- Published on
I’ve been told that actors live in constant fear of finding themselves typecast in a certain kind of role over the life of their careers in the entertainment industry.
And – to be honest – who can blame them? When you’re finally educated and respected in the art of your craft, isn’t that when you’d love to be challenged by a variety of work instead of finding yourself pigeonholed into the same character over and over and over again? As a fan of Science Fiction, I’ve met many actors who’ve kinda/sorta lamented “I never should’ve taken that Star Trek role because it’s followed me around my entire life,” and – sure – on one level, I feel sorry for them.
However, I think the same thing may’ve happened to actor Tony Sirico.
For those of you who know that name, Sirico played Paulie ‘Walnuts’ Gualtieri – a rather significant and central role to HBO’s long-running crime drama The Sopranos. In Zarra’s Law (2014), he plays a retired police detective … but for the life of me I couldn’t stop waiting for him to break loose the way a ‘made man’ should, and it may’ve hampered my ability to remain completely impartial.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“Retired cop Tony (Tony Sirico) finds he is unable to forget the murder of his younger brother, who was in the mob. He’s outraged when he finds out the man he holds responsible is getting out of prison after only two years. He needs to find answers fast and if necessary, seek revenge. Joined by his attorney nephew, Gaetano (Brendan Fehr), he infiltrates the seamy world of organized crime and gets lost in a labyrinth of greed, dead ends, and lies.”
Well …
That isn’t quite how I saw all of Zarra’s Law playing out, but it’s a very close approximation.
The veteran Sirico makes the best of the role given what appears to be his limited range (that’s not an insult to the actor; it’s only a statement that perhaps playing an officer of the law may not be his best suit). The script by Joseph Scarpinito and Charles Kipps traffics far too heavily in clichés – i.e. cops have hearts of gold; mobsters are in the biz for life; former soldiers make for great hometown heroes – and this ends up feeling more than a bit like a TV-movie-of-the-week upgraded by way of the many Brooklynese F-bombs.
Still, the chief problem I had with so much of Law is none of it felt even remotely organic. Clearly, these characters are set in motion due entirely to the conventions of scripted drama (Tony cares so much for his aging mother than he’s never taken a wife; all Gaetano wants to do is see justice served for his every client; never trust a mobster who welches on a deal; etc.), so it’s hard to see any other way for these events to unfurl except for the most predictable way. Even Gaetano is given a motorcycle as a means of defining his character (he’ll park that thing on the sidewalk simply because he doesn’t ‘follow’ the rules others do), and it felt more like this film’s answer to The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) by dishing out ‘The Motorcycle Lawyer.’ (Maybe that was its shooting title?)
To make things worse, there’s even an added subplot involving the FBI. Rather than use that element to give this tale greater gravitas, instead that ends up being little more than a mechanism to introduce greater conflict … though come the conclusion I couldn’t tell you beans about what the FBI were hoping to prove and whether or not they really did prove anything. Suffice it to say, it does end … but did anyone really care? I think not.
Zarra’s Law (2014) is produced by Scarpe Diem Productions and Snapper Films. DVD distribution is being handled by the reliable Arc Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? It’s all photographed and miked fairly well, so let’s just all be thankful for small favors. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features then you’re in for a disappointment since all they served up was a theatrical trailer.
Alas … only mildly recommended.
Honestly, I’ve been bored worse by worse pictures, but there was a modest charm to Zarra’s Law that kept me focused until the end. Largely what I looked for was that moment when former Sopranos’ tough guy Tony Sirico broke loose and busted caps into everyone, everywhere, and everything in sight. Sadly, that wasn’t quite what director Juha Wuolijoki had in mind here, so I did come away disappointed. Maybe those with minds more open than mine won’t.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arc Entertainment provided me with a DVD copy of Zarra’s Law by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
And – to be honest – who can blame them? When you’re finally educated and respected in the art of your craft, isn’t that when you’d love to be challenged by a variety of work instead of finding yourself pigeonholed into the same character over and over and over again? As a fan of Science Fiction, I’ve met many actors who’ve kinda/sorta lamented “I never should’ve taken that Star Trek role because it’s followed me around my entire life,” and – sure – on one level, I feel sorry for them.
However, I think the same thing may’ve happened to actor Tony Sirico.
For those of you who know that name, Sirico played Paulie ‘Walnuts’ Gualtieri – a rather significant and central role to HBO’s long-running crime drama The Sopranos. In Zarra’s Law (2014), he plays a retired police detective … but for the life of me I couldn’t stop waiting for him to break loose the way a ‘made man’ should, and it may’ve hampered my ability to remain completely impartial.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“Retired cop Tony (Tony Sirico) finds he is unable to forget the murder of his younger brother, who was in the mob. He’s outraged when he finds out the man he holds responsible is getting out of prison after only two years. He needs to find answers fast and if necessary, seek revenge. Joined by his attorney nephew, Gaetano (Brendan Fehr), he infiltrates the seamy world of organized crime and gets lost in a labyrinth of greed, dead ends, and lies.”
Well …
That isn’t quite how I saw all of Zarra’s Law playing out, but it’s a very close approximation.
The veteran Sirico makes the best of the role given what appears to be his limited range (that’s not an insult to the actor; it’s only a statement that perhaps playing an officer of the law may not be his best suit). The script by Joseph Scarpinito and Charles Kipps traffics far too heavily in clichés – i.e. cops have hearts of gold; mobsters are in the biz for life; former soldiers make for great hometown heroes – and this ends up feeling more than a bit like a TV-movie-of-the-week upgraded by way of the many Brooklynese F-bombs.
Still, the chief problem I had with so much of Law is none of it felt even remotely organic. Clearly, these characters are set in motion due entirely to the conventions of scripted drama (Tony cares so much for his aging mother than he’s never taken a wife; all Gaetano wants to do is see justice served for his every client; never trust a mobster who welches on a deal; etc.), so it’s hard to see any other way for these events to unfurl except for the most predictable way. Even Gaetano is given a motorcycle as a means of defining his character (he’ll park that thing on the sidewalk simply because he doesn’t ‘follow’ the rules others do), and it felt more like this film’s answer to The Lincoln Lawyer (2011) by dishing out ‘The Motorcycle Lawyer.’ (Maybe that was its shooting title?)
