redirected its setting from Sweden to Austria. While this was done to save money, it created a pull-out-one-thread scenario that wound up reconfiguring the Broadway tapestry: songs were cut to fit the shifting locale, an on-stage Greek chorus-style observation was removed, and new (and inferior) arrangements were created in an attempt to make this version stand on its own. By the end of the film

The result was not as bad as many detractors would like to imagine: the film’s visually opulent style (the costume design earned an Oscar nomination), an intelligent use of the gorgeous Austrian countryside and the presence of beloved reliables Hermione Gingold and Diana Rigg gave the film a degree a class and panache that many 1970s musicals lacked. Even Taylor, despite the distraction of her weight woes, managed to offer a genuinely touching performance as an aging theater icon unable to find her emotional footing in her maturing years.

But at the same time, the film earned its demerits at many levels: 24-year-old Leslie-Anne Down was far too mature to be taken seriously as a 17-year-old virgin, while Len Cariou, repeating his Broadway role that was pegged for Finch, failed to bring much charisma to the screen (a unique problem for the actor, who never truly found a film niche).  Prince’s direction often seemed nervous and unimaginative – what should have been the film’s crowning moment, ensemble rendition of the “A Weekend in the Country,” is presented with slovenly editing that blunts the song’s speed and wit.

Yet “A Little Night Music” is primarily recalled for another song, “Send in the Clowns.” Despite claims of dubbing, it appears that Taylor took a game crack at the classic tune.  And while her unsteady vocal abilities fell miles from the crystal-clear lyricism of the famed Judy Collins rendition, she managed to plumb the song’s darker corners and turn it into an unexpectedly bitter denunciation of self-made illusions.  Taylor’s “Send in the Clowns” was not an anthem of hope, but an admission of defeat – I am unaware of any similar consideration of the much-performed song. Within the context of her interpretation of the role, it is a daring revisionist interpretation.  Contrary to popular sneering, the real pity was not the tone of the Taylor rendition, but the sad reality that the rest of the film could not dare to attempt that level of risk, let alone succeed.

A sewing shop? No.

A tap shoe repair? Wrong again.

A fantastic and amazing flying trapeze artists of the world showcase? Not even close.

Did you guess an amusement park AND a drive in?

Do you know what I like in a business? I like when a business comes right out and tells you exactly what to expect from them in their business name.

Amusement Park Drive In is a fairly new establishment, having been built in 2004 and opened in July of 2005. Owners Riley and Vickie Cooke put it together by using the screen, marquee, and sign from the Park Drive In located in Cody, Wyoming that was unfortunately closed in 2003, after being open since 1946. They project movies onto both sides the rebuilt screen. One side’s projection booth is a 1909 caboose, the other side’s projection booth is a fully restored 1938 circus truck!

The Cooke’s former career in the carnival industry make for interesting additions to this drive in. In 2009, they built a Herschell Little Dipper steel roller coaster around the entire screen. Playground? Who needs a playground? At Amusement Park Drive In, you get the aforementioned roller coaster, a ferris wheel, and the Outlaw Race Car ride. After all of that excitement, you can then enjoy pizza that is made fresh daily by Vickie Cooke and delivered directly to your car while you watch your double feature!

I am impressed that Amusement Park Drive In took the sad demise of a piece of Americana in Wyoming and turned into an opportunity to showcase different types of Americana in Montana. All for an admission price of only $7 for adults and $5 for children! I have always been fascinated by Montana and wanted to visit, if and when I do get there, Amusement Park Drive In is definitely on my list of places to see!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

Courtney and George take us into a world inhabited by people with severe physical disabilities who have been relatively alienated by the world outside their apartments or group centers. Typically they have to deal with not only their own handicaps but also the scorn and derision of the average people on the street. What the directors of this documentary do however is two-fold. First they show you the world that these people have carved out for themselves. They show a world of love, laughter, heartache, longing, and sometimes sadness. But rarely do any of these people come off as angry, bitter, or resentful of their situations, in fact many of them seem to embrace their lot in life and life like everyone else. They have setbacks, but that doesn’t stop them from falling in love, getting married (or divorced in some cases), and going out to shows. The other half of what this movie shows is the camera flipped on us, the general populace. They take pictures of our reactions to them, our stares and ultimately our shame. They also turn the cameras on each other, ultimately bringing out each of their unique personalities and standing in a stark happy contrast to how they are viewed publicly.

The lens is focused on the relationships of Courtney and her subjects. At almost no time does the POV turn on the directors for their opinion, or intrude on their lives. They merely report what they see, and focus on the myriad faces behind their own cameras. We see the world in a flutter of stills from their eyes. We see pictures of their home-lives, their loved ones, and the people and places they see everyday on their travels. When Courtney goes to try to find a space to showcase this artwork, someone makes the comment of “who would want to see that”. They saw the art as depressing. When we see the gallery they finally end up with, and all the photos hung on the wall, if could be argued “who WOULDN’T want to see that?”. Not only were many of the pictures genuine works of art, but generally showcased the jovial nature of these people that is generally hidden from public view, either through our own apathy or due to their impairments.

The directors certainly took an interesting subject that would make many people uncomfortable and turned it into a snapshot into the lives of who aren’t living with handicaps, but living despite their handicaps. It’s a film that asks the viewer not to think, but to feel, something which is fairly uncommon in most films.

This film, shot beautifully by documentary veteran Albert Maysles (The Beales of Grey Gardens), gives glimpses into the hearts of various people and groups. It gives a funny understanding at the inner workings of today’s Roman Catholic Church, showing how they order silence of their flock whom they deem inappropriate, citing their voluntary vow of obedience as the only real reason why they should obey. It is the ecclesiastical equivalent to a parent telling a child not to do something because “I said so”. The movie looks into the center of the gay and lesbian community showing that they want to be a part of the Catholic faith, and that they feel excluded from that part of society. It even looks at the general populace who ask Sister Gramick how she can maintain her faith in the church despite their actions against gays and lesbians. It also shows the tireless efforts of this woman and the friends and family that surround her to bring understanding and peace to an argument that has raged for well over two thousand years. Even when faced with people who vehemently disagree with her viewpoints, they still respect her enough to pray with her (check out one scene in particular where Sister Gramick has a discussion with a flustered picketer, only to end up saying the “Our Father” prayer with him minutes later).

The documentary isn’t very intrusive to the viewer. It doesn’t follow Sister Gramick everywhere and certainly seems to keep a respectful distance even to her home life. It does the typical documentary thing where it shows the subject from a very young age and follows her to where she is now. While a very predictable style of film, it also leaves a mystery or two for the audience to ponder. One little bit of information that is asked multiple times but never given is Sister Gramick’s actual sexual orientation. Rather than come out as straight or as a lesbian she instead attempts to focus on the issues, maintaining distance from any personal identity feelings she might have about the matter.

All throughout the film we see a many sides to the Catholic church, but the best side we see is Sister Gramick. She shows an understanding and humor of modern times that is generally not shown by what is generally considered an antiquated institution. She embraces old rituals with new ideas and seems to get along with people all over the world both young and old. The biggest complaint I had about the documentary as a whole was that I would have liked to have seen her journey come to some sort of an end. We don’t know whether or not Cardinal Ratzinger (now the current Pope) read the book and note she left for him, and we certainly don’t know of any further price she has paid for her years of outcry against church doctrine and policy. An extra ten or fifteen minute wrap-up at the end would probably have made this a near-perfect documentary.

Production is currently underway on the feature film The City of Gardens, which is the 1980s story of a young American surfer, wrongfully accused of cocaine trafficking and sent to prison. Production has wrapped photography in Lima, Peru and will continue in Los Angeles.

The intense action drama and coming of age story stars John Robinson (Lords of Dogtown, Transformers, Elephant), Alex Meraz (The Twilight Saga: Eclipse and New Moon), Johnny Lewis (Sons of Anarchy, The Runaways, AVPR: Aliens vs. Predator – Requiem), Michael DeLorenzo (A Few Good Men, Not Forgotten, Resurrection Blvd), Deborah Unger (White Noise, The Hurricane, Angel and the Bad Man, The Game), James Remar (Red with Bruce Willis, Gun with Val Kilmer, Pineapple Express, 2 Fast 2 Furious) and Grant Bowler (Killer Elite with Robert De Niro, Jason Statham & Clive Owen, True Blood 3rd Season, Ugly Betty). The City of Gardens is directed by Camilo Vila (18 Wheels of Justice, Resurrection Blvd), who wrote the script with Monty Fisher. Monty Fisher and Alicia Rivera Frankl (Gettysburg, Babysitter, The Mask of Zorro) are producing alongside co-producer Rami Rivera Frankl. DragonTree Media president Rami Rivera Frankl is in discussions for Domestic and International Distribution. Production is currently casting the role of Wayne’s (John Robinson) mother.

The action drama, The City of Gardens, follows a blond Californian surfer, Wayne Montgomery (John Robinson), who is a fun loving beach bum escaping the influence of his wealthy and powerful father (James Remar). Wayne leaves his home in Beverly Hills for the enchantment of exotic Peru. Wayne’s carefree lifestyle and love affair with his beautiful girlfriend, Maritza, (introducing Anahi De Cardenas a Peruvian actress), ends when he is framed during a political uprising. Framing turns into extortion in the sadistic prison.

In the nightmarish prison, Wayne finds himself surrounded by a group of political activists and social misfits, including a schizophrenic who believes he is Jesus Christ (Grant Bowler) and an Icelandic devotee of Krishna, Jorge (Johnny Lewis). Wayne is forced to share a mattress with the animalistic beast that everyone calls Nicaragua (Alex Meraz) which leads to a confrontation between them.

In a desperate attempt to gain freedom, Wayne meets with Consul Powers (Debra Unger) whose hands are tied by the false drug charges. As Wayne’s naivety dissipates, another nemesis, the power hungry Lt. Gutierrez (Michael DeLorenzo), moves to break Wayne´s spirit, torturing him to extort money from his family. Left with few options, Wayne adopts a new ethic – engaging the Peruvian activists, sharing his gifts with them and learning the importance of faith through his sympathetic friend, Jorge (Johnny Lewis). Wayne challenges Lt. Gutierrez’s authority, confronting the depravity of corruption and abuse with his newfound spirit and courage. Wayne´s confrontation with Gutierrez propels the story to its final climax.

Monty Fisher’s Four Fish Films endeavors to develop and produce feature films, focusing especially on the cultures of both North and South America.

DragonTree Media, founded by CEO Alicia Rivera Frankl and President Rami Rivera Frankl, specializes in developing successful entertainment properties for the mainstream market with a multi-cultural awareness. Rami Rivera Frankl is represented by Montana Artist Agency. DragonTree Media has several projects in development including Gitano, Dead and Kicking and The B-Let Report to name a few.

Websites:
http://www.thecityofgardens.com
http://www.fourfishfilms.com
http://www.dragontreemedia.com
IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1652361/
TWITTER: http://twitter.com/cityofgardens
MYSPACE: http://www.myspace.com/thecityofgardens
FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/thecityofgardens
YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/user/thecityofgardens

Now in its 16th year, the Palm Springs International ShortFest is renowned worldwide for the extraordinary community of filmmakers it attracts, and for the quality and scope of its programming. Designated by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences as an Academy Award® qualifying Festival and accredited by the International Short Film Conference, the Palm Springs International ShortFest and its Short Film Market, are the largest and most prominent short film showcase in North America.

“It’s an unbelievable honor to have the opportunity to bring THE POND to the Palm Springs International ShortFest. Having just recently finished the film, I couldn’t imagine a better place to reveal it to audiences for the first time than the center of the short film world,” said filmmaker Dan Hannon.

THE POND is a moving and surprising story about a young woman who makes a discovery for which no one could ever be prepared. The film was shot entirely in the picturesque state of New Hampshire and represents the directorial debut of writer Dan Hannon, who also penned the original screenplay.

“At the core of this little movie is a grand notion that the universe is accomplishing amazing things right under our noses,” said Hannon. “The film’s conclusion is much more of a leaping off point than it is an ending, and will hopefully leave the audience wondering what’s going to happen next,” he added.

Joining the writer/director are the recognizable on-screen talents of Alicia Witt, currently on NBC’s “Friday Night Lights,” David Morse, most recently seen in 2010 Academy Award® Best Picture THE HURT LOCKER, and Todd Rotondi, who received recognition as Jack Kerouac in 2010 Sundance Film Festival hit HOWL. The powerful story also attracted off-screen talents including producer Francine DiChiara, cinematographer Jendra Jarnagin and composer Justin R. Durban.

The 2010 Palm Springs International ShortFest takes place June 22-28 in Palm Springs, CA. The complete schedule will release on June 13 and tickets go on sale June 15. To learn more about the festival, visit www.psfilmfest.org.

For more information about THE POND, and to view a teaser of the film, visit www.thepondmovie.com.

Yes, “The Alamo” is far from perfect.  Its fidelity to historical accuracy is weak, the insertion of mini-speeches extolling democratic principles have a tinny ring, and more than a little extraneous footage could have hit the cutting room floor (particularly the comic relief efforts of the Tennessee mercenaries and the extended sequence involved a distressed Mexican damsel).

But if one looks beyond those flaws, what remains is an old-school work of surprising power and dignity.  Wayne does not wrap “The Alamo” in a good guy/bad guy brawl. Indeed, the film goes out of its way to ensure the Mexican people are not viewed as villains or inferiors – the Mexican characters are given a social equality to their U.S. counterparts, and the ability of Santa Anna’s soldiers receive admiring praise from those within the besieged Alamo.

Instead, “The Alamo” questions how far people will go to fight for the preservation of basic liberties. This may not have been the genuine underlying element of the actual war for Texas independence, but in the context of this production it raises an intellectual challenge that many people are not comfortable in addressing. One of the film’s astonishing scenes is a spin on Col. Travis’ legendary “line in the sand” challenge, when the surviving members of the Alamo defense stood beside him with the full knowledge that they faced certain death if the battle continued longer. There is no actual drawing of the sand line in the film, but the man-by-man flow from an exit convey to a wall of defenders is a rich visual image.

Indeed, much of “The Alamo” is visually striking. (I imagine that it was even more memorable in its original Todd-AO 70mm theatrical presentations.)  For a novice director, Wayne had an uncanny ability to frame massive battle maneuvers and keep the pace of action scenes flowing.  The final siege is one of the most emotionally invigorating battle sequences ever put on film, with crisp editing and the intelligent movement of actors amidst the noise and chaos of the collapsing defenses.

