Cinema on the Verge

Good Vibes at Slamdance

July 11, 2007 · 10 Comments

2007_competition.jpgWell, it appears that one of my screenplays, Elsewhere, has received some great feedback from the script readers at the Slamdance Screenplay Competition.  The problems with the script appear to be minor and I already have some ideas to remedy them rather quickly.  Some issues are as easy as just inserting a line of dialog in the right place.
Slamdance provided some excellent feedback and while it costs a little bit of money to have comprehensive coverage done, it’s a useful tool in getting your script polished and up to speed.

Here’s the feedback to give you an idea of what to expect.

Evaluation:
“Elsewhere” is a novel concept and story centered on people, like principals Lange and Vanessa, who get gratification from self mutilation. We see realistically develop in the
story how the lives of such people can be destroyed by the repugnance such desires engenders in the people around them, a distaste almost as bad as that for cannibalism. In attaching to Vanessa Lange begins to exhibit the same predilection. The title of the script, “Elsewhere,” is creatively apt as it describes people whose gratification is achieved by such unconventional means. Their tastes are “elsewhere.” Ostracized as these people frequently are by family, friends, colleagues and superiors, they can easily become “elsewhere” in the eyes of society. Unknowingly Lange has hooked up with a woman who was once the victim of child molestation, the prosecution of which was handled by Lange’s wife, Nan. Nan appears in the story to have been devastated by the whole affair. Though it is not made sufficiently clear in the story the superb plot implication is that Nan prosecuted the wrong man for the abuse of Vanessa and that the mistake was never rectified. Vanessa’s uncle was blamed when, in fact, the abuser was her own father, a powerful and politically connected man who escaped prosecution through influence and patronage If, in fact, that is the intent of the story then, of course, Nan may be criminally liable along with her superior in the district attorney’s office to the extent either of them knowingly conducted such a prosecution. Furthermore, this plot point or concept is an excellent one for a separate story about Vanessa and the outrageous conduct of her own father willing to frame his own brother to escape criminal penalties. It certainly works in this story on the basis described above; it’s a great plot point generally.

What works:
Principal characterizations are outstanding. Despite their reviled means of gratification, Lange and Vanessa are thoroughly credible personalities. The script presents the truth that people with bizarre means of gratification can in other contexts appear perfectly normal and even talk like an office colleague or a next door neighbor. But, the story goes even further: Such desires can develop to a point that they do severely and adversely impact upon a person’s life. In Lange’s case he loses a good job; Vanessa quite logically and admissibly commits suicide though her death is not the direct product of her desire for mutilation. In her case the mutilation was another outgrowth of the abuse she suffered when she was a child or teenager. This is all very vivid and valid from a story standpoint. It also makes the story a very unusual and remarkable tragedy. Dialogue is generally uncommonly good, especially the often brilliant exchanges between Lange and Vanessa. They really shine as dialogue proceeding from two people whose self destructive impulses unfortunately complement each other to the ruin of both of them in one way or another. We have already noted the very strong plot point (relating to Vanessa) that her father was her abuser, rather than the uncle who was unjustly prosecuted. This concept is well complemented by the emotional and professional devastation suffered by Nan which is so intense she can no longer function at the professional endeavor for which she was trained and where her career experience lies. Nan’s characterization is the essential narrative bridge between the self mutilation content of the script and the function of the afflicted characters as human beings who must function in normal contexts.

What doesn’t work:
The only issue we have with the script has already been expressed. We understand the accidental connection of Lange with Vanessa who was long ago connected with Nan.
However, we are not sure from reading the script whether our conclusions fit the writer’s intent. Did Nan knowingly or unknowingly prosecute the innocent uncle? Was Vanessa, in fact, abused by her father, rather than the uncle? Or was she abused by both, with the father escaping punishment? These developments are not clear upon a straight through reading of the script as they should be. We need scene content that makes the answers to these questions clearer and more concrete than they presently are. As it is the script leaves us with difficulty understanding precisely what it is that caused Nan to resign (or was she dismissed?) from the district attorney’s office. We simply need character actions that result in dialogue that makes these vital points clear and comprehensible.