To make things worse, there’s even an added subplot involving the FBI. Rather than use that element to give this tale greater gravitas, instead that ends up being little more than a mechanism to introduce greater conflict … though come the conclusion I couldn’t tell you beans about what the FBI were hoping to prove and whether or not they really did prove anything. Suffice it to say, it does end … but did anyone really care? I think not.
Zarra’s Law (2014) is produced by Scarpe Diem Productions and Snapper Films. DVD distribution is being handled by the reliable Arc Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? It’s all photographed and miked fairly well, so let’s just all be thankful for small favors. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features then you’re in for a disappointment since all they served up was a theatrical trailer.
Alas … only mildly recommended.
Honestly, I’ve been bored worse by worse pictures, but there was a modest charm to Zarra’s Law that kept me focused until the end. Largely what I looked for was that moment when former Sopranos’ tough guy Tony Sirico broke loose and busted caps into everyone, everywhere, and everything in sight. Sadly, that wasn’t quite what director Juha Wuolijoki had in mind here, so I did come away disappointed. Maybe those with minds more open than mine won’t.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Arc Entertainment provided me with a DVD copy of Zarra’s Law by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
Now, let me be blunt: just because I may not have enjoyed a particular film isn’t necessarily any reason for me to suggest that you may not enjoy the same.
Granted, I like horror films. While I do enjoy a good slasher film every now and then, the central story usually tends to be a bit too conventional for my tastes. But with slasher films I prefer flicks to – at minimum – bring something worthwhile to the project. If it’s the same-old-same-old kid picks up an axe and decides to start whacking all of his friends with little or no logical reason, then I tend to tune out just a bit. We’ve seen those far too often before, so there’s little freshness to any of it.
Still … if the deaths are inspired, I might perk up When it all feels like everyone just showed up for a paycheck, I check out mentally before the first corpse hits the ground.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“This football season, Hogeye High Warriors and cheerleaders are out for blood. Unfortunately, someone is out for theirs and they’ll take one for the team. After the big Halloween football game, the students are joined by an uninvited guest dressed as their high school mascot armed with a bow and arrow, a battle-ax, and an insatiable appetite for butchery. They find themselves fighting for more than the winning score as terror becomes the name of the game.”
Blech.
Well, like I said at that top, I don’t like every horror film that I receive to review/preview, and sadly Varsity Blood (2014) – despite a pretty killer name and an interesting premise – just didn’t fill out my dance card, readers. The high school bloody murder scene has been done to death, and, as much as writer/director Jake Helgren probably suspected he was bringing something new to the game here, this one fails to inspire on so many levels.
For starters, so much of Helgren’s scriptwriting is just plain awful.
Everything – and I do mean everything – gets explained in extended scenes filled with exposition by just about anyone in range of the microphones. There’s a long scene on a park bench in the beginning wherein three characters pretty much give the audience insight into what happened ‘oh so many years ago’ and set the stage for how it’ll all figure into this feature. Then – not all that much latter – the town sheriff takes a radio call from his dispatcher where we listen to the woman babble on about every conceivable plot point one can possibly imagine. Seriously, Jake, have you never heard of ‘nuance’? I get that maybe you don’t understand what character development is, but couldn’t you have at least shown up to put in work on your own script?
To worsen matters, once Helgren takes off his scriptwriting hat and puts on his director’s cap the picture grinds to a halt. It’s all photographed so blandly that one suspects maybe he was taking his cues from the actors instead of the other way around. The last half of the picture takes place at the cleanest abandoned farmhouse you’ll ever see in film … well, except that you can’t see much of anything once the sun goes down. The picture could probably win an award for the worst night-time shooting ever (though I have seen worst) as very little of the action is even remotely identifiable.
Still, there’s a kill or two that tweaked my interests. Otherwise, I probably wouldn’t have sat through this one to the bitter end … and wouldn’t you know it? They left it open for a sequel.
Varsity Blood (2014) is produced by DAVED Productions and Flashback Films. DVD distribution is being handled by RLJ Entertainment and Image Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? Blech. Well, that’s not fair. The production’s sound work is just fine, especially given the fact that it’s basically a low budget run-of-the-mill horror picture; but the cinematography leads an awful lot to be desired. It’s shot with little to no inspiration for the subject matter, and the night-time videography is some of the worst I’ve ever seen, so much so it grows increasingly difficult to see what’s going on, who’s chasing who, etc. And what do you know? There are no special features. I didn’t miss ‘em, either.
Alas … barely recommended … and that’s a rare rating, folks.
I suppose if you like the teen scene slasher flicks that you might find some modest (and I do mean ‘modest’) enjoyment with Varsity Blood. Me? I’d just as soon letter in something else.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at RLJ Entertainment and Imagine Entertainment provided me with a DVD copy of Varsity Blood by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
Granted, I like horror films. While I do enjoy a good slasher film every now and then, the central story usually tends to be a bit too conventional for my tastes. But with slasher films I prefer flicks to – at minimum – bring something worthwhile to the project. If it’s the same-old-same-old kid picks up an axe and decides to start whacking all of his friends with little or no logical reason, then I tend to tune out just a bit. We’ve seen those far too often before, so there’s little freshness to any of it.
Still … if the deaths are inspired, I might perk up When it all feels like everyone just showed up for a paycheck, I check out mentally before the first corpse hits the ground.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“This football season, Hogeye High Warriors and cheerleaders are out for blood. Unfortunately, someone is out for theirs and they’ll take one for the team. After the big Halloween football game, the students are joined by an uninvited guest dressed as their high school mascot armed with a bow and arrow, a battle-ax, and an insatiable appetite for butchery. They find themselves fighting for more than the winning score as terror becomes the name of the game.”
Blech.