Extra praise should be added to Dimitri Tiomkin’s score, which covers the range from Appalachian folk to flamenco to stirring military marches to the uncommonly beautiful ballad “The Green Leaves of Summer.”  “The Alamo” is rarely cited among Tiomkin’s best work, but it brilliantly highlights his musical versatility.

Wayne reportedly wanted to only have a small role in the film, but his box office draw required that he take a front-and-center role.  He made a vigorous effort to keep his portrayal of Davy Crockett more reactive than proactive in his scene, and he clearly cedes many of his scenes to the more extroverted performances of Laurence Harvey’s Col. Travis and Chill Wills’ raucous sidekick.  Yet it is impossible for him not to dominate the film with his legendary presence; no matter who is in the scene, your eyes inevitably shift to Wayne (the scene where Richard Widmark’s Jim Bowie mourns his slain wife is dominated by Wayne’s stoic yet somber gaze at his suffering friend.) Wayne’s character’s slaughter becomes doubly tragic, as the ultimate film hero suffers the cruelest of fates by being snuffed out before our eyes. 

A crueler fate was suffered by “The Alamo” itself.  The film ran significantly over budget, and its healthy box office return was not enough to make its initial release a profitable endeavor.  Wayne invested a great deal of his own money into the production and was forced to sell his share to United Artists in order to remain financially solvent; as luck would have it, the film wound up in the black only after Wayne sold his portion of ownership.  The film’s unsubtle Academy Award campaign also created more damage, particularly Chill Wills’ advertising campaign that became something of an industry legend for sheer crassness and cluelessness.

Yet if one strips away the side stories and sympathetically looks beyond the problems, “The Alamo” emerges as a stirring work of entertainment.  If anything film is deserving of a second look, this is it.

Madison Young Interview Part 2

KFINK: What are some of the behind-the-scenes tasks involved with erotic filmmaking that other indie filmmakers might not know about?

MADISON: I ask the performers who they would like to work with and inquire about their sexual fantasies so I can fit those into the script.  We also discuss things like STI testing, safer sex needs, sex toys that they have wanted to try, what their lube preference is, and if they have latex allergies (so we know what kind of condoms to have ready for them).  Preshoot we gather props, enemas, vibrators, toys, baby wipes (to wipe up fluids), bottled waters (to replenish fluids), douches, sponges (in case any of the models get their period on set), and any implements that might be used on a bdsm set like rope, cuffs, and collar.  Most of the behind-the-scenes tasks specific to erotic film making really has to do with finding the cast that has the right chemistry together and creating the most erotic and comfortable space for those characters to open themselves up intimately and share their sexual selves with their collaborative partner and the camera.

KFINK: Non-erotic indie filmmakers generally plan to take their films on the film fest circuit or start looking for distribution / VOD options early on in their filmmaking journey.  Do you see this as the common trajectory for erotic / porn filmmakers as well?  If not, what do they usually plan to do with their films? Also, do you think it’s easier for erotic / porn filmmakers to make money from their films than other filmmakers?

MADISON: It’s a similar journey for indie film makers and erotic film makers. In creating an erotic film, I release the film via dvd, VOD, and on my membership web site www.madisonbound.com.  I also show a lot of my films in the erotic film circuit. It’s a great way to reach a new audience.  I haven’t tried to sell any non-erotic films, but from what I know of the mainstream and indie film industry it’s really about networking and knowing the right people, which really translates to any industry.

KFINK: How do you see the porn/erotic film industry responding to competition from free content on the web?  Are some methods/companies more effective than others in terms of finding ways to sell content?  Is this an issue that you contend with?  If so, what are you doing to stay competitive?

MADISON: Basically if your content is a quality product and you are documenting a unique aspect of sexuality, if your content is authentic, creative and showing chemistry between the performers, then any free content that goes on the web is going to simply be promotion for your product and will actually bring in customers as they will want to see more of the products that you are producing.

A lot of the free porn out there is mainstream porn or what I call “fast food porn” which is formulaic and doesn’t show any chemistry or pleasure.  If someone isn’t interested in quality, then they can just consume a bunch of “fast food porn”.  Personally I don’t find “fast food porn” to be satisfying or hot.  I need to have chemistry and passion in my porn, and I know the directors that provide that kind of content, and I’m happy to pay for those films because I know I’ll be getting what I’m looking for and something that I enjoy.  I also know who the director is and it makes me happy to help support the films they are making.

KFINK: Do you have anything new in the works that we should watch for?

MADISON: Last week my film “Pregnant with Desire” that I directed for Good Releasing was released.  It’s a documentary porn about the sexual desires of women during pregnancy.  I’m wrapping up editing on a film called “Lucky: A Woman’s POV” which is the 3rd installment in my pov series shot from a woman’s point of view – it’s the first of its kind.  And I’m casting for my next bisexual film and in preproduction for that project. The Real Sex episode in which I was featured is now airing on HBO, entitled “Real Sex: Stocks Down, Sex Up”.  I’m working on some final edits with my literary agent on my memoir and doing a reading for an erotic film next week.  I’m also working with Spike TV sometime this month to come in as a sexpert.   I have a lot of upcoming workshops that you can check out on my web site www.madisonbound.com and working on launching a second site before the end of the year.

*****

End of Interview

Just looking at what’s on Madison’s plate makes us tired…and excited. Definitely taking notes from her about how to create opportunities and market. It sounds like she has so much fun doing it. No pun intended.

So – what’s next?

• Have any more questions for Madison? Share your thoughts, and maybe we’ll be able to talk her into coming back to share more…
• Are there any other indie porn directors you’d like to see interviewed here? Let us know, and we’ll see what we can do.

Coming up soon on PEEP SHOW: Insights into the world of kinky film from Cinekink Film Festival director Lisa Vandever. What is she looking for, what kinky filmmakers should we be keeping an eye on, and what exactly does one have to do to get into Cinekink?

When Cinemascope began being used extensively in 1953, wings were added to the screen to accomadate the larger picture. However, in 1955 those wings and the playground were destroyed by a tornado. Fortunately, the screen was rebuilt and the theater was able to continue accepting customers for many years….

Until 1981 when another wind storm took down more than half of the screen! By the summer of 1982, the screen had not only been rebuilt and replaced, but a second screen was added, the rotting wood in the tower was repaired, and the damaged playground was again restored.

After suffering not just one but two disastrous storms, the Skyview Drive In is still showing double features for an admission price of only $9. Stop by and visit them this summer, you will be glad you did!

Special thanks to fellow FilmSnobbery.com contributor, Julie Keck, for telling me about the Skyview Drive In!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

Madison Young is a role model for us, a shining example in the indie porn world of what we hope to accomplish someday in the indie non-porn world.  No, we don’t want to make porn, but we do want to find creative ways to monetize our passion.

Madison isn’t your average porn gal.  She doesn’t just star in other people’s pornos, cash her paychecks, and buy fancy purses to carry her little dogs around in – she directs her own porn, produces it, decides what she wants to say with it, and uses it to fund her future projects and her art (she has a gallery in San Francisco called Femina Potens.)  She calls the shots.  Just like we want to do.

But Madison takes it even further.  In addition to her erotic film work, Madison conducts sex-positive workshops around the country, is working on a memoir, blogs, tweets, and is developing a following that’s outside of the normal porn fan category.   As female directors, we admire Madison’s entrepreneurship and her ultimate control over her career.  So it only made sense that we’d reach out to her for tips.

We approached Madison a few weeks ago with a timid request for an interview; she wrote back saying yes.  Julie fainted; Jessica revived her.  And here’s what happened next.

Madison Young Interview Part 1

KFINK: First of all, we just got back from Cinekink Vegas where we got to see a couple of your shorts, including “Frisk Me”, which you directed, and “Taxi”, which you starred in.  The audience loved both. Which do you prefer: directing or acting?

MADISON: I love both directing and performing in adult films.  Both are satisfying in different ways.  I’m a storyteller and writer so I love to direct and see my vision come to fruition.  I love working with the cast and crew to create a great collaborative experience.  I’ve been coordinating events for a really long time and coordinating a shoot is very similar.

Directing has been an amazing experience for me and really allows me to have a larger part in the change that is made in the world of feminist pornography and to put my stamp on my work.  It also really allows me to bring together intelligent sex positive [people who] want to explore parts of their sexuality on film in a safe and supportive environment.  I love having a chance to facilitate that kind of experience.  As a performer, I love to give myself over completely to the scene and to connect energetically and sexually with my costar/s.  It allows me the experience of showing how communication during sex can be sexy and a chance for the camera to capture authentic orgasms and female pleasure.

KFINK: We know that you’re very busy with your gallery, Femina Potens, as well as your movies, and we learned in another interview that you actually started making movies in order to fund the gallery. Can you tell us a little bit about your journey toward making erotic films?

MADISON: I have always been interested in creating dialogue and community through visual and performative art forms.  I grew up doing theater and immersing myself in the arts even though my parents weren’t really surrounded by any kind of cultural centers.  I was drawn to artistic expression through theater, painting, performance, and dance.  It was a primal[ly] honest mode of physically expressing oneself and at the [same] time exhibited a connection with both the audience and collaborating artists.  It was a messy raw form of communication and held a sense of child-like playfulness as it tapped into a sexual instinct rooted in the artists work.  These qualities attracted me to the arts.  I was determined to create art and to create space where the intersections of art and sex could be explored.  Thus the creation of my art gallery Femina Potens.  I also explore this intersection in my work as a performer in the adult industry, as a director, and a sex educator.

KFINK: Between the time that you started making films and now, what are the two most important things you’ve learned about filmmaking?

MADISON: I started directing films in 2005 and have now released 24 films that I have directed (I’ve also performed in all but two of those).  It’s hard to narrow it down to two but I would say “visualization” is one of the first things I teach people in my DIY Porn Making Workshop: visualizing your film from the first shot to the rolling credits and everything in-between.  Be mindful in your visualization of your “shots”, actually visualizing your film as a string of photos rather than just in what the characters are doing.  While you are visualizing and constructing your film, keep in mind what you are working with, what locations you have at your disposal, and your budget.

The second most important thing is “Communicating and Listening ” with your cast and crew.  Talk with your cast about who they would like to work with, what gets them hot and what their sexual fantasies are and then incorporate that into the shoot.  This includes communicating ahead of time with your videographer and photographer about your vision for the film, getting the shot list to your videographer in plenty of time, and reviewing the shots, even walking through the location together before the  shoot; communicating about testing and safer sex  (What are your performers boundaries and needs?  What are your company’s regulations regarding testing?);  even communicating ahead of time about dietary needs and desires.  If I’m shooting an 8-hour day I always provide a full meal for my cast and crew as well as snacks.  And if you are starting early in the morning, I make sure to have their favorite coffee drink there, too.  Your cast and crew knows that their needs and desires are being respected when you listen to them, and they will give a great performance when you give them that respect and create space for their fantasies to come true with in your script.

KFINK: Do you think there’s something unique about filmmakers who make kinky movies as opposed to other types of movies?

MADISON: The film-making element in kinky films vs non-kinky films is pretty much the same.  In creating a kink film I feel like there is more communication between the performers- making sure that limits are discussed as well as safe words and checking in and keeping eye contact with the submissive to make sure that there aren’t any problems.  Usually when I’m shooting more intense bdsm scenes, I’m the submissive.  So not only am I in a single leg inverted suspension covered in clothespins and nipple weights, but I’m also directing the shots like that as I’m being vibrated and fucked.  But I also really get off on multitasking

KFINK: And we really appreciate your ability to, uh…juggle those tasks, Madison…

*****

End of Part 1

Our sincerest thanks goes out to the lovely Madison Young for sharing her knowledge and her time.  And her porn.

In the second part of Madison’s interview she talks about how makers of porn market their products, battling free content on the web, and the secret behind-the-scene prep erotic filmmakers do that other indie filmmakers might not know about… Are YOU ready for it?

The Midway received a complete renovation in 2007 when it was purchased by Mike and Mia Kerz. The screen tower was refurbished and painted, the projection booth equipment was upgraded, and the concession stand, the retro “spaceship” ticket booth, and the children’s playground were all restored to their original 50′s era glory. The Diner is set up in the classic self-serve drive in diner style and offers a variety of hamburgers, cheeseburgers, hot dogs, corn dogs, nachos, french fries, onion rings, fried cheese sticks, pizza, candy, ice cream, cotton candy, and popcorn. The Midway’s main resource for upgrading and maintaining the theater comes from the revenue generated by the Diner, therefore no outside food or drink is allowed.

The Midway has a capacity of up to 500 cars and they strive to recreate the drive in theater experience as best they can by playing oldies, classic cartoons, and drive in announcements before the presentation of the first feature film and the “dancing hot dog” intermission reel. The Midway will be celebrating its 60th anniversary of continuous service this year!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

It’s a good thing that Gary King had the foresight to cast Jenn Dees at this point in her career, because once word of her range of performance hits the mainstream, this girl is going places fast. Jenn has a vulnerability and emotional range that can be shown with nothing more than a passing glance. She shows off a great personality, and even busts-a-move with some panache mid-movie. I cannot highlight this actress enough. She carries the emotional, narrative, and visual weight of this movie. Jenn plays Luci, a troubled young lady who has trouble sleeping, loves to people-watch, and even follows people around just for fun. Luci loses her job, and a bit of her sanity as she wanders the streets. The voiceover she does throughout the film hints at some deeper issues of loss, and deeper emotional pain that she hasn’t dealt with. In her journeys she encounters many other characters, some good, some bad, and some quite weird.

The camera in this movie moves around, a lot. That is to say the cinematographer, Jason Varner took advantage of the entire range of his camera’s functions, and also used every piece of backdrop and set that was at his disposal. There are times where the character of Luci really stands out from her surroundings, and they seem dream-like and abstract around her. The cinematography is even made more stylized by the creative editing done by the director Gary King. Gary hasn’t wasted one frame of this movie. His portrait of this young woman, her plight, and her surrounds all come together like a jazz ensemble. It’s all over the place, but at the same time fits together in cohesive harmony.

I can’t help but feel bad for some other indie movies in competition at film festivals with WHAT’S UP LOVELY. Gary King has crafted a lean 69 minute tale that was tailor-made for the festival circuit, and if the second and third parts of his loneliness trilogy are as well done as this film, then he has a good shot at achieving cult film status in the indie world, and it will certainly be his ticket into the mainstream directing world. Gary King could very well be the new Kubrick or Gilliam.