How it can be improved:
This analyst suggests that the most satisfying resolution to the questions raised above is for Man to have resigned because she found out after the uncle’s prosecution succeeded that Vanessa’s father had also molested Vanessa. However, because of the father’s influence Nan’s superior refuses to allow the father to be prosecuted. Nan resigns from the D.A.’s office and this precipitates her descent into depression. We can therefore also readily understand why when she tries to return to her job her superior refuses to have her back. Nan’s superior might take Nan aside in private where they discuss the reason behind her resignation. This would appropriately cue the audience as to what happened to cause Nan’s departure, ennobles her character without making her party to a cover-up of a fraudulent prosecution of the innocent uncle and helps reinforce Vanessa’s connection to Lange’s story, maintaining both Lange and Vanessa as principal characters in a unified narrative though we have two characters each with separate lives and coming out of separate story lines. Double check any story points that are not currently categorically clear. If a character needs to explain something in unambiguous terms then, by all means, have the character do so.

Next step:
This script has excellent major and minor characters, a great plot concept and other elements for a fresh and engaging drama. The necessary constituent scenes and
characterizations are already there. All that is required to make this an attractive piece to industry decision makers is to reinforce plot developments as suggested above.

As you can see, this is a script with vast potential.  Hopefully the quality of the work is enough to shoot me over to the next round.  While I don’t think I’ll win the grand prize, being one of the 0 finalists would be nice but you never know and I’ll keep plugging away at getting my work out there.

Till next time ladies and gents.

→ 10 CommentsCategories: General

Script Samples Down

May 9, 2007 · No Comments

I’ve taken the screenplay samples offline because I’m retooling many of them and they may end up being very different than what they were before.  As many of who have created you know, these works are never really done.  However, I promise the samples will make their triumphant return very, very soon!

→ No CommentsCategories: Uncategorized

Yippie Kiyay Mother….BLEEP!!!

May 5, 2007 · No Comments

xin_42050401093470774655.jpgIn possibly the worst summer blockbuster news I’ve heard yet, Fox may be trying to get Live Free or Die Hard (Die Hard 4.0) down to a family friendly P-13 rating. I guess my question is why?

Yes I know the sales figures indicate that P-13 ratings have a better chance at performing well at the box office, but this is the fabled Die Hard series for fucks sake and I use that word to give this post a nice R rating.

I don’t want a watered down Die Hard film. I want blood, I want profanity, I want all the elements that made the first set of films successful. Who gives a fuck (just to give this post an R rating) if the teeny boppers can see it or not. I don’t care about them nor do the people who remember these films who ARE THE ONES WHO ARE GOING TO SEE THIS!!!!! These punks don’t know who John McClane is nor do they care. Let them go see Pirates of the Caribbean already!

I’m not the only one upset, so is the man himself, Bruce Willis, as he told Vanity Fair:

“I really wanted this one to live up to the promise of the first one, which I always thought was the only really good one.’ And he’s not happy about it. ‘That’s a studio decision that is becoming more and more common, because they’re trying to reach a broader audience. It seems almost a courageous move to give a picture an R rating these days. But we still made a pretty hardcore, smashmouth film.’“

You mean P-13 like smashmouth? With words like heck, darn and blimey? Not a lash out at you Mr.Willis, just the system. And it’s this system that always seems to find away to take the fun out of a good idea. Can the American film industry produce a successful R rated action film anymore? All indicators seem to be yes, but not on their watch.

Yippie Kiyay Mother fuckers and scratch this one from my list. I’ll wait for the unrated DVD.

→ No CommentsCategories: General

Grindhouse Review

April 8, 2007 · 4 Comments

grindhouse-20070405103504588.jpgNope, the review isn’t here if you zipped over to this site from my personal blog.

Although I did just give this blog a big redesign.

Lovely, yes?

But if you REALLY want my take on Grindhouse, it’s not here……but HERE!

→ 4 CommentsCategories: Film Reviews · General

Give me the Grindhouse Baby!

April 7, 2007 · 2 Comments

 Give me sleaze, give me sex, grindhouse-poster.jpggive me violence!

Yes readers, if you love some good schlock on celluloid then this latest epic by the directing tandem of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez should do the trick. At least I hope it will as watching the previews reminded me of some of the Z grade films I overdosed on while growing up.