Well, like I said at that top, I don’t like every horror film that I receive to review/preview, and sadly Varsity Blood (2014) – despite a pretty killer name and an interesting premise – just didn’t fill out my dance card, readers. The high school bloody murder scene has been done to death, and, as much as writer/director Jake Helgren probably suspected he was bringing something new to the game here, this one fails to inspire on so many levels.
For starters, so much of Helgren’s scriptwriting is just plain awful.
Everything – and I do mean everything – gets explained in extended scenes filled with exposition by just about anyone in range of the microphones. There’s a long scene on a park bench in the beginning wherein three characters pretty much give the audience insight into what happened ‘oh so many years ago’ and set the stage for how it’ll all figure into this feature. Then – not all that much latter – the town sheriff takes a radio call from his dispatcher where we listen to the woman babble on about every conceivable plot point one can possibly imagine. Seriously, Jake, have you never heard of ‘nuance’? I get that maybe you don’t understand what character development is, but couldn’t you have at least shown up to put in work on your own script?
To worsen matters, once Helgren takes off his scriptwriting hat and puts on his director’s cap the picture grinds to a halt. It’s all photographed so blandly that one suspects maybe he was taking his cues from the actors instead of the other way around. The last half of the picture takes place at the cleanest abandoned farmhouse you’ll ever see in film … well, except that you can’t see much of anything once the sun goes down. The picture could probably win an award for the worst night-time shooting ever (though I have seen worst) as very little of the action is even remotely identifiable.
Still, there’s a kill or two that tweaked my interests. Otherwise, I probably wouldn’t have sat through this one to the bitter end … and wouldn’t you know it? They left it open for a sequel.
Varsity Blood (2014) is produced by DAVED Productions and Flashback Films. DVD distribution is being handled by RLJ Entertainment and Image Entertainment. As for the technical specifications? Blech. Well, that’s not fair. The production’s sound work is just fine, especially given the fact that it’s basically a low budget run-of-the-mill horror picture; but the cinematography leads an awful lot to be desired. It’s shot with little to no inspiration for the subject matter, and the night-time videography is some of the worst I’ve ever seen, so much so it grows increasingly difficult to see what’s going on, who’s chasing who, etc. And what do you know? There are no special features. I didn’t miss ‘em, either.
Alas … barely recommended … and that’s a rare rating, folks.
I suppose if you like the teen scene slasher flicks that you might find some modest (and I do mean ‘modest’) enjoyment with Varsity Blood. Me? I’d just as soon letter in something else.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at RLJ Entertainment and Imagine Entertainment provided me with a DVD copy of Varsity Blood by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning and Happy Thursday, gentle readers!
Yes, yes, and yes: you can hear that clock happily ticking away. It does sound a bit happier after Hump Day, doesn't it? Why, it's almost as if the mechanism recognizes that the weekend is just around the corner, lifting its mechanical spirits just as our souls grow a bit lighter in the process, no? Ok, ok, enough is enough, so let's get down to the business of today ...
Like so many who blog, vlog, and pontificate, I listened to the Walt Disney earnings call yesterday. (I don't wax on and off about such things 'round here, but it's fascinating from time-to-time to follow these cultural controversies a bit more closely.) Indeed, things don't sound all that good for the Mouse House presently; though Bob Iger did an affable job of trying to chirp on with a bit of optimism, I think it's pretty clear that the fundamental absence of F-A-C-T-S in the call (offset by heavy doses of speculation) shows that perhaps he and others in management over there are in way over their heads. And how couldn't they be? As many know, the studio has lost upwards to $1B at the box office alone -- not to even mention that their parks and cruises have been reporting mixed figures, and the Galactic Starcruiser Hotel flop can't be missed, either -- so that's gotta leave a mark. I've tried -- like so many -- to retain some positivity about Disney+, but even that venture looks to be crashing and burning right in front of mankind's eyes. Some days, it ain't easy being a mouse.
Well, well, well ... we'll leave that for now, and buckle down to the biz of our own affairs.
As for today? 60 incredible citations await, and I've dug into my files this morning to realize I have a good number of movie premieres I also need to add to the date. In that respect, keep your eyes peeled as today will be growing somewhat significantly if I can get them up in the right chronology over the next few hours. Plus, I do have a movie on tap for later today, and -- depending upon its merits -- I might even have a review up later. Keep your eyes peeled.
In the meantime ...
Yes, yes, and yes: you can hear that clock happily ticking away. It does sound a bit happier after Hump Day, doesn't it? Why, it's almost as if the mechanism recognizes that the weekend is just around the corner, lifting its mechanical spirits just as our souls grow a bit lighter in the process, no? Ok, ok, enough is enough, so let's get down to the business of today ...
Like so many who blog, vlog, and pontificate, I listened to the Walt Disney earnings call yesterday. (I don't wax on and off about such things 'round here, but it's fascinating from time-to-time to follow these cultural controversies a bit more closely.) Indeed, things don't sound all that good for the Mouse House presently; though Bob Iger did an affable job of trying to chirp on with a bit of optimism, I think it's pretty clear that the fundamental absence of F-A-C-T-S in the call (offset by heavy doses of speculation) shows that perhaps he and others in management over there are in way over their heads. And how couldn't they be? As many know, the studio has lost upwards to $1B at the box office alone -- not to even mention that their parks and cruises have been reporting mixed figures, and the Galactic Starcruiser Hotel flop can't be missed, either -- so that's gotta leave a mark. I've tried -- like so many -- to retain some positivity about Disney+, but even that venture looks to be crashing and burning right in front of mankind's eyes. Some days, it ain't easy being a mouse.
Well, well, well ... we'll leave that for now, and buckle down to the biz of our own affairs.
As for today? 60 incredible citations await, and I've dug into my files this morning to realize I have a good number of movie premieres I also need to add to the date. In that respect, keep your eyes peeled as today will be growing somewhat significantly if I can get them up in the right chronology over the next few hours. Plus, I do have a movie on tap for later today, and -- depending upon its merits -- I might even have a review up later. Keep your eyes peeled.