“The Rabbit of Seville” plays off the long-established relationship between hunter Elmer Fudd and perennial prey Bugs Bunny.  A lengthy chase across a rural countryside brings the adversaries to the backstage of an opera house preparing for a production of “The Barber of Seville.”  Bugs, who apparently knows his way around this unlikely venue, allows Elmer to flatfoot through the unfamiliar setting before a casual flick of a switch raises a curtain that introduces the startled hunter to a full auditorium.

Elmer never gets the upper hand again – in fact, he only has a single line in the entire cartoon.  Bugs, now clad in a white barber’s smock and carrying a razor and scissor, emerges as the Barber of Seville and sings a slang-heavy riff in lieu of the libretto.  The opera itself is never cited or parodied – Rossini’s overture is hijacked to support a zany skein of sight gags surrounding Bugs as the overzealous barber and Elmer as his hapless customer.

Strangely enough, Elmer’s bald head – a defining physical characteristic – was rarely exploited for comedy purposes during the golden years of Looney Tunes and Merrie Melodies.  This time, however, the follicle-free skull is the foundation for indignities: a swirl of hair tonic and “Figaro fertilizer” produces a wave of flower-hair, whipped cream and scoops of fresh fruit create a dessert sculpture atop Elmer’s battered noggin, and a scalp massage takes place with Bugs standing on Elmer while rubbing his toes into the man’s cranium.

The film also provides a surprisingly sadistic gag, with Bugs giving a violent razor shave to his foe.  While the actual slicing is carefully kept under the lower portion of the screen, Elmer’s anguished cries of pain and the swiftness of Bugs’ razor strokes more than suggest a violent assault.  Later, Bugs dons the turban of a swami and plays a flute that summons a snake-like electric razor to chase and bite at Elmer. Back in 1950, this cartoon was not meant for kiddie audiences – animation was part of the standard movie bill, and the primary audience was made up of adults that could appreciate such roughhousing.

“The Rabbit of Seville” also includes a staple of the Bugs Bunny cartoon: the hero donning female drag to humiliate his enemies. This time, Bugs disguises himself as a Spanish flamenco dancer, with scissors used as castanets. Elmer’s bashful infatuation with his faux-flamenco artist allows Bugs to snip away at the hunter’s suspenders, thus forcing his pants to drop to the floor.

But more amazing is a new twist on the drag routine: Bugs interrupts the climactic fight-chase by offering flowers, candy and an engagement ring to Elmer.  Jubilant beyond words, Elmer rushes off and instantly returns in a white wedding gown; Bugs responds by donning a tuxedo. A black-robed man suddenly emerges to join the pair in matrimony – offering cinema its first same-sex marriage and interspecies wedding at the same time!  But being Bugs Bunny, the victory is ultimately his: Elmer is deposited into an oversized wedding cake and the shrewd rabbit looks directly into the camera with a munch of raw carrot and a self-confident, “Eh, next?” – an invitation for the next joker to match wits.

Yes, I know that “What’s Opera, Doc?” is far more artistically striking and “A Corny Concerto” is a sublime satire of Disney’s “Fantasia.”  Yet for sheer rudeness, “The Rabbit of Seville” offers an extraordinary consideration of what can be achieved in less than eight minutes of running time.

FINEST HOUR is a four part (at this point anyways) series about a small production company charged with the impossible task of creating a very low budget sequel for their demanding Russian boss. What follows are their poor attempts at casting (including an immigrant named John Stamost that they are trying to pass off as the real John Stamos), production problems on their set which is a borrowed backyard with barking dogs in the background, and 37 minutes of daylight left in which to shoot. If they can’t pull something off, they’re all fired! Will they fail? Or will it be their FINEST HOUR? (See what I did there?)

The camerawork is actually pretty good on this series. It has a certain low budget style and it is consistent throughout. This could easily have been on of those cinema verite shot pieces like CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM that seems to be all the rage lately, but instead they went with a more traditional style, and it really works for the story. The audio is done well, even in the outdoor scenes, and the lighting is consistent as well.

The acting is pretty well done too. Definite nods should go to the actor who plays the flamboyant Intern (Christopher Davis Carlisle), and Jim Allen Jackson who plays their hapless supervisor Gary. Both of these actors stand out as being able to sustain further storylines, and the Intern could probably have a show all his own. The rest of the actors and actresses all do a great job as well, easily playing off one another. It would have been nice to see Stephanie’s character (played by Abby Wathen) get a little more story development, but keep in mind this is only the “pilot episode”, so there is plenty of room for these characters to grow. The main character of Holland (played by co-director Bill Chamberlain) could be toned down just a bit. I can see them going for over-the-top, but his character is just a little too much so. All the kinks can be worked out in later episodes though once they’ve had more of an opportunity to get into their character’s skins.

If these guys and gals had a real budget, they could probably make something that could hit the primetime lineup on TV and probably do better than most of the tripe out there. It’s great to see a webseries that highlights people working in the film industry, since there really isn’t anything else out there representing. This “pilot episode” is a good starting point, but I think we need to see more to really get a sense of who these characters are and where they came from.

For more on this series visit: http://www.finesthour.tv
Follow them on Twitter at: @wwwFINESTHOURtv

Unfortunately on May 23, 1950, the cinder block screen was severely damaged by a tornado but it was rebuilt and able to reopen by July 1, 1950, charging the new admission price of forty cents.

In 1952, Carl Floyd, of Floyd Theaters, purchased the Silver Moon and immediately made several improvements to it. He added the concession stand that is still in operation today, modernized rest rooms, and the flashing neon marquee that still attracts the attention of those traveling along U.S. 92 West today. Mr. Floyd went on to own several theaters in the Lakeland, Florida area and by 1969, his company was known as Floyd Enterprises. One of his employees at the time, Harold Spears, was appointed president. In the 1970′s, Burnup and Sims, Inc. had acquired Floyd Enterprises, and kept Mr. Spears on as president. A second screen was then added to the Silver Moon in 1985. Another merge with Mastec, Inc occurred in the 1990s and by 1996, when Mastec told Mr. Spears to close down the remaining drive in theaters, Mr. Spears formed Sun South Theaters and bought the Silver Moon Drive In, which he continues to own and operate today. A flea market on the grounds is open for business on Saturdays and Sundays starting at 5:30 am, along with the snack bar serving a nice big breakfast! Each screen shows a double feature 7 nights a week for an admission price of $4 (kids aged 4-9 price is only $1)!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

The story revolves around Jeff Yeardley, a man who was just fired from both his job and his family for having an illicit affair with a co-worker. His wife takes their kid with her, and Jeff is left to deal with the ramifications of what he is done. We see with Jeff trying to get a new job, deal with divorce lawyers, and maintain a relationship with his son all while trying to keep a stay sane. He is kicked while he is down by having to sell almost all his vanity possessions just to live. His visitations with his son are accompanied by a court appointed watchdog, and his falls prey to a ploy by two women at his new job who make a bet on who will sleep with him first. No matter how much Jeff tries to fix his life, his downward spiral continues. The storyline revolving around the two girls who want to sleep with Jeff seems to be a bit excessive, but I can see that it is just the screenwriter wanting to play Jeff’s vices against him. We know that it was an affair that ruined his life and career, so he wanted us to see Jeff fight against those urges again, and show what would happen if the aggressor came from the outside. Can Jeff resist temptation again knowing that it could cost him his wife and child, and even his new job again? What other consequences would there be to the young girls’ ploy?

While the cinematography was a little uneven in a few scenes, with some shots looking more “camcorder-y” than others, overall this film looks great. The editing is tight and well done from scene to scene (bonus points go to the great shots of the flies at the end). There is at least one continuity error that I spotted (there is a shot showing his TV where it was AFTER he had sold it), but other that the production design is solid. The audio is crisp and clear, with even the few outdoor scenes sounding slick and professional.

The acting is superb all around. Even the little guy who plays Jeff’s son Chase Yeardley (Garrett Geoghegan) does a fantastic job of being the kid stuck in the middle of a broken home. He deals with new men in his mother’s life, tries to deal with his father’s mood swings, and being taken from his home. Jeff’s wife played by Saskia Grace Holmes has naturalistic reactions to most of what’s going on around her. She deals well with the crumbling of her marriage, but seems to get into bed with another guy a little too quick in my opinion.

You really don’t see the end of this movie coming, and it is a really powerful ending. To spoil it here would ruin it. But that being said, track down this flick and watch it if you get the opportunity. You won’t regret it.

At the recent DIY DAYS convention in New York City, Brian Newman spoke about the importance of innovation to filmmakers and story tellers.  His formula: Technology + Theory = Innovation.  For example, he argued that the typewriter + Freud = Surrealism.

There are many arguments surrounding the impetus for various technological innovations in film.  If you believe Paul Virilio, war has been the primary driver of technological innovation.  Others say it’s the sex business.  My guess is that it’s a little of both.

While pornography doesn’t need new theories to propagate its content (as they say “sex sells”), part of why porn thrives is that it’s not afraid to exploit and experiment with new technologies.

Further, it’s important to consider that the history of pornography, like the history of Hollywood, is (most likely) largely mythological.  Even so, most recognize the role the porn industry played in the VHS – Beta Wars.  Porn (and Disney) picked VHS.  VHS thrived.  And Beta…well, Beta went the way of the eight-track tape.  (That was before cassettes, kids, which came before CDs, which came before mp3s…yowza…)

Where porn leads, the movie industry (indie and otherwise) follows, so let’s take a look at blue movie innovations that indie filmmakers should pay attention to.

Lovely Corsette Markings

Drawing by Leontine Greenberg

The Traveling Smut Show. In the early days, erotic filmmakers drove from small town to small town (just ahead of the authorities) in order to set up small local screenings to willing consumers before jetting out of town.

In much the same way, groups like OpenIndie, Cinefist, and Film Courage Interactive are attempting to set up small, local screenings as determined by audience demand.  The only thing missing?  They need to incorporate the chase!

Interactive Websites. Even with the overabundance of free content on the web, porn fans will still pay for a membership to a site, for specific types of content, and for opportunities to interact with live porn stars.  By the same token, Indie filmmakers are striving to create  (or paying transmedia experts to create) rich universes around our soon-to-be-made movies that draw in fans and possibly entice them to follow (and invest in) our movie making journey.  Smart phone apps. Comics. Behind-the-scenes teasers.  These are all things that porn has embraced and that indie movie makers are working on.

In this area, porn makers actually have a barrier that indie movie makers don’t: regulations about content.  So if porn can make it work, so can we.  Time to do some trail blazing, people.  You’re creative types.  Go!

Porn conventions. Do you know how much stuff is sold at porn conventions?  A lot. Movies, thongs, sex toys, autographs, etc.  If you can put a porn star’s likeness on it, someone will buy it.  So what’s the indie movie equivalent of that? Um…film festivals?  Maybe, if they were geared more toward movie fans than movie makers.  If we start creating events for movie lovers who want to meet the filmmakers (who have already marketed themselves as someone the fans would want to meet), film festivals could be huge money generators.  Or…do we need a new type of indie movie event?

If the porn industry is, in fact, on the cutting edge, what else should indie movie makers pay attention to?

The film in question is called “Monkeyshines, No. 1” and it is known two of Edison’s associates, William K.L. Dickson and William Heise, were responsible for its creation. Edison was aware of filmmaking experiments taking place in Europe, though it is not certain if he actually saw the test films that were being made. Nonetheless, he believed that a new entertainment medium could be created on his side of the Atlantic, and he pushed his engineering team to make pictures move.

Tests involving a prototype camera began sometime in 1889, but there is contradictory information regarding when the first attempt at American filmmaking actually took place. Some documents put the momentous occasion in June 1889, while others place it during the week of November 21, 1890.

The initial test was dubbed “Monkeyshines, No. 1” – there is no explanation why this particular name was chosen. Nor is it clear about who would be the first American to appear on camera – laboratory assistants John Ott and G. Sacco Albanese have both been credited.

There was no plot for this first film.  All that was required for the man in the viewfinder was to dress in white and engage in broad arm and upper body movements while keeping his feet solid on the ground.

Quite frankly, Dickson and Heise’s prototype camera, called the Kinetograph, had serious problems. There was no clarity in the picture – in fact, the captured image was completely blurry. In terms of trial and error, “Monkeyshines, No. 1” was a technical error.

Yet viewed today, the film could easily qualify as a work of experimental cinema.  The absence of detail creates a faceless entity that engages in endless shape shifting formations.  His arms fold and disappear, re-emerging as stumps.  His shoulders expand to a wide circular formation that engulfs his head, only to recede while his head appears to float above a black band that cuts away his neck into an inky void. To the right of the figure is a light object – is it another person, an off-centered light, or some other object that was accidentally captured on film? Even more peculiar are asymmetrical white lines that flash across the screen, further enhancing the eerie visual presence.

The Edison crew did not originally intend to project their film experiment on a screen. Instead, their work were meant to be seen on a Kinetoscope, a cabinet-sized device with a single person viewfinder window that played the images on a rotating cylinder. Looking through the Kinetoscope’s window at the weirdness of this first effort must have been a jolting image for Dickson, Heise and their teammates.

“Monkeyshines, No. 1” was not intended for public viewing, nor could it be shown due to its problematic visual quality. Two additional films in the “Monkeyshines” series were made before Edison was ready to make his first public exhibition in 1891 with a clear film that showed Dickson waving a hat. The initial experiment was unknown to the general public and not seen until many years later.

In retrospect, “Monkeyshines, No. 1” is a weird baby step into a new world. From its ghostly and opaque imagery, a universe was born. It is hard to imagine that the men who put this little work together could have imagined what would follow their achievement.

Émile Dequenne plays Jeanne, anatomically attached to her rollerblades, is an idealistic, directionless twenty-something Parisian, who lives with her mother Louise (Catherine Deneuve) in the quiet suburbs of Paris. Jeanne’s half-hearted search for a job, and Louise’s continuous pestering, leads her to the legal firm of Samuel Bleistein (Michel Blanc), a prominent, politically-engaged, community-focused Jewish lawyer and – excuse the cynicism – the unrequited love of Jeanne’s mother. While Louise is undecided about reigniting a relationship with Bleistein, Jeanne falls in love with Franck (Nicolas Duvauchelle), a wrestler with a hardened stare that threatens to unhinge at any moment. This relationship is the beginning of an unraveled thread that leads Jeanne to telling a lie that doesn’t just grip France and the western world, but turns her private suburban domesticity upside down.