Truth be told, my Saturday’s were filled with low grade horror, kung-fu and action films. I had interest in little else except maybe a game or 2 on the old Atari 2600. An endless parade of these films would be shown on a local independent TV station and when that didn’t fit the bill it was Commander USA’s Groovie Movies on the USA Network. Ah, the memories.

I thoroughly expect these 2 film making pioneers to bring a new twist to the old game and raise it to a level that’s in a class by itself.

Or will they?

Stay tuned and check out this post for a link to my upcoming review of…..GRINDHOUSE!

→ 2 CommentsCategories: Film Reviews · General

Chatham

March 31, 2007 · 4 Comments

film27.jpg

Chatham is a film currently in production (just a few hours from me) in Cape Cod and based on the novel “Cap’n Eri” by Joseph Lincoln. It’s a period piece that takes place in 1905. The film boasts a solid cast featuring David Carradine, Rip Torn, Bruce Dern, Mariel Hemingway and my good friend Don Foley who is giving a great account of his moments on the set here.

The romantic comedy centers around 3 retired sea captains who draw straws to see which one of them will advertise for a bride. The “loser” must let the other 2 captains live with both he and the new bride. Personally I can’t see how anyone would wind being the “loser” with the bride being played by Mariel Hemingway but the film should be fun. And I’m also looking forward to see how the trio of Carradine, Torn and Dern play off one another. All are great acting veterans.

Here’s a slide show of the production in progress courtesy of Cape Cod online.

→ 4 CommentsCategories: General · Movies

Original Screenplay: For Her Redemption

March 26, 2007 · 3 Comments

The latest screenplay I’ve just completed but I still consider it a work in progress to an extent. I’d like to get it lower than it’s current 120 page mark. I find that too long and like them coming in around 90 pages. But this is the first script I’ve done in awhile and I guess I had a lot to say. I think it’s a very compelling story and will be great once I complete my retooling which at this point isn’t anything that’s too major. For those of you who create, you know your creations are never done.

And now for the log line.

A successful executive witnesses a woman committing suicide and decides to investigate the final months of her life and is forced to confront his own past daemons in the process.

→ 3 CommentsCategories: Original Screenpays

And we’re back!

March 25, 2007 · No Comments

Actually I’m back to updating this blog a bit more often with news on some independent films that strike me or whatever else for that matter. I’ve recently begun the process of enrolling in a few screenwriting competitions and hope to get some feedback on my work and what can be done to make it better. The 2 big ones I’m shooting for now are Sundance and Slamdance. I’m looking into exploring others but these will be my focus for now. I feel my work is good enough to be considered for production and while I’m not expecting to “win” I do hope to get some constructive feedback if I advance far enough.

And that’s what the focus of this blog will be in the coming months. I’ll try and get some reviews up but ultimately I’d like to chronicle my adventure of getting my work out and considered. Let the games begin!

→ No CommentsCategories: General · Uncategorized

Review: Confusions Of An Unmarried Couple

January 8, 2007 · No Comments

I enjoy films that attempt to wrestle with some of the real problems that men and women face in the midst of a relationship or after the breakup of one. I don’t care for the recreation of an ideal romance that seems more at home on a greeting card or chick flick. I want to see a film that gets messy with the subject and shows the bleeding wounds that we can inflict on one another in the name of love. Confusions Of An Unmarried Couple is a film by the Canadian brother duo of Brett and Jason Butler that makes an attempt at doing this. Does the film succeed? I’ll save that answer for later in the the review, first some background on the story.

Dan (Brett Butler) is a young gent so shattered by the recent breakup with his girlfriend Lisa (Naomi Johnson) that he’s basically shuttered himself from the world. The film opens with scenes of Dan living off a diet of beer and very little else. He seems to sleep all day and normal things like showering and taking care of himself are too much of an hassle. Dan is not lazy or a pig, he simply has nothing left in the emotional tank to sustain himself. He masturbates to images of Lisa and questions why she did what she did. When done, he wallows in the stench of his physical neglect and mental malaise.