In the meantime ...
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Good morning, Happy Wednesday, and Happy Hump Day, gentle readers! Here's hoping that your week is off to the best start possible because -- after today -- it'll be winding down with the weekend growing ever larger in sight! Isn't that a great feeling?
I wanted to pop in quickly this morning -- I know, I know, I know, Wednesday new content is usually fairly slim, but I do have some things on tap for later today -- to alert you to the fact that yours truly finally made an appearance in the realm of Podcasting. I believe I've mentioned previously that the fine folks over at Hyperspace Heroes had extended an invitation to have me on recently, and -- lo and behold -- the episode dropped this past Monday. Realizing that all of you out there in Cyberspace have things to do, I didn't want to advertise it so quickly that it got missed in the shuffle, so here it is as of today. The episode is up on running on their portal, and -- naturally -- I encourage everyone to show them a little bit of love, check it out, give it a good listen, and don't be so hard on us.
Yes, yes, yes: I say "um" a bit too often -- I'm out of practice from my days in college radio -- but I think the discussion is both timely and prescient, especially given the current state of affairs between streaming and the movie theaters fighting tooth and nail to get your available entertainment dollars in their pockets. Now more than ever -- what with the writer's strike, the actor's strike, and the possible forthcoming special effects strike coming -- you have a choice where to invest your time and money; that's largely what our conversation revolved around, along with some tidbits about SciFiHistory.Net's history and a little background on myself. Seriously, it's a great conversation, and I was thrilled to have been part of it.
I wanted to pop in quickly this morning -- I know, I know, I know, Wednesday new content is usually fairly slim, but I do have some things on tap for later today -- to alert you to the fact that yours truly finally made an appearance in the realm of Podcasting. I believe I've mentioned previously that the fine folks over at Hyperspace Heroes had extended an invitation to have me on recently, and -- lo and behold -- the episode dropped this past Monday. Realizing that all of you out there in Cyberspace have things to do, I didn't want to advertise it so quickly that it got missed in the shuffle, so here it is as of today. The episode is up on running on their portal, and -- naturally -- I encourage everyone to show them a little bit of love, check it out, give it a good listen, and don't be so hard on us.
Yes, yes, yes: I say "um" a bit too often -- I'm out of practice from my days in college radio -- but I think the discussion is both timely and prescient, especially given the current state of affairs between streaming and the movie theaters fighting tooth and nail to get your available entertainment dollars in their pockets. Now more than ever -- what with the writer's strike, the actor's strike, and the possible forthcoming special effects strike coming -- you have a choice where to invest your time and money; that's largely what our conversation revolved around, along with some tidbits about SciFiHistory.Net's history and a little background on myself. Seriously, it's a great conversation, and I was thrilled to have been part of it.
Also -- as I've always preached -- can you help a brother out and give a Retweet, a follow, or a listen? Folks who work in today's alternative media -- humble peeps like myself, Hyperspace Heroes, and the growing expanse of social media influencers, bloggers, vloggers, and the like -- can always use your support. I know I've said it before -- if not hundreds or thousands of times -- but a simple Retweet almost practically exponentially gives us a wee bit more exposure than we had the day before. It's free -- costs you absolutely nothing -- and -- quite frankly -- it makes us damn giddy sometimes.
Do your part to support indie smilers like me and others.
-- EZ
- Published on
OK, haters, hear me out ...
Kids, I'm old. I've seen things. I've seen things you wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion ... tears in rain ...
Yes, yes, yes. I lost my train of thought there for a moment, but trust me when I tell you I'm going someplace.
I have seen things, and -- back in the days of my distant youth -- there was a little TV innovator who went by the name of Glen A. Larson. Now, many will tell you that he was a bit of a huckster. Essentially, their argument is that ol' Glen would watch entertainment trends, gauge when something was popular, and then he'd run up the tentpole his own iteration of it. For example, everyone who was alive back then and interested in genre programming knew full well that TV's Battlestar Galactica was Larson's TV equivalent to the silver screen's Star Wars (now Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope). And when that proved a bit too expensive for network budgets, he tried toning it down a bit with Buck Rogers In The 25th Century. In the process, he amped up the sexiness (hello, Erin Gray) and maybe even dumbed down Galactica's ideals into something a bit more mainstream, a bit closer thematically to some of the bits and pieces of Star Wars that were embraced with mass appeal.
But for those of us truly watching closely, that's not all Glen did.
On top of securing TV broadcast rights for these intellectual properties, he encouraged the good folks at Universal Pictures to think outside the box by also prepping THEATRICAL RUNS both domestically and around the world. The thinking at the time was that by taking this approach a major studio might offset its costs of TV production by accepting whatever box office take was available. Given the fact that sometimes these shows couldn't secure distribution rights around the world as quickly as could mainstream fare, opening Galactica and Buck Rogers in theaters in those countries almost insured that there would be some interest -- arguably much more than there where it would be available in the regular time slot. While I've never read a full breakdown on the financial returns of this experiment, I can say that it possibly achieved a small measure of success if only to heighten awareness of a new brand for fans to cling to.
Where I've always argued that Universal made a calculated error was in not providing something a bit different to the theatrical experience. From what I have read, the first Galactica flick ended up excising some of the plot and scenes in order to get it to what the studio felt was an acceptable length -- all well and good -- but seriously? Couldn't you also have created a bit of extra content -- a few extra scenes here and there -- that were specifically shot for theatrical exhibition, thereby giving fans a more significant reason to go to the multiplexes? Sure, there would've been some increased costs, but I think even George Lucas proved (with his Special Editions) as well as Peter Jackson proved (with his Extended Editions) that fans hungry for more were willing to both pay for it and pay handsomely in some cases.