The narrative is split between two distinct acts: ‘Circumstance’, which explains the events that lead up to Jeanne’s baseless story, and the thereafter in ‘Consequences’. These acts become a character study of Jeanne’s predicament to her mother’s dismay and the full integration of the Bleisteins into the main narrative. However, with the ‘Consequence’ act the film never fully explores the reverberating affect of Jeanne’s story on French-Jews and Afro/Arab-French communities; a strange directorial choice considering the international affect of the real story. But don’t let this personal preference overshadow what is possibly the purpose of Techiné’s work: this film is about dichotomies; the dichotomy between the public and private, the city and the suburbs, the (ethnic) minorities and the (French) majorities; intimacy and alienation. Techiné explores the tensions between these dichotomies with the characters of Jeanne and Louise, as the private effects of Jeanne’s stupid lie on her mother’s private life and, maybe, this where Bleistein’s pragmatism plays a crucial balance to the unwarranted chaos caused by Jeanne and the press, but there is more to it.

Jeanne’s existence is seemingly flawless and somewhat ethereal; this safe Parisian suburban living is a world away from the ethnically mixed ‘ghettos’ and tense streamlined homes of affluent Jews. However, this doesn’t excuse, but explains Jeanne’s unconsciousness to racism. Her sunny carefree lifestyle is representative of France’s liberty, however, the zealous hunger of the press to ‘protect’ this beautiful French female ‘victim’ from these monstrous African/Arab origin, demonstrates how the remaining French ideologies of fraternity and (racial) equality are not applicable to all. Téchiné subtly comments on the visibility of Afro-Arab immigrants in France as being of relevance when they are seen to be committing such abhorrent acts, even acts never committed.

The Girl on the Train doesn’t become burdened or define itself by the events that occurred in 2004, but it still disappoints because it never pushes itself, and very much like the immigrant tensions in France, it tiptoes around the central issue.

Tuesday May 18th at 10PM EST at http://live.filmsnobbery.com we will speak with NYC Filmmaker’s Festival director Darren Levine about his first go at a film festival happening this June from the 3rd to the 6th. After that we put filmmaker Lucas McNelly in the hotseat and chat with him about his film Blanc de Blanc and it’s recent theatrical run!

I did not even know that there are still drive in theaters in my beautiful home state of Virginia.

Apparently, there are ten active drive in theaters there in all!

To my credit, however, none of them are in the Hampton Roads area where I was born and lived the majority of my life.

Hull’s Drive In located in Lexington, Virginia began its life as Lee Drive In, opening on August 5, 1950. By 1957, the drive in was purchased by Mr. and Mrs. Sebert Hull, who changed the name to Hull’s Drive In and ran it every weekend for the next four decades.

Unfortunately, Mr. Hull passed away shortly before the 1998 season. Mrs. Hull sold the drive in to Mr. W.D. Goad who kept it going that summer. However, by the 1999 season, the cost of much needed technical improvements kept him from opening the drive in theater.

For the first time in almost fifty years, the screen stayed dark as Mr. Goad desperately searched for someone who could not only make the necessary repairs and upgrades, but who could run the business as well.

Fortunately, there are angels in Lexington, Virginia. Hull’s Angels to be exact.

Hull’s Drive In happens to be the nation’s one and only community-run and owned, non-profit drive in theater. The community surrounding Hull’s Drive In were not going to let their beloved drive in close forever. In June of 1999, fifty of the community’s biggest fans of the theater got together to devise a plan to keep the theater up and running. By 2000, they formally organized as the non-profit organization Hull’s Angels. They began a fund-raising campaign that enabled them to make all of the necessary repairs and reopen the theater by July of 2000. They were able to fully purchase the business by May of 2001, after opening in April of the same year for its first six month season under the Angel’s management. The drive in has been in full operation since with the complete support of volunteers and the community.

When and if I ever do make it back home, I plan on giving Hull’s Drive In a long overdue visit. After all, it might be the only way I could ever come close to a true angel!

Hull\'s Drive In featured on MSNBC Nightly News

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

Cannes – May 14, 2010 –

The Wagner/Cuban Company’s Magnet Releasing, genre arm of Magnolia Pictures announced today that it has acquired world rights to MANDRILL, the thrilling new action film directed by Ernesto Espinoza and starring Marko “the Latin Dragon” Zaror. Zaror is a phenomenal talent from Chile who is making a big splash in the international martial arts scene, and just cinched the Best Rising Action star award at ActionFest 2010 in Asheville, NC. Winner of the Best Picture award at Fantastic Fest 2009, MANDRILL is from the same team behind cult favorites KILTRO and MIRAGEMAN, also distributed by Magnet Releasing, and tells the story of a master assassin (Zaror) hell bent on avenging the murder of his parents.

“Ernesto and Marko deliver the goods once again. MANDRILL is tons of action filled fun. Mind blowing fights that need to be seen to be believed,” said Magnolia SVP Tom Quinn.

“Zaror continues to deliver phenomenal martial arts combined with great acting,” said producer Derek Rundell. “Ernesto once again created an action packed adventure that’s funny and cool. We are thrilled that Magnolia continues to believes and help us crossover into the international marketplace.”

Tom Quinn negotiated the deal on behalf of Magnet Releasing with Derek Rundell.

About Magnet Releasing

Magnet is the genre arm of Magnolia Pictures (www.magpictures.com), specializing in films from the vanguard of horror, action, comedy and Asian cinema, and is home to such critically acclaimed films as Tomas Alfredson’s Let the Right One In, John Woo’s historical epic, Red Cliff, Ty West’s The House of the Devil, Nacho Vigalondo’s time travel masterpiece Timecrimes, sci-fi epic Mutant Chronicles, The Warlords starring Jet Li, Tony Jaa’s thrilling Ong Bak 2, Nicholas Winding Refn’s Bronson and such upcoming titles as Gareth Edwards’ Monsters, anticipated horror sequel [Rec]2, Neil Marshall’s Centurion, George A. Romero’s Survival of the Dead, and the thrilling action sequel District 13 – Ultimatum. Magnolia Pictures is the theatrical and home entertainment distribution arm of the Wagner/Cuban Companies, a vertically integrated group of media properties co-owned by Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban that also include the Landmark Theatres chain, the production company 2929 Productions, and high-definition cable network HDNet.

The bottom line is whether one considered a work to be already a complete piece of art unto itself or we always knew there was something missing, there should be something endlessly appealing about newly found cuts of films to any enthusiast of cinema, yet out of all these possibilities it seems to get the least attention.

Hidden figures in paintings have spawned novels and to an extent been proven and made headlines, lengthier editions of novels have gone on to be best-sellers but rediscovered film prints seem to be stuff of cinephiles alone. There is plenty to get excited about, however.

First, there is the purely archaeological and scientific aspect of finding a previously thought to be lost cut of a film. Unearthing something thought missing through a bulk of the history of cinema is a big enough event unto itself but then consider the restoration efforts needed to bring that film to the screen, which took years.

Second, there is a dichotomous nature to cinema. It is a performance art that since the advent of sound has locked audio and image and made them virtually permanent and unchanging, unlike theatre which is alive and vibrant and now the art form of memory. However, the medium upon which films are recorded from the stock itself even to the first video formats are not permanent. Thus, the likelihood an alternate cut would survive that long is unlikely and quasi-miraculous. Making it a more rare and special occurrence and thus making film preservation that much more important.

Perhaps most importantly it is in this cut that you get closest to Lang’s vision of “Metropolis,” which was to an extent compromised in order to give the film a tidier running time for commercial purposes. Film likely is, was and always will be the art form most influenced by the business side of it so to have lost this initial vision, and still have scenes stolen from us, to squeeze a few more screenings in a day is a shame but to come closer to the original intent so long past the film made its mark is amazing.

Comparing cuts is also a great way to learn about filmmaking so if there is a significant director’s cut available with the theatrical cut of a film, or in the case of “Mr. Arkadin” (aka “Confidential Report”) many cuts, you should get it.

If there is one thing that the discovery of an alternate truer version of “Metropolis” proves is that great things can still happen in cinema and we can only hope for similar finds in the years to come to liven up the landscape.

A review of Metropolis

232QYKZ8EHCJ

Some silent actors are clearly better than others but the style can’t be held against the film, it is what it is. While saying that Brigitte Helm is quite good in this film, she may go a little too far when she’s playing the evil robotic alter ego of her character but she is clearly two different people in those scenes. Gustav Fröhlich is an effective lead who portrays the audience’s POV aptly.

The image quality is superb on a bulk of the film, meaning the portions we already knew existed. They look as crisp and clear as they likely did in 1927, perhaps even better. While the transferred 16mm footage doesn’t look quite that good with many lines, which have been dulled and are nearly translucent running through it, they are without question an invaluable addition to the narrative.

Not only did the restorers fully explain the story of the footage’s discovery and how it was added back to the cut they also noted that the image size would change to keep less than knowledgeable patrons from complaining. Better yet they had some fun with the titles. Not only did they digitally create newer, more accurate ones they added motion to those which referred to the workers underground and the elite up above the city.

The restoration of the original score, as best as it could be replicated, was also a welcome and brilliant touch. The end credits acknowledge the fact that some pieces of the music had to be created by educated guess and rarely could you tell. It was pretty seamless and moreover the impact of the film is enhanced twenty-fold. Typically on DVD releases, especially the cheaper ones which is how I was accustomed to seeing “Metropolis” you get stock, canned, jazzy nonsense that rarely if ever really syncs. You can almost imagine the producers of said DVD sitting around picking a track because it synced in one spot. The score is breathtaking and absolutely draws you into the tale, if all else should fail.

While you should be forewarned that all we know should be in this film isn’t, as there are titles describing the rare scene that could not be saved or found. You will witness here in greater fullness than ever before the enormity and vastness of Lang’s vision. His vistas come through and the added running time gives this seemingly simple through-line the time to make the impact it seeks to make. It is, if you dig deep enough, a more complex and involved visual narrative than many may give it credit for. While we today will not be jarred by the seemingly contrasting styles of the sub-plots there is a grab bag of visual elements worth exploring.

For a modern audience the message of the film, which is repeated on quite a few occasions, may seem a little heavy-handed, again I warn you that it must be taken with a grain of salt. Think of other silents you know and enjoy and consider if they too aren’t very on the head. You know exactly what the message of “The Immigrant” and “The Kid” are but they work anyway. Typically, you are told someone’s profession or that they are the hero before you see them, which is also less cinematic than desirable but the language of film was new and it was important to be simple and direct. It bears noting that Metropolis is not overly-laden with titles and it just works.

Seeing this new cut of Metropolis will not be like watching a regurgitated version of something you’ve seen before. It will be like a whole new experience. Not only do you see it on the big screen but you see it sharper and more clearly than you’ve likely ever seen it before. It really is like the saying goes; see it again for the first time.

Further Reading: Why a New Cut Matters

1. Government incentives at the state level are allowing more productions to get financed and opening up the job market in the filmmaking industry. This also trickles down to the independent film community. Filmmakers are able to and do use these tax credits, and other incentives like free shooting permits, etc. to fund and sustain their productions.

2. Technology has given independent filmmakers unparalleled opportunities to break into the film industry. Many movies that are starting off as shorts posted on YouTube are being optioned as Hollywood films (for example last year’s “District 9″). For filmmakers who are going a different route, technology has enabled them to make their art cheaper, more efficiently, and their productions are scalable to almost any size budget. The new independent filmmaker is not a technophobe or luddite, they are embracing technology as an indispensable weapon in their arsenal of art.

3. Organized filmmaker events are everywhere. Contrary to some schools of thought, the independent filmmaking community does exist and is incredibly vibrant. From film festivals all over the world to more local fare like The Conversation and DIY Days, filmmakers are gathering everywhere to network, learn, and share their projects with the general public and their contemporaries. The filmmaker community is open and welcoming. It is expanding and growing every year. Festival submission data corroborates that. Artists seek out other artists. That is the nature of creativity. It yearns to be nurtured and is inherently social.

4. Just the act of being a filmmaker does not necessitate that the artist is, or has to be a businessperson. Some people create just to create. Even getting your film in front of an audience does not necessarily require you to have an MBA from Harvard. It can be as simple as setting up a screen or popping in a DVD at your local bar, church, or school. The art of SELLING a film is where the business part comes in. Yes films have budgets, and the big buzz word right now is sustainability. Filmmakers don’t really need money to create art. They are not sustaining their creativity, they are sustaining their lifestyle. Things cost money, art doesn’t. Yes the accouterments of filmmaking can cost a pretty penny, but I run into filmmakers ever week that have made films for under $1000. They might not be the most professional looking films ever made, but they ARE being made. The business aspect of filmmaking is the same as any day job anyone has ever had. Trading time for money to pay for the necessities in life. Food, shelter, and clothing (and in most filmmaker’s cases, coffee). Filmmakers can in fact sustain themselves, without compromise to their art, but perhaps compromise to their lifestyles. Indie filmmakers recognize this and make these sacrifices constantly to tell the story they want to tell. They re-mortgage their homes and beg, borrow, and steal to realize their visions.

5. Crowdfunding has given filmmakers a unique way to fund their projects. The best part about crowdfunding is that it solves the investor issue, and acts as a natural audience filter for projects that might not yet be ready to be made (either due to poor creative vision, lack of a compelling story, etc.). Once a project has been successfully crowdfunded, and provided that the filmmaker stays within that budget, that project has a net loss of $0.00. Anything made from day one is pure profit. This is something that the Hollywood part of the industry just cannot do. Their business model does not support this.

6. Independent filmmakers have always had to think outside the box for things like funding, production, and distribution. This has led to a myriad of new business opportunities for those that are bold enough to see this demand and supply the proper channels for indies to take advantage of. Businesses like IndieGoGo, Biracy, and Kickstarter have answered the call for crowdsourcing. OpenIndie, Distribber, and IndieFlix are options to consider when looking towards distribution. The bulk of these sites were started by other filmmakers that saw a need in their community for a particular service. No one else was taking care of their needs, so they decided to do it themselves.

7. Filmmakers are always looking to share the tips and tricks they’ve learned while battling it out in the trenches. People like Jon Reiss, Chris Jones, and Lloyd Kaufman all have books out (Chris and Lloyd have a series of books each!) that are aimed at helping filmmakers make, produce, and sell their own damn movies. Others like Lance Weiler have even found other means of monetizing their careers as public speakers, giving seminars, and addressing other filmmakers. This to me shows entrepreneurial spirit and shows that there are many filmmakers that think about the future of not only the film community, but also their own.