Lisa sits at home creating humorous folk songs chastising Dan for what he did. Her song is interrupted by Dan, who continuously bombards her with crank calls. Lisa’s place used to be Dan and Lisa’s place. We learn that the two were planning to get married but it all fell through when Dan caught Lisa cheating with another woman. And while Lisa may harbor some anger over the breakup, it’s Dan who hurts the most. Lisa still has numerous things of sentimental value at her place and these things motivate Dan to finally go out into the real world to get them back. It’s in the attempt to reclaim these things that the meat of the story is told.

What is the meat of the story? What many dysfunctional relationships are; a battle of semantics and one upping each other. Most of the film takes place at Lisa’s with both she and Dan verbally slugging it out. The action is cut with documentary style confessions of each of them giving their side of the story. Are they right or wrong? Difficult to say because this is not a cut and dry issue. Actually, there are many issues that are tackled in this film that many people out there have done or experienced. There are the mistakes of confusing sex with intimacy and intimacy with white lies. There are secrets and insecurities. There are accusations that men only care about sex. We do care, but sex for men isn’t always about self gratification, it’s about feeling like a wanted man and gaining confidence from that. What better way to get that than from a woman you love or desire? Maybe we place too much worth on the act, but it’s the most efficient way for us because that’s how are minds are rigged. Is it wrong? That issue is always up for debate. Dan is ridiculed for not speaking of other women because he views them as future sex partners. Is the caution a fear of commitment, a cushion for his ego or a natural act of self preservation? Why would Lisa pressure Dan to marry if she still had feelings for this other woman in her past? Is it true love that these 2 seek or power over each other?

Love is not power over someone, this much I know. Therefore what I saw between Dan and Lisa was something more on the side of lust and codependency with a chance for love somewhere underneath it all. I sat back and found myself nodding and laughing over some of the points addressed in this film, and there are many of them. This is a dialog driven film that feels like it’s arguing with itself. This is not a bad thing as the film is attempting to grapple with issues that destroy relationships the world over. Neither sex fully understands the other and each argument draws a deeper divide between them. It made me realize how much time and energy are wasted on the wrong things. Dan returning to Lisa’s place was not so much about getting what belonged to him, but taking away things that could hurt her in a vengeful way. Haven’t we all felt this at the end of a bad breakup? Is this a productive exercise? I feel it weakens us further, but that’s just my take.

I really enjoyed the film but did it succeed in it’s attempt? I think the themes the Butler brothers are dealing with are excellent territory that they should keep exploring. This is their 3rd film that I’ve reviewed and with each one, I see bigger and bigger steps in the right direction. Gone are the homages to their idols and instead we have a more vulnerable and heartfelt outing. It’s not easy to stick your neck out like this but they have. This feels like their vision and it’s a good one. Actually this is their best and most mature outing thus far. So the answer is yes for this outing and no in the bigger picture. I say “no” because I know they have more to say on these topics and I want them to keep digging. The best is yet to come from these men.

If you’ve loved and lost and fought to be loved again, this one may be for you.

→ No CommentsCategories: Film Reviews

Worth the gamble? Casino Royale (2006)

November 19, 2006 · 4 Comments

1318d48.jpgI’m deviating from my focus on smaller films to very big ones with Casino Royale, the latest installment in the the James Bond franchise that’s thrived for over 40 years. I’ve been a fan of this series for as long as I can recall so it was a priority to check this one out on opening weekend. The buzz from critics all around has been extremely favorable.

Typically, the Bond films are trashed by both critics and loyalists to the Flemming novels as being too over the top and too reliant on gadgetry. I say that such a formula has worked well over the last several decades with some down cycles here and there, but overall they met most movie goers expectations. This includes yours truly who found himself giggling like a kid over the ice palace and invisible car featured in the last installment, Die Another Day. That would also be the final outing for the long sought after and acquired Piece Brosnan who I found to be great as 007.

Producers, after seeing the stellar results of prequels like Batman Begins, opted for the same treatment for Bond. They would focus on his first mission as a double 0 agent. A Bond less refined and green around the edges but with a heart of steel when it comes to killing and a softy when it came to romance. Casino Royal sets out to give us a Bond in the midst of a steep learning curve who gets hurt physically and emotionally with each mistake made. This would deviate from the formula that worked so well for so many years and be, in essence, a return to the basics. The guide in putting this film together would be the sole Flemming book never made into an official Bond film, Casino Royale. And in a move more controversial than it should have been, Daniel Craig was cast as Bond.