Indeed, Lucas (and Lucasfilm) also flirted with this idea -- TV deals sharpened with theatrical runs -- with two live-action Ewoks / Endor-based films in the 1980's. The Ewok Adventure (aka Caravan Of Courage) and Ewoks: The Battle For Endor may not have been reverential classics in the Star Wars universe in any respect, but they were produced on a TV scale and given the chance outside the U.S. to reap some rewards from box office receipts. To my knowledge, there was no new content recorded for either of those (and I've also never seen any financial accounting for them), but I have corresponded online with folks who remember watching them on the silver screen. That alone tells me some folks ponied up the cash, and it was perhaps an endeavor worth untaking.
Lastly, have you heard of Fathom Events? Fathom Events is an organization linked up nationally (maybe globally, for all I know), and they've held special presentation of not only live theatre, cinema classics, and concerts but also special TV engagements. In fact, I've been to several of their broadcasts wherein they had episodes of the original Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and Doctor Who in theaters. In all of these events, there was some extra content also aired -- behind the scenes stuff, interviews, etc. -- and I can say that the theater houses were nearly at capacity on each occasion. That, alone, tells me there's an audience for SciFi and Fantasy like no other ... and I think it's a big miss that there isn't more of this done.
Flashforward to today: the Mouse House is spending an incredible amount of money bringing Star Wars -- perhaps one of filmdom's greatest THEATRICAL properties -- to the small screen.
Now, I'm not opposed to The Mandalorian show. I'm not opposed to the Obi-Wan Kenobi show. I'm not opposed to the Book Of Boba Fett. This isn't a statement on q-u-a-l-i-t-y, mind you, because I think each of them -- even the critically acclaimed Andor -- have their strengths and weaknesses. But ... why not produce a theatrical cut that could air, say, six months later? It would have to be something with exclusive footage and maybe an interview bit here and/or there, but do you expect me to believe that fandom wouldn't support this? Again, I realize that this may not work with the way one division of a major studio (film) fiscally accounts for costs and whatnot, but where there's a will there's a way ... and I'll go to my grave saying this is a big, big, big miss.
In fact, I'll always argue that doing so might very well be the kind of tactic that could save not just TV and not just the movies: it could save the entire entertainment industry.
-- EZ
Kids, I'm old. I've seen things. I've seen things you wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion ... tears in rain ...
Yes, yes, yes. I lost my train of thought there for a moment, but trust me when I tell you I'm going someplace.
I have seen things, and -- back in the days of my distant youth -- there was a little TV innovator who went by the name of Glen A. Larson. Now, many will tell you that he was a bit of a huckster. Essentially, their argument is that ol' Glen would watch entertainment trends, gauge when something was popular, and then he'd run up the tentpole his own iteration of it. For example, everyone who was alive back then and interested in genre programming knew full well that TV's Battlestar Galactica was Larson's TV equivalent to the silver screen's Star Wars (now Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope). And when that proved a bit too expensive for network budgets, he tried toning it down a bit with Buck Rogers In The 25th Century. In the process, he amped up the sexiness (hello, Erin Gray) and maybe even dumbed down Galactica's ideals into something a bit more mainstream, a bit closer thematically to some of the bits and pieces of Star Wars that were embraced with mass appeal.
But for those of us truly watching closely, that's not all Glen did.
On top of securing TV broadcast rights for these intellectual properties, he encouraged the good folks at Universal Pictures to think outside the box by also prepping THEATRICAL RUNS both domestically and around the world. The thinking at the time was that by taking this approach a major studio might offset its costs of TV production by accepting whatever box office take was available. Given the fact that sometimes these shows couldn't secure distribution rights around the world as quickly as could mainstream fare, opening Galactica and Buck Rogers in theaters in those countries almost insured that there would be some interest -- arguably much more than there where it would be available in the regular time slot. While I've never read a full breakdown on the financial returns of this experiment, I can say that it possibly achieved a small measure of success if only to heighten awareness of a new brand for fans to cling to.
Where I've always argued that Universal made a calculated error was in not providing something a bit different to the theatrical experience. From what I have read, the first Galactica flick ended up excising some of the plot and scenes in order to get it to what the studio felt was an acceptable length -- all well and good -- but seriously? Couldn't you also have created a bit of extra content -- a few extra scenes here and there -- that were specifically shot for theatrical exhibition, thereby giving fans a more significant reason to go to the multiplexes? Sure, there would've been some increased costs, but I think even George Lucas proved (with his Special Editions) as well as Peter Jackson proved (with his Extended Editions) that fans hungry for more were willing to both pay for it and pay handsomely in some cases.
Indeed, Lucas (and Lucasfilm) also flirted with this idea -- TV deals sharpened with theatrical runs -- with two live-action Ewoks / Endor-based films in the 1980's. The Ewok Adventure (aka Caravan Of Courage) and Ewoks: The Battle For Endor may not have been reverential classics in the Star Wars universe in any respect, but they were produced on a TV scale and given the chance outside the U.S. to reap some rewards from box office receipts. To my knowledge, there was no new content recorded for either of those (and I've also never seen any financial accounting for them), but I have corresponded online with folks who remember watching them on the silver screen. That alone tells me some folks ponied up the cash, and it was perhaps an endeavor worth untaking.
Lastly, have you heard of Fathom Events? Fathom Events is an organization linked up nationally (maybe globally, for all I know), and they've held special presentation of not only live theatre, cinema classics, and concerts but also special TV engagements. In fact, I've been to several of their broadcasts wherein they had episodes of the original Star Trek, Star Trek: The Next Generation, and Doctor Who in theaters. In all of these events, there was some extra content also aired -- behind the scenes stuff, interviews, etc. -- and I can say that the theater houses were nearly at capacity on each occasion. That, alone, tells me there's an audience for SciFi and Fantasy like no other ... and I think it's a big miss that there isn't more of this done.
Flashforward to today: the Mouse House is spending an incredible amount of money bringing Star Wars -- perhaps one of filmdom's greatest THEATRICAL properties -- to the small screen.