8. Organizations such as SAG have gone out of their way to create contracts that are specific to low budget independent film. They have recognized that either one of two things will happen. Either filmmakers will play ball and create SAG approved films, or they’re going to do it anyway whether SAG approves or not. Agencies have seen the power of the independent filmmaker over the years and have changed or added to their policies to accommodate them. This shows that filmmakers do in fact have the ability to affect change within the industry. Look what happened when it was outed that Sundance hadn’t shown a true low budget indie in a number of years. The filmmaking community made a huge deal of it and that very same year we were introduced to Sundance Next.

9. Independent film has changed the way we watch content. Way back in 1993 the film “Wax or the Discovery of Television Among the Bees” became the first feature film to be streamed on the internet. This paved the way for future generations of filmmakers to put their content on the net and get it seen by a completely different audience than the traditional theatrical. While there were a lot of technical limitations of the time that prevented this movie to be fully appreciated online, other filmmakers embraced this new medium and has made it a home for the promotion of themselves and their content.

10. Independent film has led to film curators. People like Zak Forsman and Pericles Lewnes who created CineFist and the Annapolis Pretentious Film Society respectively as both a distribution platform for their films but also as a screening venue for others’ films. Other filmmakers and people in the indie film community have done this as well. David Branin and Karen Worden are the curators of Film Courage Interactive, and marketing expert and publicist Sheri Candler created her own as well. These combined with the film festival circuit provide filmmakers the opportunity to not only make an event out of their movies, but also a chance to have a limited theatrical distribution.

URL: http://www.atom.com/spotlights/lost/?xrs=orea_daily_lost

THE LAST 10 SECONDS OF LOST

The finale of Lost is May 23rd! Since we know Hollywood is completely out of ideas, Atom.com and Team Tiger Awesome look to classic TV and movie history for 11 ways that Lost should end.

Jackie Gleason made that mistake in the 1970s when he revived “The Honeymooners” in a brief skein of specials.  While the misadventures of the Kramdens and the Nortons represented classic moments in television, they also represented a particular period in time: the consumerist 1950s, when affluence and prosperity were suddenly within the reach of the people who had previously been labeled as the “working class.”  Much of the comedy in “The Honeymooners” came in the frustration of Ralph Kramden to elevate himself from his seemingly lowly socio-economic standing and take full advantage of the elusive promises in the American dream: the goal of riches and prestige gained without sweat equity.  This represented the antithesis of the other sitcoms of the era, which were mostly suburban-based efforts where money woes were not evident.

By the 1970s, however, the 1950s formula made no sense.  The belated specials picked up where the 1950s left off – complete with same drab kitchen set, the same costumes for Ralph and Ed Norton, and the same social positioning where the men labored and the women were faithful yet beleaguered housewives. The characters weren’t so much living as frozen in amber – the world changed and they didn’t.

For these specials, Art Carney and Audrey Meadows were brought in to revive their iconic Ed Norton and Alice characters.  By the 1970s, though, the actors seemed to have lost interest in the roles that made them famous.  Carney had little reason to be nostalgic for his old second banana part – he was enjoying a comeback in films thanks to his offbeat Oscar-winning role in “Harry and Tonto.”  Meadows was semi-retired by this time, and her return seemed half-hearted at best.

Joyce Randolph, the original Trixie Norton, was inexplicably bypassed in favor of Jane Kean, who played the role in a number of forgettable 1960s “Honeymooners” specials that took the characters to European locales. (Those efforts were mostly forgettable, but at least they tried to do something different.)  But few people associated Kean with the role, which made her presence odd for a revival of old favorites.

But even worse, Gleason was far too old to revive the manic elements of Ralph Kramden’s dilemmas. The wild-eyed horror, the bellowing voice, and the threats of sending Alice to the moon with a “bang-zoom” punch – they were nowhere to be seen in the 1970s. With his tanned complexion, relatively subdued gestures and dapper pencil mustache, he hardly seemed like a lowly Brooklyn bus driver – Gleason was playing his public persona, not Ralph Kramden.

This particular production centered around Valentine’s Day and involved basic “Honeymooners” shenanigans: Alice secretly takes a night job as an answering service operator in order to save money to buy Ralph a new suit for Valentine’s Day.  Ralph, however, notices the suspicious changes in Alice’s routine and jumps to the conclusion that she’s trying to kill him and run off with another man.

Back in the 1950s, this could have been handled with vibrancy and gusto.  By 1978, it seemed like a bad case of same-old/same-old. The actors walked through the contrived plot twists with monotone line readings and no physical energy.  Even the seemingly foolproof buffoonery as putting Gleason and Carney in drag came across as enervated and embarrassing – it seemed like a dreary display of tired older people trying (and failing) to milk laughs from silly situations.

The show’s closing gag involves the long-overdue installation of electric appliances in the Kramdens’ kitchen. It was a belated attempt to acknowledge that times changed, but it seemed more sad than funny – two decades after its peak, the shtick was no longer relevant, let alone amusing. “The Honeymooners – Valentine Special” wasn’t all that special.

Not only can you see a movie on one of their 14 screens (screen #9 is the original screen) 7 days a week and 365 days a year, there is a circus, carnival rides, video arcade, food court, and the biggest draw: the Swap Shop flea market.

That’s right. I said a drive in theater, circus, carnival rides, arcade, food court, AND a swap shop.

Photo Credit

Despite the almost foreboding choice of opening on November 22, 1963 (the day President John F. Kennedy was shot), the Thunderbird Drive In and Swap Shop is the second largest South Florida attraction, garnering visits from 12 million people in the year 1990, alone. Owners Betty and Preston Henn decided in 1966 to start holding a flea market on the drive in grounds. By 1979, a food court (with vendor booths) was added and the flea market was running Wednesday through Sunday until 1988 when they enclosed the building, added air conditioning, and extended the flea market to six days a week.

Photo Credit

In 1989, a stage was constructed that has held (free!) performances by many notable acts, including Willie Nelson, KC And The Sunshine Band, Three Dog Night, and Loretta Lynn. The circus (where Steve-O from the show, “Jackass” performed as a clown during the 1990s), carnival, arcade, and Dancing Waters show also began around this time. Unfortunately, in 2005 the Thunderbird was hit hard by Hurricane Wilma but was soon back up and running. In 2007, a fire damaged a bit of the entertainment complex but even that could not put an end to the Thunderbird Drive In and Swap Shop. It is definitely on my list of things to see this summer when I visit my mom in Florida!

Photo Credit

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

This tale (which somewhat plays like a cross between “The Bourne Identity” and “Enemy of the State”) is directed, written, and produced by first-timer Andrew Burroughs. Andrew has a great talent for writing diverse characters and immersing them in their stories. For his first film, Andrew does an admirable job of handling a film like this. He has a whole lot of great locations, a fairly large cast, and a lot of scenes multifaceted scenes. The camera rarely stays still in this movie, and Burroughs does a good job of capturing all the action.

The film is shot fairly well but could definitely use some more lighting in many scenes. The naturalistic look of the film doesn’t lend itself very well in several scenes, making some of them too dark to read the character’s expression and emotions. The action scenes are shot competently, with some decent handheld work on some of the chase scenes. The fights are actually done pretty well, with some decent effects shots (although there are a few continuity errors that could be addressed). “Algeny” is edited fairly well. There are a few shot decision that I really didn’t like, and the film could probably stand to lose about 10-15 minutes worth of extra story. It plods along in a few spots, and this movie really feels like it should move along a little more than it does. It’s got a great story, and the characters are strong, but the film feels bogged down by story at times.

The sound design isn’t bad. The ambient music throughout is generally not bad except for a little overused techno mix during some of the early chase scenes. Overall the sound is crisp and clear. There is still a hint of “indie” to how it sounds, but overall not bad for a first-timer. The dialog doesn’t sound heaped on top of the soundtrack, and the effects and music are fairly well integrated.

As far as first film endeavors are concerned, Andrew Burroughs does a solid job with “Algeny”. His film is a welcome addition to the independent film community.

It can be very hard to tell a succinct yet complete story in a short amount of time. It’s a learned skill that plagues many writers, and even many successful Hollywood directors. Mark Cabaroy (“Life’s Passing Me By”) helms the short thriller “Blindsided” starring Maria Rusolo as blind psychic Carly St John who works with the police to help find missing people. This film is very reminiscent of the Audrey Hepburn classic “Wait Until Dark”, in which a blind woman is trapped in her house and is terrorized by an intruder. This film confines the young lady to a hotel room where a criminal on the run, Randy Meyers (Chris Cardona) is holding her captive. But much like “Wait Until Dark” there is a great twist near the end, and “Blindsided” doesn’t disappoint either.

While sticking to a slim 16 minute runtime, “Blindsided” engages the audience immediately. When Randy enters her hotel room we wonder what his agenda is, then Carly is introduced into the room, seemingly oblivious to Randy’s intrusion. Then the two finally speak to each other and the tension is heightened, and is kept at an elevated level for much the rest of the movie. The confined spaces combined with Carly’s handicap makes for great cinema and Cabaroy knows how to pay it off at the end and keep the audience guessing until the final moments.

The acting from Maria Rusolo is top notch as the blind psychic. I’d say it was believable but that would be an understatement since the contact lenses she wore for the role actually MADE her completely blind. The level of trust she shows both her fellow actors (one of them armed with a knife in most scenes), and trust in her director seem to allow her to work freely in her environment, bringing out a stellar performance that you can really latch onto. Chris Cardona plays a relatively typical goon, but infuses his role with a little sleezy je ne sais quoi that adds to his dangerous nature. His performance really compliments Rusolo’s in a way that helps to pay off the ending even more.

The cinematography is very well done. The colors are crisp and the director of photography (Clayton Combe) does very well at working within the small confines of the hotel room. The editing (done by Mike Nero) is tight and keeps the story running from frame to frame. There is next to no downtime in this little thriller, and the director and editor obviously took every opportunity to keep it that way.

“Blindsided” is running around the film festival circuit currently. I would recommend that if it is playing at one near you, take advantage of the opportunity and check it out!

The short “Meth”, written and directed by Michael Maney and starring Stephanie Brait is a great example of telling a compelling story in limited timeframe. With great visuals (and believable CGI that Hollywood should take notice of) and even better story, “Meth” is a tour-de-force of short filmmaking.

Stephanie Brait’s character Nikki is a Meth addict. She narrates her spiral down into drug addiction for us while at the same time educating us on the ways and means of how she acquires her drug of choice, the effects that it has on her body and mind, and how it has affected her life and her relationships with those around her. All this is conveyed in the first five minutes of the movie and she narrates it with a tongue-in-cheek wit and spot-on humor. The supporting characters in this film play their roles great as well, with the character of the mannequin (voiced by Robert Pavlovich) being the stand out. This discarded mannequin that Nikki finds comes alive and starts instructing her to kill someone at a specific time, at a predetermined place. The ending is also a real surprise that is partially hinted at throughout the movie, but really pays off in the closing couple minutes.

The film is shot as as a series of alternating takes, going from Nikki’s often hallucinogenic point of view to the standard storytelling cinema style. The director of photography Ryan Lewis doesn’t take too many chances camera-wise, but conveys the story clearly and gives the audience an easy entrance to the flick from frame one. The CGI integration is flawless and the character interaction with the mannequin is wholly believable. The only gripe about the look of the film comes from a couple depth-of-field blurry shots that really seem unnecessary. The editing is solid, and the soundtrack and effects are well integrated.

May 6, 2010

Screenwriting Comes to the iPad With Scripts Pro!

Ten Films Your Mother Shouldn’t See & 10 Films You Should Show Your Mom

Apologies for missing last weeks article folks but after a doctors visit I had some angry villagers on my hands and a couple guys concerned with what actually counts as necrophilia. Really it’s the doctor’s fault I’m behind because you know they aren’t supposed to give out medical information like that. So what if you’re a zombie, that’s still no reason to run screaming, “GET THE SHOTGUN!” Frankly it’s just rude.
But anyway, in honor of Mother’s day this weekend (Sunday May 9^th if you’ve forgotten) I have composed two lists. Ten movies you absolutely should NOT let your mother see, and ten movies you should show your mother. If you were looking for some way to occupy your time with her.

And remember kids: A mother’s love is like a mold under the sink. It may not be the healthiest thing in your life, but it’s always there.
(Love you, Ma -X)

Ten Cult Films Your Mother Shouldn’t See

1. The Bad Seed

From 1956, this classic cult film is about a sweet little girl who kills people. I happened to see it when I was 8 and had the same blonde hair and blue eyes and homicidal tendencies as the main character. From then on Rhoda was always my hero. And my mother wondered why I always wanted my hair in braided pigtails…

2. Harold and Maude

You don’t need to put any ideas into her head.

3. Eraserhead

It’s just going to bring up a bunch of unpleasant memories from when you were born, (“We didn’t know if it was even human!”) and that’s really the last thing your mother wants to think about on Mothers day.

4. Clerks

She does not need to know how you spend your afternoons at work.

5. Polyester

John Water’s look at the life of a suburban house wife feels like it’s meant to be funny but it comes off as brutally honest. Save mom the pain and just watch it alone.

6. Deliverance

You never did find out what happened to Daddy on that camping trip, now did you?

7. Requiem for a Dream

Right now she doesn’t know why you always take the TV. Don’t paint her a picture.

8. Reefer Madness

Lets face it, once she sees it, she’s going to want to smoke and she’s going to start pestering you for some from your stash because it’s Mother’s Day and she was in labor for 20 hours, “Your father didn’t want me have drugs then either! Am I going to have to throw you out of the room too?”

9. Un Chien Andalou (1929, France)

Two words: Cut Eyeball.

10. M (1931, Germany)

If Germans weren’t scary enough this one has Peter Lorre in his debut role as a child killer.

10 Movies You Should Show Your Mom

1. The Exorcist

“See, Mom? I could have behaved so much worse.”

2. The Shinning

Maybe this is a movie everyone close to me in my life needs to view at least once. Because I can never get the point across quiet as accurately as Jack Nicholson does, you do not bother me when I am trying to write.

3. Mommie Dearest

When she says, “Well I wasn’t like that with you,” say nothing, and see if you can manage a tiny whimper.

4. Fight Club

Bring it up the next time she asks why you can’t meet someone. “Well there was this one girl at my testicular cancer support group…”

5. Alien

“20 hours of labor is nothing compared to that.” Or if you happen to be of the female variety, “That is exactly why I am not having kids.”

6. Friday the 13^th

Because you tried to tell her, sometimes she is a little over protective.

7. Kiss Me Deadly

An apocalyptic sci-fi story that will have Mom thinking twice about opening anything of yours.

8. Attack of the Killer Tomatoes!

There’s a reason why you still refuse to touch your vegetables…

9. The Warriors

“I never did anything that bad as a kid. I mean sure I killed people but I was never stupid enough to join a gang.”

10. Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back

This has nothing to do with mother’s day but it’s a good movie. Why shouldn’t she see it?

Midnight Showings for Friday May 7th & Saturday May 8th

Landmark’s Sunshine Theatre (New York)
Clerks: The Kevin Smith debut film about life behind a counter. This simple look at life in a Qwik Stop is both insight, semi-surreal and fucking poignant. But despite having almost no violence in the film (with the exception of the fight between Dante and Randal), it was originally given an NC-17 rating by the MPAA based solely on its graphic dialogue. Miramax hired attorney Alan M. Dershowitz (of the O.J. Simpson defense team) who successfully petitioned the MPAA to lower its rating to R without any cuts.
143 East Houston Street on the Lower East Side

Nuart Theater (West Los Angeles)
The Human Centipede: Set in Germany, a retired surgeon who had once specialized in separating Siamese twins, traps three people in his basement that he’s transformed into a makeshift hospital. His plan? To be the first person to connect people together via their gastric system. I had this very same idea after reviewing Facebook’s terms, and I honestly have to wonder why no one made this movie before.
Rocky Horror Picture Show playing Every Saturday at Midnight! Featuring Sins O’ The Flesh LIVE!
11272 Santa Monica Boulevard, just west of the 405 Freeway
West Los Angeles, CA 90025

Piedmont Theatre (Oakland, CA)
Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home: Staring the original Star Trek cast and directed by
Leonard Nimoy, Captain Kirk and his crew must travel back in time to1986 San Francisco in order to save the Earth from an alien probe.
Some shots of the whales were in fact four foot long animatronics models. The models were so realistic that after release of the film, US fishing authorities publicly criticized the film makers for getting too close to whales in the wild. The shot of the whales swimming past the Golden Gate Bridge were filmed on location, when a cable got snagged on a nuclear submarine and the whales were towed out to sea.
4186 Piedmont Avenue at Linda

The Albany Twin (Albany, CA)
The Rocky Horror Picture Show:
Tim Curry’s film debut, a movie worthy of a much longer and extensive introduction, to be done at a later date. But did you know that in the dinner scene when the tablecloth is ripped away and Eddie’s carved corpse is revealed, the shock on the actors exhibit is genuine horror as most of them were not told of the prop cadaver.
Saturday May 8^th ONLY! With Barely Legal LIVE!
1115 Solano Avenue

Landmark’s Bridge Theatre (San Francisco, CA)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
3010 Geary Boulevard at Blake

The Ken Cinema (San Diego, CA)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
Friday May 7th only!
4061 Adams Avenue
San Diego, CA 92116

Landmark’s E Street Cinema (Washington, DC)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
555 11th Street NW

The Esquire Theater (Denver, CO)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
590 Downing Street

The Oriental Theatre (Milwaukee, WI)
The Rocky Horror Picture Show
Longest Running Engagement in the U.S.!
With Sensual Daydreams LIVE!
Sat, May 8^th only
2230 North Farwell Avenue

Landmark’s Inwood Theatre (Dallas, TX)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
5458 West Lovers Lane at Inwood

Landmark’s River Oaks Theatre (Houston, TX)
The Human Centipede
ADULTS ONLY
2009 West Gray

Find more information and showtimes for all these theaters at LandmarkTheatres.com

The 99W is on its third screen. In 1962, the first screen was destroyed and the marquee letters lost to the Columbus Day Storm. After a gust blew down the second screen in 1990, it was replaced by using the screen salvaged from another (closed) Portland area drive in, The 104th Street Drive In.

In 1983, a Twin Cinema Indoor theater was built on the 99W’s property in order to keep business going year round. Since 1994, business has picked up strongly again for the drive in, after a somewhat stalemate around the 1980s and early 90s. The indoor theater has 225 seats and admission is $5.00 (kids age 11 and under $4.00). The drive-in has a capacity to park 275 to 300 cars with an admission price of $8.00 (kids age 6-11 $4.00, age 5 and under are free). The Twin Cinema is open year round and the 99W Drive In is open from late April or early May until late October.

For an added bit of nostalgia, the owner sometimes slips in old movie trailers from the 50s, 60s, or 70s and always shows a classic intermission snack bar reel. There are plenty of regulars and even folks who drive all the way from Washington to visit the 99W. If you are ever in the area, do yourself a favor and visit!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Photo Credit

“TENSE, TWISTED, SHOCKING, AND VERY BLOODY.”
BBC Movie Cafe
“Has ‘CULT FOLLOWING’ written all over it!”
Daily Record

May 3, 2010 (New York, NY) – The thriller that shocked the UK and redefined the nature of horror is now receiving its highly-anticipated North American release. Troma Entertainment announced today the May 4 DVD release and May 25 Blu-ray release of Marc de Launay’s acclaimed thriller DARK NATURE. The winner of a BAFTA Scotland New Talent Award (Best Writing) and two HD Fest Awards (Best Director and Best Cinematography), DARK NATURE is a chilling new film that combines old school terror, dark wit, and modern fears.

Shot beautifully in anamorphic widescreen, DARK NATURE blends the unsettling psychological horror of THE SHINING, the eco-scares of LONG WEEKEND, and the unrelenting dread of ROSEMARY’S BABY to paint a disturbing portrait of modern life in rural UK.

Hoping to enjoy a nice holiday in the country, a mother and her rebellious daughter travel to a remote Scottish community, but their weekend getaway soon turns into a desperate fight for their lives. DARK NATURE offers bloody thrills and the blackest of comedy as these women struggle against a brutal attacker who is hiding a secret that threatens to tear them to shreds. This smart thriller has a twisting, turning narrative that creates a sense of dread from the first shot and never lets up until the final seconds.

Highlights from the DVD include as follows: commentary track by director Marc de Launay, Behind the Scenes of DARK NATURE, interview with star Vanya Eadie, THE LAST NOEL: a short film by Marc de Launay, and a trailer.

About Troma Entertainment

Based in New York City, Troma Entertainment is the oldest, continually operating, fully independent movie studio in the world. Since 1974, Troma has produced, acquired, and distributed more than one thousand feature films and T.V. programs in all genres and from all regions of the globe. Best known for THE TOXIC AVENGER, Troma has helped bring to the world the best and brightest talents in entertainment, ranging from master Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki (Troma’s 1993 release of his MY NEIGHBOR TOTORO was the first Miyazaki movie to be given a wide American theatrical release) to American humorists Matt Stone and Trey Parker (Troma’s 1996 release of their CANNIBAL! THE MUSICAL would shine the spotlight of their incredible humor almost two years before their deserved success with SOUTH PARK). Troma-produced films have also been the starting ground for such actors as Academy Award® winners Kevin Costner (SIZZLE BEACH USA), David Straithairn (WHEN NATURE CALLS) and Marisa Tomei (THE TOXIC AVENGER), as well as Chris Noth (WAITRESS!), Samuel L. Jackson (DEF BY TEMPTATION), Gates McFadden, Fergie from the Black Eyed Peas (MONSTER IN THE CLOSET), Vincent D’Onofrio (THE FIRST TURN-ON!), and more!

There are several things about this film that stand out. The first are the stellar performances by a very fresh group of young actors. Most notable is the performance by the lead actress Julia Marchese who plays Ronnie. The emotional roller-coaster that she is put through during the movie is handled effortlessly by some solid acting on her part, and with then exception of a couple of lines that could have used a second or third take, there is absolutely nothing that would make me believe that she was anyone BUT her character. Marion’s turn as Sara is haunting and twisted. I very much appreciated that they didn’t go heavy on special effects or makeup for her scenes because that would have really ruined the illusion they were trying to portray in the film. Other faces in this film include John T. Woods, Lauren Mora, Teddy Goldsmith, and Anthony Dimaano. Watching these folks made me feel like I was watching a made-for-MTV sitcom, except that their performances trump anything that the people on “The Hills” could offer up. I would be all too happy to go into more about the story of this movie, but I really think that too much exposition on my part would ruin a good portion of the suspense you would get going into it blind. So instead I’ll offer my usual critique of the technical aspects of this movie.

The cinematography is pretty standard fare, which is not a knock against the flick at all. The director of photography Alex Simon doesn’t feel the need to use any special camera tricks, odd angles, or annoying uses of depth-of-field to convey the story, rather letting the camera linger almost a second too long (but not quite) to capture these phenomenal performances and chilling images. The only thing that would have made the movie a little more complete would have been the use of a little more score throughout some of the scenes. I realize that they might have been trying really make the audience feel the emptiness of the apartment during some scenes for when the scares came up we were hit harder. I think they would have benefited more from some musical cue changes rather than just the complete silence. On that note though, the audio in general was crisp and clear, and the music that was used fit the soundtrack perfectly and didn’t feel layered on. Also points go to the sound designer for the use of a stopwatch tick to signify some of the eerie scenes.

The payoff in the final scene of the movie is completely worth the wait, with Marion Kerr (also the screenwriter) giving us a Hitchcockian ending that many other suspense writers should take a note from. This low budget film is worth every penny that was put on the screen, and should certainly be considered as a future classic.

Although we think it’s obvious to plunder the porn world for tips on how to make marketable films that sell, there is one nagging question lurking beneath the surface: Can indie filmmakers really learn something from an industry that caters to one of our most base desires?

Let’s face it: porn doesn’t have to be interesting. It doesn’t have to tell a story; it just has to show some sex. The only requirement is that each film is different than the last one because people don’t like to wank off to the same stuff over and over again — the consumers of porn demand variety. (Or, rather, consumer capitalism demands that consumers demand variety or else the whole system would fall apart, but that’s a topic for another day…another site maybe…) Further, variety in porn can simply mean sex on a boat instead of in a living room. Or sex with a hermaphrodite alien instead of a cable guy. Or 5 on 2 instead of 6 on 1. You get the picture.

The bottom line is that sex is one of the things that people obsess over. We want it; we pout when we don’t get enough of it; we complain when it’s too visible; we worry that by hiding it, it becomes perverted. It’s a basic component of human relationships and the foundation for human society and culture. No matter how intellectual you are, no matter how much you appreciate art, you must acknowledge that independent film does not, nor will it ever, have that kind of power, sway, or importance.

by Leontine May - http://leontinemay.tumblr.com

The good news for indie filmmakers is that our appetite for procreation can only be matched by our appetite for destruction. This is why Hollywood and pornography are so inextricably linked. Both are filled with cheap delights: Hollywood movies have big names and extreme FX; pornos have big boobs and extreme close-ups. Both can be short on story. And this is where indie film fits in. Indie filmmakers get to tell rich stories that are glossed over and ignored by their more “successful” counterparts.

While this is true to some degree, there is more to porn than most people are willing to acknowledge. Pornos don’t have to tell a story, but many of them do. Further, pornography caters its content to very specific audiences who have very specific needs/mindsets. There’s fat porn, tranny porn, gay porn, inter-racial porn, people-sitting-on-balloons porn, foot fetish porn – name a taboo or a marginalized group, there’s a porno out there that’s explored it.

So what happens when you make a movie catered toward a certain group of people with certain opinions and desires? You have a built-in audience who’ll see your movie, buy your swag, and (most importantly) tell other people about your movie.

So, what’s Peep Show Lesson #1? Go out and find a niche, find the people that love that niche, and you’ll find the audience for your film. Sure, you can make a bland generally appealing movie in the hopes of garnering a wide audience. But who’s going out there looking for bland, generally appealing porn? (Answer: no one.) Same thing goes for movies, folks. People want to be titillated. People want to surprised. People want to see movies that explore what’s in their heads and in their hearts, so take a note from the porn book and find out what people want to see but never get a chance to.

Come and check out our interview this Tues. May 4th with “Kick Ass” editor Eddie Hamilton and Emmy Award winning director (“Kent State”) Mark Mori! Keep an eye out for Mark’s new authorized biopic about Bettie Page and Eddie’s section about editing in the new addition of the “Guerilla Filmmaker’s Pocketbook” written by previous FilmSnobbery Live! guest Chris Jones

The monotone aspect of this film fits it perfectly. It gives it an almost timeless feel, as well as evoking a bit of nostalgia that for some reason is missing in a lot of other films that are released these days in black and white. The cinematography overall is tight, with striking camera angles and good use of depth of field in many scenes. It’s a convention that is oft overused, but is just right in this movie. It’s amusing that the main character in this movie is an artist, and that towards the end he unveils his masterpiece, much like the director has revealed this film to his audience as his masterpiece (it’s his first English speaking film).

There is a failing in this film. But I haven’t decided yet whether it is intentional, or not. The soundtrack to this film is stellar, however the dialogue and even the dead silence in the movie are plagued with a loud humming noise. Part of me wants to feel that this was an homage to early cinema rather than an error.

This movie is a must see for anyone who enjoys the cinema of the 60′s, was a fan of Warhol and the experimental films he made, and anyone that appreciates strong characters with a strong story to back them up. The visuals are striking, and the music nothing short of groovy. “Chiaroscuro, Baby” is a flick to look out for.

The characters are engaging fresh faces, many of whom are relatively new to the industry. It’s obvious they enjoy the parts they’re playing and throw themselves into their roles, despite the sometimes campy dialogue. Some of them feel like they’d be more at home on the stage versus in front of a camera lens, but that comes with experience and it’s hard to judge their true range of skills based upon seeing them in this one movie. The leads perform admirably and the supporting characters help to fill in the world that Steel has created.

The fairly wide variety of locations used in the movie also add that sense of realism to the story that is generally left out in some films. The use of multiple locations adds a lot of free production value to an otherwise obviously low budget film. Other things in this film that should be given kudos are the action scenes, underwater filmed scenes, and even an unexpected aerial skydiving scene. J.A. Steel definitely knew how to take advantage of her limited budget on this shoot, and it certainly all ends up on the screen.

The few issues I do have come from what I know had everything to do with a lack of budget for a movie of this scope. The soundtrack, sound effects and dialogue are uneven and feel layered on rather than fully integrated into the movie. The added use of sound effects in post production are mostly too loud and sometimes drown out dialogue a little, or feel out of place. I know that it was done mostly to fill in the scene and make the picture seem more rich and inviting, but sometimes it’s best to just lay off the extras. Another gripe is in regards to editing, which seems choppy at times. The story still comes through, which is really the main goal here, but it loses fluidity during some dialogue exchanges. It also shows off the differences in how some of these scenes were shot. I don’t know how many cameras were used on this set, but you can tell the differences in how some of this footage was shot and edited, as some cutaways just look completely different from the shots before it.