Does the gamble pay off? Yes and, in some ways, no. First, a little about the film. Bondmads_mikkelsen-le_chiffre-2.jpg must take down a criminal banker and ace card player known as Le Chiffre (Madds Mikklesen) who weeps blood due to a problem with his tear ducts. Le Ciffre is a mastermind at getting money into the hands of terrorists around the world. He intends to use his card playing skills to raise money for them in a super high stakes poker game in Montenegro. Bond romances the wife of one of heavies connected with Le Chiffre, Solange (Caterina Murino), but is melted away by MI6 money cruncher Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), who is sent by M (Dame Judi Dench) to keep Bond in check. Bond must then defeat Le Chiffre at the poker game which will, in turn, bring his criminal network crashing down.

I had to keep reminding myself that this was before Bond really becomes Bond. He does several things that are out of character so to speak when dealing with Vesper. But if you keep in mind that this is the beginning, it will make sense how Bond becomes the type of man that views women as temporary prizes, obstacles, liabilities or disposable. The Vesper character deviates strongly from the typical “Bond girls” of the past. She’s given more to do with her mind rather than her beauty, both of which she has in abundance. She’s not afraid to challenge James and she has the upper hand through most of the film. The exchanges between them are fun and sorely lacking in past films.

The action sequences are fine. There’s a great foot chase through a construction site, another chase through an airport runway and a nasty shoot out in a collapsing Venetian building to name a few. The gadgets are there but seem more pratical than fun, almost pedestrian with the exception of the defibrillator in the glove box of his Aston Martin. If I can wage any gripe about this films action it’s that it felt, at times, like The Bourne Identity series. To be clear, that film and it’s followup are fantastic. I have no problem with them. However, Bourne is Bourne and Bond is Bond. The two are best enjoyed separately and not mixed shaken or stirred together. There’s is also way too much product placement going on in Casino Royale. The rather reserved David Arnold score picks up dramatically as Bond cruises the Bahamas in…….a Ford! Sure he gets the Aston Martin later, but where’s the real music for that. C’mon guys! A Ford!?! I know Bond had humble beginnings, but honestly.

7db7eea.jpgAnd that brings me to another gripe, continuity. Sure the Bond series is rather dodgy with with this but while I love Judi Dench as M, it makes no sense having her in it since she’s not brought in until Goldeneye. This is where things get a tad precarious in my judgement of this film. I can’t determine if this is just a liberty taken by the producers to keep a woman with incredible presence and ability in the series, or if they are going to act as if the previous 20 films never happened. If the latter, then this film drops from one of my favorites to one of the most hated in the blink of an eye. I don’t mind shaking up the legacy but don’t spit on the legacy.

Overall, we have a new Bond in Daniel Craig that is funny, gritty, dangerous and vulnerable. His attempt at the role is class, this guy nails it. If there is one potential problem that critics seem to be pushing for, it’s injecting too much realism into this series. It doesn’t belong in Bond as his world is that of fantasy. To be too real in the world of Bond is to be boring or something in the realm of Tom Clancy. (Nothing wrong with Clancy, it’s just not Bond) Bond doesn’t need to be human, he needs to be just as mad as the evil maniacs he’s trying to do in. Absurdity and impracticality are not hindrances in the Bond canon, they are necessities. But again, this is the beginning, some of his practical humanity is still left and he hasn’t become Bond we know and love. casino-royale_teaser-trailer_004.jpg

To the Bond movie fans out there who are worried about the changes; the exotic locations, beautiful women, glamor, gadgets and guns are still there but they just don’t feel like anything we’ve seen in the past films. You even have recurring characters like Felix Lieter (Jeffery Wright) coming back into the mix. But it wans’t until this films final moments that it really felt like a true Bond film to me. And that sequence was so different from the typical Bond ending that strangely…….it was more Bond than anything I’d ever seen in this series.

And that had me leaving the theater with a smile on my face.

→ 4 CommentsCategories: Film Reviews