Now, I'm not opposed to The Mandalorian show. I'm not opposed to the Obi-Wan Kenobi show. I'm not opposed to the Book Of Boba Fett. This isn't a statement on q-u-a-l-i-t-y, mind you, because I think each of them -- even the critically acclaimed Andor -- have their strengths and weaknesses. But ... why not produce a theatrical cut that could air, say, six months later? It would have to be something with exclusive footage and maybe an interview bit here and/or there, but do you expect me to believe that fandom wouldn't support this? Again, I realize that this may not work with the way one division of a major studio (film) fiscally accounts for costs and whatnot, but where there's a will there's a way ... and I'll go to my grave saying this is a big, big, big miss.
In fact, I'll always argue that doing so might very well be the kind of tactic that could save not just TV and not just the movies: it could save the entire entertainment industry.
-- EZ
- Published on
Holy Mother of Dragons ... is that Christina Lindberg?
Ah, how one's love of a decent exploitation picture takes you back to the days of youth ...
For those caught awares, the great actress Christina Lindberg headlined what's been debated as one of the greatest exploitation / grindhouse pictures of all time -- 1973's Thriller: A Cruel Picture -- that kinda/sorta gets credited from time-to-time with being at the forefront of a 'rape/revenge' trend that carried many drive-ins through the better part of the 70's. I've seen it -- I'm not sure if I've reviewed it in this space, mostly because it's a bit too conventional and doesn't very strongly (in my opinion) utilize Horror elements in the narrative -- and, yeah, it's very grindy, if I do say so myself. Maybe I'll go digging through my archives this weekend to see if I can find my thoughts, and -- if so -- I'll post them up on the MainPage for all to see.
But the reason that I bring Lindberg up this morning (in this space) is I see she's headlined a Horror flick from 2018: Black Circle -- from writer/director Adrian Garcia Bogliano -- is getting a brand-spanking-new release from the fine folks at Synapse Films just next month. If I can, I'll get my hands on this one and do a review; Lindberg is a talent worth seeing again, and who knows how far she's come in the four decades (and counting) since taking entertainment by storm back in the day.
As I was provided the below information via a distributor relationship, I'm doing the proper stewardly duty and passing along the information. Interested readers are encouraged to get themselves in line for the new release if you're so inclined.
Ah, how one's love of a decent exploitation picture takes you back to the days of youth ...
For those caught awares, the great actress Christina Lindberg headlined what's been debated as one of the greatest exploitation / grindhouse pictures of all time -- 1973's Thriller: A Cruel Picture -- that kinda/sorta gets credited from time-to-time with being at the forefront of a 'rape/revenge' trend that carried many drive-ins through the better part of the 70's. I've seen it -- I'm not sure if I've reviewed it in this space, mostly because it's a bit too conventional and doesn't very strongly (in my opinion) utilize Horror elements in the narrative -- and, yeah, it's very grindy, if I do say so myself. Maybe I'll go digging through my archives this weekend to see if I can find my thoughts, and -- if so -- I'll post them up on the MainPage for all to see.
But the reason that I bring Lindberg up this morning (in this space) is I see she's headlined a Horror flick from 2018: Black Circle -- from writer/director Adrian Garcia Bogliano -- is getting a brand-spanking-new release from the fine folks at Synapse Films just next month. If I can, I'll get my hands on this one and do a review; Lindberg is a talent worth seeing again, and who knows how far she's come in the four decades (and counting) since taking entertainment by storm back in the day.
As I was provided the below information via a distributor relationship, I'm doing the proper stewardly duty and passing along the information. Interested readers are encouraged to get themselves in line for the new release if you're so inclined.
On September 5th, acclaimed Spanish horror director Adrian Garcia Bogliano’s Black Circle comes to Blu-ray in an impressive edition that includes its original soundtrack on CD.
When sisters Celeste and Isa play a mysterious vinyl record from the 1970s, neither had any idea what they would unlock. They soon discover that the record, meant to induce calmness, created duplicates of themselves. As their doppelgängers grow in strength their only hope lies in finding the hypnotist who created the recording years ago. Featuring a mesmerizing score by Rickard Gramfors and a haunting performance by Christina Lindberg (Thriller: A Cruel Picture), Black Circle is a film you won’t soon forget.
The Blu-ray edition includes the original motion picture soundtrack on an included CD; an audio commentary with director Adrian Garcia Bogliano; the original teaser trailer; Don’t Open Your Eyes – an original short film; an interview with Adrian Garcia Bogliano and Christina Lindberg; Inside Black Circle – a behind-the-scenes featurette; and a still gallery.
When sisters Celeste and Isa play a mysterious vinyl record from the 1970s, neither had any idea what they would unlock. They soon discover that the record, meant to induce calmness, created duplicates of themselves. As their doppelgängers grow in strength their only hope lies in finding the hypnotist who created the recording years ago. Featuring a mesmerizing score by Rickard Gramfors and a haunting performance by Christina Lindberg (Thriller: A Cruel Picture), Black Circle is a film you won’t soon forget.
The Blu-ray edition includes the original motion picture soundtrack on an included CD; an audio commentary with director Adrian Garcia Bogliano; the original teaser trailer; Don’t Open Your Eyes – an original short film; an interview with Adrian Garcia Bogliano and Christina Lindberg; Inside Black Circle – a behind-the-scenes featurette; and a still gallery.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Honestly, I'm really only re-discovering my love for Giallo films, folks.
I saw a good number of them in the early 1990's, but it was at a time that I was going through so many of them that few of them resonated with me the way they probably should have. When you dive into that wide, wide pool of blood and go deep under, it can be difficult to submerge and have any real sense of where you are, what you liked, what you didn't, etc., so as these features get some new exposure I'm taking them in. Some of them? Well, it's understandable why I forgot about them (to a degree), and yet others really do hit the mark in the way that both a good story and some compelling visuals should.
That said, I've always been familiar with the name of Dario Argento, and I've read on many occasions that Tenebrae remains one of his strongest features. In that respect, I might just have to jump back in the bloody water with a 4K Ultra HD cut from the master's library. It's coming to shelves late next month (September), and fans are encouraged to get in line as this one might disappear reasonably quickly.