All in all I can appreciate what Steel was trying to accomplish with “Denizen”. I think that the overall broadness of a story like this is very hard to contain within a small-ish budget with an inexperienced cast and crew. With J.A.’s background as a martial artist you can definitely tell she shouldered a lot of the action scene burdens, as well as being in front of the camera for her role in the movie. When a director has to work in so many capacities, often the production suffers a little. At the end, “Denizen” is a fun monster movie, despite any flaws that are inherent to it’s production. I look forward to what the folks at Warrior Entertainment bring out next.

One of the major stumbling blocks this film faces is a problem of accents and language. The film is a tale of the ragtag team from Monterrey, Mexico that was the first to capture the Little League World Series crown. It would’ve been best if the film had been shot in Spanish, instead we get stereotypical accents which waver despite the arduous efforts of some cast members and the young core of the film is quite talented and likely able to handle it. To compound this problem the one kid they did have deliver an entire line in Spanish couldn’t deliver it so it was poorly-dubbed. Which brings to mind the other issue in films where accented English substitutes for a foreign language and that’s the quandary of when to venture into that foreign tongue. It’s usually best to never do so for a whole line especially if the actor being asked to deliver it can’t speak fluently.

There was, however, also inconsistency in the the casting of some pivotal roles. The first being Clifton Collins, Jr. as Cesar. Not only does his accent waver, as should be considered a given of almost anyone in the cast, but his delivery is frequently off. The prime example of this is when first addressing the media in Williamsport, PA he is concerned about the start time of their first game because that’s when the players have their siesta. Not only have we not seen a siesta in the film but the delivery is so poor you think he’s joking and poking fun at stereotypes about Mexicans. When immediately in the next scene you find out it’s true and is a legitimate complaint. Similarly when he’s being the tough coach you rarely get a glimpse of why the kids would like him regardless; it’s not a layered enough performance.

The second casting issue is more one of perception but in film in many cases perception is reality. Probably the most important person to this team is the town priest who travels with them most of the way to the series. This character is played by Cheech Marin. There’s nothing greatly wrong with Marin’s performance, as there is with many of the smaller supporting players who are unknowns, but he’s just not credible in this part as some other lesser known actor might have been. Lastly, there is Frances Fisher as Betty a beat reporter who is following the team, at first reluctantly and then willingly, who cannot decide what decade she was from or where she is from and ends up being a character without time or place.

The young cast aside from the accent issues, which was an affectation placed upon them, do deserve special mention and accolades for bringing forth most of the positive moments in this film. Namely they are: Jake T. Austin, who plays Angel Macías, the star pitcher of the team, who features in the film’s greatest moment when their coach reminds him that he’s Sandy Koufax (as the team was inspired to greatness by comparing themselves to the Brooklyn Dodgers) and he says “No, I’m Angel Macías,” which is followed by a triple-cut on his delivery of his last pitch which was awesome. Ryan Ochoa, the team’s wise-cracking catcher, Norberto, who in the narrative makes one of the great plays in the championship in what is one of the film’s special moments. Moises Arias, who is best known as Rico on the Disney Channel’s Hannah Montana, should tap into this kind of character more, he’s a bit a pest but well-intentioned and not completely obnoxious. Lastly, there is Jansen Panetierre, who plays the amicable Enrique, who is one of the two star pitchers on the team who absolutely owns his moment when he was told he’d be starting the semi-final game when he thought he’d be passed over for Angel.

What is perhaps most maddening about this film is that it botched the simple and cliché and excelled in what was unique. What makes that even more frustrating is that a lot of what is cliché could have been removed from the film and and not hurt it any since it runs about two hours. There is much of the time where you feel like you could be watching The Mighty Ducks or any other sports or Disney project. There’s all the standard scenes which detract from the different tale this film is trying to tell. Which is not to detract from the aforementioned projects or company since this film didn’t handle the scenes nearly as well.

The first act of the film drags painfully and the pace never recovers. The film insists on setting things up slowly even though nothing terribly complicated or suspenseful is happening. For example, Cesar meets his love interest, Maria, for the first time and you know there will be flirtation and what this scene leads to is establishing a turbulent relationship but the pace of dialogue combined with the Bill Conti score, which in this project is always cheesy, make the scene seem interminable.

The film starts, like many do, with the “based on a true story” title card and that should be enough but it throws in archival footage as well and black & white traveling shots. This is rarely, if ever, effective and only really makes a difference at the end when you see real photos of scenes we saw re-enacted.

The bad start that this movie gets off to is almost overcome with wrinkles unique to this tale: the kids having never played on grass, the meeting with Cool Papa Bell, the trip through the segregated South, the relationship of Cesar and Maria, the preoccupation with the games that takes over Monterrey and the games themselves.

While I am sure there are likely a few liberties with history taken I won’t get too bogged down in the minutiae there but rest assured if you survive the first act you will sit through the movie because it does indeed get better. Where it does suffer again later on is in a typically poor handling of sports on film. Yes, the story is about the characters, their relationship, their camaraderie and coming together for a common purpose but in a sports film you will inevitably have game scenes and we the audience need to know the stakes of each game and that wasn’t always the case. Similarly, as per usual, you got “Film Baseball,” which can apply to any sport and most movies, where editing made it easy to accomplish the desired result of a play. For once I’d just like to see a camera set up behind a pitcher, or the catcher, and see the whole play from windup to contact with no cuts.

If you are heading out to the movies as a fan of Little League Baseball, as I am, and want to see depicted on screen all that is good about the game, both past and present, you likely will not be disappointed. If you head out to see The Perfect Game as a fan of film you will likely be disappointed and will witnessed something far less than perfect.

In some ways, Lean may have been the wrong director to approach the project. Coming off his triumph of “Lawrence of Arabia,” he clearly wanted to out-do the vast grandeur of that towering work. Pasternak’s novel, which created an international sensation after it was smuggled out of the Soviet Union, seemed like the perfect project: the vast upheaval of the Bolshevik Revolution, in which a nation’s turmoil provides the backdrop for a passionate love triangle. Too often, though, this feels like “Lawrence of Siberia” in terms of trying to redefine the scale of epic filmmaking.

Lean’s film has no shortage of turmoil. Thousands of extras barrel their way through various sequences: marching, running, screaming, fighting, standing on lines, shooting each other, riding into battle on horses, etc. Yet “Doctor Zhivago” captured the commotion but not the emotion of the era. Lean’s decision to trim down Pasternak’s insight on the political dimensions of the era in favor of the adulterous love story between the eponymous doctor-poet and his muse Lara, a revolutionary leader’s wife, throws the film’s soul out-of-kilter. The star-crossed lovers against a backdrop of political fury could easily take place in any location at any period. The shock of Pasternak’s frank and brutal dissection of the bloody rise and ultimate betrayal of the Bolshevik period is absent – indeed, it is difficult to imagine how Lean’s “Doctor Zhivago” could upset the Kremlin with the force that Pasternak’s book created.

It doesn’t help that in Lean’s film, Zhivago’s wife Tonya (Geraldine Chaplin) is such a bland cipher that it is impossible not to fault the philandering physician for spending so much time in the arms of the lovely Lara (Julie Christie at her sexiest peak, complete with anachronistic mod hairdo). Zhivago (Omar Sharif) is also a bit of a curiosity: more of a passive observer than an actual participant to the upheaval, he often seems like an afterthought rather than the center of attention. The audience doesn’t even get to see or hear the poetry that the moist-eyed Sharif writes by candlelight while Lara rolls in their naughty bed. It is no wonder that the film’s showier supporting characters – Rod Steiger’s oleaginous attorney, Tom Courtney’s indefatigable revolutionary and Alec Guinness’ enigmatic secret policeman – wind up stealing the scenes.

And still, “Doctor Zhivago” is enjoyable in an old-fashioned manner. The production values are extraordinary: Russia was clearly off-limits for this Cold War production, so vast recreations of Moscow streets were created at a Spanish studio while Finland and Canada doubled for the snowy Urals. The film is rich with dramatic images – most notably the snow-and-ice encrusted dacha where the lovers’ retreat – while the rich detail of the costuming and art direction represents a triumph in film design. Maurice Jarre’s theme music, of course, has become a classic in its own right. And, yes, Sharif and Christie look damn fine together as illicit lovers.

Now returning on DVD for a 45th anniversary release, “Doctor Zhivago” represents the kind of film that doesn’t get made anymore. Whether that is good or bad depends on personal taste – but despite its faults, the film deserves to be seen again.

Not only is it the oldest drive in theater in Ohio, it holds the honor of being the second oldest drive in theater in the world.

Built at the junction of State Routes 21 and 250 just northwest of Strasburg by Andy Thompson and Roland Boyer during the summer of 1935, the Lynn Drive In was originally named Boyer’s Auto Theatre.

Photo Credit

The theater opened in the spring of 1937 and included a restaurant, gas station, Golf driving range, and arcade. In 1948, the theater was bought by Ward Franklin and his son-in-law Ray McCombs who changed the name to the Lynn Auto Theatre in honor of McCombs daughter, Judy Lynn. During the mid 1950′s, the restaurant, gas station, arcade, and golf range were unfortunately closed.

By the fall of 1957, Richard R. Reding, along with his son, Richard and his wife, Eunice (“Abby” as she was known to most) decided to buy the theater. They added a second screen during 1967, upgrading it to a Twin screen drive in. By the 1970s and 1980s, the Reding family not only owned the Lynn Auto Theatre but twelve other movie theaters in Northeast Ohio.

Today, the theater is on its fourth generation of the family, owned and run by Rick and Abby’s sons, Rich and Jamie Reding. In 1996, they added new soundheads to the speaker posts and installed audio boards giving customers the option of listening through their FM vehicle radios or by the traditional speakers provided. In 2001, the projection systems were completely overhauled and refurbished and by 2005, they added a brand new classic retro marquee.

Photo Credit

The Lynn Auto Theater is one of the few grass drive ins left. It can accommodate 225 vehicles and is open from March through October. Not only do you get to watch a great current film here but you will also be in the midst of living Americana history that I am sure will be unforgettable!

360 view of the Lynn Auto Theatre in Strasburg, OH

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Troy’s movie (he both wrote and directed) could easily translate to a full Hollywood feature, with themes including repression, love, angst, wanting, and individualism, “2095″ could have an appeal to not only sci-fi enthusiasts, but also to the drama crowd. The film is a love story, but it works on many other levels. It reminds me somewhat of “The Matrix”, but with much less martial arts.

It’s shot very well with great visuals and effects. There are a few close-up shots that I could do without, but I can appreciate a few bad shots with a story that works this well. Good sound and acting rounds out the film and if it were to be remade into something bigger, I would want to see the actors and actresses reprise their roles rather than have them recast with more Hollywood types. If you have an option to see this movie the next time you’re lucky enough to see it play online, or at a film festival, spend the extra couple of dollars for a ticket. You certainly won’t be disappointed.

The cast is fantastic, with each character getting their little moment to shine. Great performances by Dave Allen, James Urbaniak, and Tangi Miller round out an already stellar cast. Each character plays off each other like they were improving the script rather than reciting lines from it. The chemistry between Brian and Clark is that of lifelong friends and even the romantic connection between Brian and the colder, calculating Amy works in a realistic manner.

Shot in pretty much one location through the entire film, “Drones” does a great job of taking what they have and making it work for them in every frame. While there were a few lighting choices I took issue with, overall the shots looked great and the limited special effects weren’t overdone or too showy. The camerawork is pretty traditional, but that works for this movie. It is evident from frame one to the credits that this movie is all about the story and the characters, and doesn’t have to rely on fancy camera moves or effects to keep the audience engaged.

Speaking of the writing, the script was penned by Ben Acker and Ben Blacker and feels like a more realistic (funny given the sci-fi twist) “Office Space” in tone. People talk like people and the movie doesn’t miss a beat, never leaving the audience mired in the story, instead letting them come along for a nice steady ride. One interesting aspect of the script is that, while it includes a little cursing here and there, unlike most movies it curses in context, and uses them as comedic punches and story points rather than having the characters uttering obscenities just to move to the next shot. There is an art to cursing, and Acker and Blacker are the Monet and Picasso of dirty words.

A great soundtrack featuring Common Rotation (director Adam Busch’s band), and original music by Jonathan Dinerstein rounds out this movie nicely. The music is light and complements the tone of the film nicely, and even ties into the dialogue at times. I’m looking forward to the upcoming release of the soundtrack for “Drones”. The sound design overall was well done. Everything integrates nicely into the movie rather than feeling layered on top of the film.

This movie is just plain fun and has something for everyone. Whether a girl or guy, an office worker or orange picker, “Drones” is a flick that can be picked up and enjoyed anytime or anywhere.

One of the reasons why I praise this book so highly is that it speaks to every filmmaker regardless of budget constraints. It puts the story first and gives hints and tips for almost every crew position in the industry and gives rational advice that even a no-budget filmmaker can take to the bank. Even if you’ve made a film before, or are just a struggling gaffer, “The Guerilla Filmmaker’s Pocketbook” can give information on how to work better and more efficiently with everyone else in your cast and crew.

Some of the chapters I’d like to highlight are Writing A Feature Film with Blake Snyder (pg. 32), where he shares his love of “beat sheets” and explains how even a movie like “The Island” couldn’t answer even the most simple question “What is it?”, and thus was a domestic box office flop. Another chapter to take note of is P.A. with Judy Goldberg (pg. 72). Never in any of the books on filmmaking have I read anything from the Production Assistant’s perspective. While this position is low on the totem pole of movie production, the movie suffers if they’re not treated properly, or not given the proper information (and food) they require to do their jobs. Kudos to Chris Jones and Co. for taking notice of this often under-appreciated role. Marketing with Sheri Candler (pg. 208), is also another must-read part of this book, and it’s a subject where I personally see a lot of filmmakers get flustered. Sheri breaks it down and gets right to the point on when you should get started marketing your film (IMMEDIATELY!), and how to handle things like interviews, Q&A’s, and maximizing your exposure with the press. Lastly, there are several case study interviews towards the back of the book. In my opinion the one that you should definitely make sure you check out is the interview with Jamin and Kiowa Winans about their movie “Ink” (pg. 264). It shows Jamin’s creative process, how he and Kiowa worked together and how they even parlayed a two week booking in a theater in Colorado into eight weeks, and then continued that momentum into nationwide on-demand screenings of their film.

This is one of the most complete compendiums of information currently available on the market. It is certainly a daunting book to read from start to finish in just a few sittings, but it is really very handy if you are just looking for a tidbit of info on a particular subject. It’s basically an entire encyclopedia on filmmaking jammed into 320 pages. Get this book immediately and I guarantee that your next project will be better for having done so.