I've been provided some of the details below, and I wanted to share them with the readership. Read it and weep, my friends ... tears of joy, that is.
I saw a good number of them in the early 1990's, but it was at a time that I was going through so many of them that few of them resonated with me the way they probably should have. When you dive into that wide, wide pool of blood and go deep under, it can be difficult to submerge and have any real sense of where you are, what you liked, what you didn't, etc., so as these features get some new exposure I'm taking them in. Some of them? Well, it's understandable why I forgot about them (to a degree), and yet others really do hit the mark in the way that both a good story and some compelling visuals should.
That said, I've always been familiar with the name of Dario Argento, and I've read on many occasions that Tenebrae remains one of his strongest features. In that respect, I might just have to jump back in the bloody water with a 4K Ultra HD cut from the master's library. It's coming to shelves late next month (September), and fans are encouraged to get in line as this one might disappear reasonably quickly.
I've been provided some of the details below, and I wanted to share them with the readership. Read it and weep, my friends ... tears of joy, that is.
on September 26th, Synapse Films unleashes Dario Argento’s Tenebrae on 4K UHD from a new 4K restoration from the original camera negative, presented in Dolby Vision (HDR10 compatible) in its original 1.85:1 aspect ratio with restored original DTS-HD MA lossless mono Italian and English soundtracks and English subtitles for the Italian soundtrack.
As mystery writer Peter Neal (Anthony Franciosa) is promoting his newest novel Tenebrae, a serial killer begins to murder their victims in the very manner Neal describes in his book! As those around him are being picked off one by one and the police look at Neal as the sole suspect, the author must investigate and find the murderer himself before he’s either killed or framed for the murders. Featuring performances by Franciosa, John Saxon, Daria Nicolodi, and John Steiner makes Tenebrae an all-star murder mystery not to be missed, with Argento at his very best.
The two disc 4K UHD + Blu-ray set features an audio commentary by authors and critics Alan Jones and Kim Newman; an audio commentary by Argento expert Thomas Rostock; an audio commentary by Maitland McDonagh, author of Broken Mirrors/Broken Minds: The Dark Dreams of Dario Argento; Yellow Fever: The Rise and Fall of the Giallo, a feature-length documentary charting the genre from its beginnings to its influence on modern slasher films, featuring interviews with Dario Argento, Umberto Lenzi, Luigi Cozzi and more; Being the Villain, a newly edited archival interview with actor John Steiner; Out of the Shadows, an archival interview with Maitland McDonagh; Voices of the Unsane, an archival featurette containing interviews with writer/director Dario Argento, actresses Daria Nicolodi and Eva Robins, cinematographer Luciano Tovoli, composer Claudio Simonetti and assistant director Lamberto Bava; Screaming Queen, an archival interview with Daria Nicolodi; The Unsane World of Tenebrae, an archival interview with Dario Argento; A Composition for Carnage, an archival interview with Claudio Simonetti; an archival introduction by Daria Nicolodi; an international theatrical trailer; a Japanese “Shadow” theatrical trailer; an alternate opening credits sequence; “Unsane” end credits sequence; and image galleries.
As mystery writer Peter Neal (Anthony Franciosa) is promoting his newest novel Tenebrae, a serial killer begins to murder their victims in the very manner Neal describes in his book! As those around him are being picked off one by one and the police look at Neal as the sole suspect, the author must investigate and find the murderer himself before he’s either killed or framed for the murders. Featuring performances by Franciosa, John Saxon, Daria Nicolodi, and John Steiner makes Tenebrae an all-star murder mystery not to be missed, with Argento at his very best.
The two disc 4K UHD + Blu-ray set features an audio commentary by authors and critics Alan Jones and Kim Newman; an audio commentary by Argento expert Thomas Rostock; an audio commentary by Maitland McDonagh, author of Broken Mirrors/Broken Minds: The Dark Dreams of Dario Argento; Yellow Fever: The Rise and Fall of the Giallo, a feature-length documentary charting the genre from its beginnings to its influence on modern slasher films, featuring interviews with Dario Argento, Umberto Lenzi, Luigi Cozzi and more; Being the Villain, a newly edited archival interview with actor John Steiner; Out of the Shadows, an archival interview with Maitland McDonagh; Voices of the Unsane, an archival featurette containing interviews with writer/director Dario Argento, actresses Daria Nicolodi and Eva Robins, cinematographer Luciano Tovoli, composer Claudio Simonetti and assistant director Lamberto Bava; Screaming Queen, an archival interview with Daria Nicolodi; The Unsane World of Tenebrae, an archival interview with Dario Argento; A Composition for Carnage, an archival interview with Claudio Simonetti; an archival introduction by Daria Nicolodi; an international theatrical trailer; a Japanese “Shadow” theatrical trailer; an alternate opening credits sequence; “Unsane” end credits sequence; and image galleries.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
-- EZ
- Published on
Rest assured: I’ll go to my grave having witnessed far more independent and/or independent-style features than most folks ever knew were conceived, made, and/or released.
On my journey through a life of watching film, I’ve learned to appreciate storytellers who commit themselves and those around them to doing more with less. They have less budget. They have less investment. They have less opportunities. But – when all is said and done – there are still a great number of them that achieve a freshness with their individual ideas despite no mind-blowing special effects, no million-dollar advertising campaigns, and no blockbuster stars to list on the marquee outside. Simply put, these are the films that still tell stories, and I’m glad to have discovered them in whatever way that I have.
Now … 2022’s Brightwood may not be as entirely original as one could’ve hoped.
We’ve had such ‘locked box’ kind of stories before that have tinkered with the elements of space and time. And other directors, screenwriters, and assorted talent have probably employed the fictional backgrounds of their various created characters to both comment on and/or say something about the wider world that exists outside. But it’s still exceedingly rare when a truly independent production comes along and manages to hit those marks powerfully enough to give it an enthusiastic thumbs-up, and that’s where I find myself this morning. I enjoyed it – and I did so in spite of some weaknesses here and there – mostly because it established a lean efficiency early on, stayed true to the measure of its potential, and delivered the goods as promised.