He’s the author of “The Guerrilla Filmmaker’s Handbook”, and the director of the Oscar nominated short “Gone Fishing”…He’s Chris Jones and he’s here to talk about a new edition of his handbook, spill the beans on his run-ins with the law, and give up the tips and tricks that independent filmmakers are just dying to know about.

See it all LIVE! this Tues., April 27th at 10PM EST right here at http://live.filmsnobbery.com

As I discussed in my previous article, “Too Bad to B Movie” what defines a cult film is always up for debate. Some will argue that mainstream movies cannot be considered a cult film, others will say they can be under certain conditions. One person can claim that a cult classic is a movie that is good because it’s particularly bad and I can argue that these people are inarticulate morons.
It’s all relative.
Eventually the question is always left, “What do you consider a cult film?” but if you are a film maker and you are attempting to turn your movie into a cult film, here are some things I can suggest to you that will possibly help you achieve this illustrious status:

1) Create your own individual style this different from anyone elses, and perfectly unique from anything that has been done before. (See Reservoir Dogs)

This may require some light research, and soul searching or soul procurement if you do not already have a soul. Craigslist.com is a good source for souls, I’ve been told, but I don’t know, I don’t partake of such things.

2) Have no budget. (See Evil Dead)

The best success is hard-won they say, (but I have the sneaking suspicion this is bullshit as easy success still sounds like money and sex.) When other film makers see your movie, the size of your budget and how you used it is a huge deal. You want other guys to look at your movie and look at your budget and you don’t want them to talking about what a great personality and message the film had. No, you want them to get excited, “Wow! You did all that with a budget like that? That’s incredible!” [Obligatory dick joke to be inserted later after I review footage from this year's Streamys]

3) Use shocking material. (See Pink Flamingos)

There’s a level of pornographic you will need to cross to achieve “shock” if you are not using a cattle prod but it should be only in the visual effect of the word. Pornographic in that a normal person finds themselves unable to look at the screen, and pornographic in that a small percentage of people might be turned on by it, (but that can generally be true of anything, [See Jesus Camp]).

4) Bomb your first theater run. (See The Shawshank Redemption)

I mean that in the non-literal sense of course, do not blow up your premiering audience, but yeah, your first theater run should suck. Do not by any means have a good box-office reception. No one should know that you actually have created a brilliant movie until at least the DVD release.
I bring up The Shawshank Redemption because this is a movie I’m sure many will be surprised to see listed as a cult film, but yes, actually it does qualify. This adaptation of the Stephen King story just happened to come in 1994, the same year as Forrest Gump, Pulp Fiction, and Speed. While it was rightly nominated for a slew of Oscars, it won none and it failed at the box-office during its first run.  It wasn’t until later that the film gained some well-deserved audience attention.

5) Exploit TV (See It’s a Wonderful Life)

Bribe as many programmers as you can, and offer your movie for TV and the Web, offer it on Hulu and Netflix, for free or for cheap. Shove it down peoples throats and get as many people to see it or play it as possible.
Eventually, yes, the fans will emerge. Everybody likes something. It’s a Wonderful Life showed generations of movie makers that even if you have Jimmy Stuart committing suicide on Christmas, you can turn yourself into what audiences will eventually call a “classic.” God help us all.

More tips to come eventually, honestly you can’t stop women from telling you what to do but take five for now, kids.

Midnight Showings for Friday April 23 & Saturday April 24th

Landmark’s Sunshine Theatre (New York)
Terminator 2: Judgment Day: From the incomparable James Cameron, T2. See current California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger mostly nude in gay bar in the first ten minutes of this lovable action flick from the early 90′s. The action sequences and effects in this movie are still unbelievable to watch twenty years later.
143 East Houston Street on the Lower East Side

Nuart Theater (West Los Angeles)
Predator 2: (Playing only on Friday, April, 23rd)
Alien’s use Los Angeles as a hunting ground, brutally killing drug lords, gang leaders and any one with a gun, which in LA at the time (1990), was pretty much everyone. Hilariously bloody, this movie brings back warm and fuzzy feelings for me, as it loosely resembles my early 90′s childhood in Miami, though the slaughterhouse and subway scenes which I love dearly, could never have been shot in my home town as we don’t have subways and slaughtering is generally done in the open air. Schwarzenegger was going to co-star in this movie but decided to do Terminator 2 instead. Isn’t that funny?
Rocky Horror Picture Show playing Every Saturday at Midnight! Featuring Sins O’ The Flesh LIVE!
11272 Santa Monica Boulevard, just west of the 405 Freeway
West Los Angeles, CA 90025

Piedmont Theatre (Oakland, CA)
Coffy: A busty Pam Grier plays Coffy, a nurse working in a city hospital, having a romance with a political hopeful, and caring for her sister, she wields a shotgun and singlehandedly takes down an entire heroine operation. This movie was shot in only 18 days and was a surprising success at the time, but who could possibly say “No” to movie about a chick that hides razorblades in her afro? Bad Ass.
4186 Piedmont Avenue at Linda

Landmark’s Clay Theatre (San Francisco, CA)
The Rocky Horror Picture Show
Saturday April 24th!
With The Bawdy Caste LIVE!
2261 Fillmore Street

Landmark’s E Street Cinema (Washington, DC)
The Room: An American black comedy that begs the question, “Can you ever really trust anyone?” (A query not to be made to my ex-boyfriends.) The movie transformed into a Midnight Show with it’s own cult following after a short theatrical run in 2003.
555 11th Street NW

The Esquire Theater (Denver, CO)
Birdemic: Shock and Terror: Hickcock’s The Birds was one of my favorite films growing up. Something that seriously concerned my mother and elementary school teachers. Because when you live on the Florida coast there are plenty of seagulls and more vultures than you expect and some kids will take you seriously when you tell them that the birds are all just waiting for a day to attack. Just watch a flock of gulls go after an abandoned box of cookies and many are easily convinced. But Birdemic isn’t just a story created to frighten school kids. In our modern times of avian flu, global warming, organic living, and environmental awareness the movie confronts issues that Hitchcock never could have foreseen, even if he scored the better title.
Director James Nguyen In Person for a Q&A Sat, Apr 24 only!
590 Downing Street

The Oriental Theatre (Milwaukee, WI)
The Room: An American black comedy that begs the question, “Can you ever really trust anyone?” (A query not to be made to my ex-boyfriends.) The movie transformed into a Midnight Show with it’s own cult following after a short theatrical run in 2003.
Saturday, April 24th only!
2230 North Farwell Avenue

Landmark’s Inwood Theatre (Dallas, TX)
Spaceballs: Mel Brook’s hilarious spoof Star Wars and various other space movies. This film makes you want to bitch slap the makers of Scary Movie, Not Another Teen Movie, and Meet The Spartans, because seriously, what the fuck was that?
Despite all the running gags about Spaceballs lunch boxes, cereal, and flame throwers, no legit Spaceballs merchandise was ever produced as per the fair-use agreement between Mel Brooks and George Lucas.
5458 West Lovers Lane at Inwood

Landmark’s River Oaks Theatre (Houston, TX)
Wayne’s World: A spin-off of a Saturday Night Live regular skit with Mike Myers and Dana Carvey where they play two slacker friends doing a public access TV show in their basement. Not entirely unlike our own Film Snob, Nic Baisley, but unlike Mike Myers, Nic is not fit for a screen larger than seventeen by ten inches. It’s the only thing that properly hides the belly.
2009 West Gray

Find more information and showtimes for all these theaters at LandmarkTheatres.com

I jumped at this opportunity because I’ve been fascinated with pornography, intellectually, for a very long time. As a matter of fact, The GirlRods series (the first five films that Julie and I made together) were all about porn. The GirlRods started out at two co-stars figuring out where dating fit into the porn world. As the years went on, the crew grew to a rag-tag team of 5 female porn stars who fought and fucked with a little help from their friends. As a group (and individually) they worried about the effect of aging on their careers, compiled their lists of won’t-do’s for their shoots, and tried to be shrewd business women. They even went on adventures involving mad scientists, robot dopplegangers, and astrophysical gapers.

Drawing by Leontine Greenberg

The GirlRods films explored some of our deepest anxieties about sex, gender, and sexuality and how those things are expressed in pornography. We wondered about whether the mainstreaming of porn is damaging, whether or not it exploits women, whether it cheapens sex. And the answers to all of those questions is: sometimes. Early on, though, those questions ceased to be interesting. The deeper we delved, the more we discovered that there is a wide variety of pornography and that a lot of porn is, like most American enterprises, pushed forward by the bigger-stronger-faster model of every other industry. So much pornography is about endurance and feats of strength. From the myths about 12-inch cocks to bukaki to ATM – it’s about how big, how much, and how far. And, ultimately, it’s about how much money can be made.

While there is certainly much discussion about the effect of pornography on society, this column is going to explore the business side of making and distributing pornographic and erotic films. The goal of this exploration is not to teach people how to make pornography, though that might be a side-effect; instead, we want to give independent filmmakers some ideas about other possible models for production and distribution from an industry that seems to always roll with the punches.

Can indie filmmakers really learn anything from porn? Maybe. Maybe not. Considering how well pornography navigates and adapts to the changing technological and media landscape, we think it’s worth exploring.

Viewed today, it is easy to see what went wrong.  Kurosawa’s belated journey into color cinematography resulted in an artistic overkill: garish art direction and costuming matched with blatant artificial effects (particularly the use of boldly painted skies) work to call direct attention to the filmmaking technique. The visual subtlety that made classics out Kurosawa’s work is absent in this sledgehammer approach to cinema.

Kurosawa’s scattershot approach to his source material, Shugoro Yamamoto’s short story collection “The Town Without Seasons,” doesn’t help. “Dodes’ka-den” consists of interconnected tales of strangeness and tragedy involving a community living in crummy shacks within an overwhelming garbage dump. The film has no strong central character – the closest thing it has to a connecting personality is a demented youth who runs about the garbage dump while believing his driving a trolley car. The youth’s complete divorce from reality mirrors the fate of his neighbors: some are oblivious to their circumstances, others ignore it and, in one case (the most tragic of the stories, involving a deranged homeless man whose child dies from food poisoning), inner delusion takes over completely.  No one in the film tries to better themselves – the characters exist in a Beckettian nightmare without realizing a better life is possible.

Unfortunately, Kurosawa directs his cast in an Acting 101 method that prevents the ability for anyone to create a fully dimensional character.  A comic tale of two drunken laborers who swap wives is weak farce – the men are vaudeville inebriates and excessively too gorgeous and smart, to the point that it is impossible to believe they are wasting their lives with such losers.  The more serious episodes, including a teen girl molested by her stepfather and a near-catatonic man whose life was destroyed by his wife’s infidelity, are overplayed to the point that they become caricatures of tragedy. The marriage of a gruff woman and her mild-mannered handicapped husband is steamrolled by giving the woman acute tough guy habits (complete with dangling cigarette and built-in scowl) and trapping the man in a weirdly overstated limp and a too-severe facial tic.

As a result, “Dodes’ka-den” is awash with color and fury but lacking in heart and soul.  The ultimate effect is the cinematic equivalent of a neon sign: full of flash and color, but never illuminating.

Unlike the other drive ins I have featured so far, the Mission Tiki has another interesting way to attract new (and returning) customers. They hold Swap Meets every Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday from 6am until 2pm. The price for the Swap Meet admission is only fifty cents on Wednesday and Friday and seventy five cents on Saturday and Sunday.

Not only do they have a great selection of movie concessions (including freshly made tacos!), but there are plenty of dining establishments located around the theater, if you are craving something else. Or, you could always bring your own snacks from home, unlike most other movie theaters, the Mission Tiki doesn’t mind!

The movies generally begin around 8:15 to 8:30pm but it is recommended that you get there at about 7:30pm to find a good spot! You can use the waiting time to take in the fabulous Tiki decorations or stake out a good site to sell your wares at the Swap Meet!

Special thanks to my pal, Chris Blake for telling me about the Mission Tiki!

If you would like to highlight an interesting movie theater in YOUR town, please feel free to contact me here: Stephanie@FilmSnobbery.com, follow me on Twitter, or be my awesome pal on Facebook!

Los Angeles – April 16, 2010 – Red Flag Releasing announced today that it will debut “8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION” simultaneously in theaters, On Demand and through digital download channels June 18th, 2010. Written and directed by journalist and former Mormon missionary Reed Cowan, and narrated by Academy Award© -winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black (Milk), “8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION” exposes the Mormon Church’s historic involvement in the promotion and passage of California’s Proposition 8 and the religion’s ongoing campaign against gay rights. The film takes place in California and Utah as Mormons, following their prophet’s call to action, wage spiritual warfare with money and misinformation against gay citizens, doing everything they can to deny them of marriage and the rights that come with it. “8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION” opens in theaters on June 18, 2010, two years after the first gay marriages took place in California (June 17, 2008).

The film will open in theaters June 18th, 2010 in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Boston, Salt Lake City, Atlanta, Palm Springs, Phoenix, San Diego, Dallas, Houston and Honolulu. “8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION” will also debut day-and-date On Demand via cable and satellite providers and digital download channels.

Produced by Cowan, Steven Greenstreet, Chris Volz and Emily Pearson for David V. Goliath Productions. Cowan and Bruce Bastian served as executive producers. The film is co-directed by Greenstreet.

“This film is for voters who deserve to see how money and misinformation can influence public policy. As a former Mormon missionary and seminary student with knowledge of Mormon strategy at the highest levels, it’s also important for youth in any church who often feel the sting of bigotry from the pulpit. There is a body-count of suicide and homelessness tied to such bigotry, and if this film can be a part of promoting life and liberty, it will have achieved its purpose,” said Cowan.

“There was so much confusion surrounding this issue during the campaign. It is important for people to understand that this is another struggle for civil rights,” said Red Flag Releasing’s Laura Kim. “The film is so timely and the issue impacts the lives of so many people we know, it just makes sense to make it as accessible as possible through multiple distribution outlets. Having those see it in markets where we will not be theatrically makes the most sense and increases the viewing capability of this very important story,” added Red Flag’s Paul Federbush.

About Red Flag Releasing
In this age of ubiquitous technological change, Paul Federbush, Laura Kim and Ron Stein have launched a new independent film distribution company, Red Flag Releasing (RFR), that will take advantage of available platforms to customize a release that is organic to the needs of each film. In its first year, RFR will acquire completed films at festivals, and find projects in production where the company can provide finishing funds.