That, my friends, deserves a measure of respect.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com citation:
“A couple find themselves trapped while on a run around a pond.”
The real trick to effectively delivering nearly any ‘what if?’ scenario is to know precisely when you’ve gone just far enough; and – on that barometer – I think Brightwood achieves just about everything writer/director Dane Elcar probably set out to do with this nifty little thriller/chiller. Audiences – especially those with short attention spans – might grow a bit weary with what’s perceived as the central puzzle to the script, and that’s about the time that Elcar and his talented duo spin something in a little different direction. While it may not maintain a level of freshness and/or chaotic development that big studio exports base their bottom line on (I’m thinking something like the Saw franchise or maybe even something in The Purge’s library of bloody glee), Brightwood merrily chugs along – not unlike its fateful joggers – to the point wherein its foregone conclusion – illustrated poignantly in its last scene – probably wasn’t that hard to predict after all.
And – yes – cue up those who love to point out how well the script serves as a visual allegory for the nature of the Great American Relationship (i.e. marriage or a close facsimile). It’s easy to see the metaphors at work – almost tiresomely so at times – and I suspect that contingent of academics who want their films to “say something” should be pleased. Let it be said that partnerships between sparring minds have always had highs and lows – that’s the part of the ‘for better and for worse’ in marriage ceremonies – so spinning a yarn that’s existential and equally horrific proves to be a noble endeavor. This one leans a bit more heavily in the direction of Rod Serling than it does M. Night Shyamalan, though I suspect some might argue otherwise.
On my journey through a life of watching film, I’ve learned to appreciate storytellers who commit themselves and those around them to doing more with less. They have less budget. They have less investment. They have less opportunities. But – when all is said and done – there are still a great number of them that achieve a freshness with their individual ideas despite no mind-blowing special effects, no million-dollar advertising campaigns, and no blockbuster stars to list on the marquee outside. Simply put, these are the films that still tell stories, and I’m glad to have discovered them in whatever way that I have.
Now … 2022’s Brightwood may not be as entirely original as one could’ve hoped.
We’ve had such ‘locked box’ kind of stories before that have tinkered with the elements of space and time. And other directors, screenwriters, and assorted talent have probably employed the fictional backgrounds of their various created characters to both comment on and/or say something about the wider world that exists outside. But it’s still exceedingly rare when a truly independent production comes along and manages to hit those marks powerfully enough to give it an enthusiastic thumbs-up, and that’s where I find myself this morning. I enjoyed it – and I did so in spite of some weaknesses here and there – mostly because it established a lean efficiency early on, stayed true to the measure of its potential, and delivered the goods as promised.
That, my friends, deserves a measure of respect.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com citation:
“A couple find themselves trapped while on a run around a pond.”
The real trick to effectively delivering nearly any ‘what if?’ scenario is to know precisely when you’ve gone just far enough; and – on that barometer – I think Brightwood achieves just about everything writer/director Dane Elcar probably set out to do with this nifty little thriller/chiller. Audiences – especially those with short attention spans – might grow a bit weary with what’s perceived as the central puzzle to the script, and that’s about the time that Elcar and his talented duo spin something in a little different direction. While it may not maintain a level of freshness and/or chaotic development that big studio exports base their bottom line on (I’m thinking something like the Saw franchise or maybe even something in The Purge’s library of bloody glee), Brightwood merrily chugs along – not unlike its fateful joggers – to the point wherein its foregone conclusion – illustrated poignantly in its last scene – probably wasn’t that hard to predict after all.
And – yes – cue up those who love to point out how well the script serves as a visual allegory for the nature of the Great American Relationship (i.e. marriage or a close facsimile). It’s easy to see the metaphors at work – almost tiresomely so at times – and I suspect that contingent of academics who want their films to “say something” should be pleased. Let it be said that partnerships between sparring minds have always had highs and lows – that’s the part of the ‘for better and for worse’ in marriage ceremonies – so spinning a yarn that’s existential and equally horrific proves to be a noble endeavor. This one leans a bit more heavily in the direction of Rod Serling than it does M. Night Shyamalan, though I suspect some might argue otherwise.
Beyond that, however, I’m not sure I can provide any more substantive feedback to the picture.
When the (limited) journey itself is the construct for the film, I’ve always struggled – as a critic – to see more in the experience. It’s a puzzle box, so it only works as well as is the puzzle conceived; and on that level Brightwood isn’t so much about depth as it is the intrinsic development. There isn’t all that much here – no insult intended but come the big finish ‘it is what it is’ – and the lack of any authentic explanation to the how’s and the why’s of the couple’s predicament might leave some viewers with a bad taste in their mouths. Still, I’d argue that it goes just far enough in presenting the mystery that maybe – just maybe – few will quibble over the mechanics despite the fact that we’ve culturally seen this story (or a mild variation of it) before … albeit with lesser trees.
Hats off to the talent: Dana Berger and Max Woertendyke make for a lovely couple (snicker snicker) who Fate, Mother Nature, and The Universe (it would seem) have conspired to keep them united despite their professed desires to consciously uncouple. Lesser actors might’ve had trouble selling the sizzle required to make Brightwood work compellingly, and they handle the gamut of emotions required to make their 84 minutes of fame here a truly frightening and confusing ‘morning in the park.’
Brightwood (2022) was produced by Noble Gas Media and Pond Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the fine folks at Cinephobia Releasing. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the sights and sounds to this modestly budgeted independent thriller to be quite good from start-to-finish; there are some bits of sound trickery here and there that are intentionally meant to be a bit distracting, and I thought they delivered the level of eeriness quite effectively. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts an audio commentary, the original short film “The Pond” (which served as the foundation for the film), some deleted scenes, and some assorted trailers. It’s a great collection for a small flick.
Highly recommended.
Look: I’ve always, always admitted that I’m a sucker for just a good indie thriller – honestly, there are so few truly good ones – and I gotta give props to Brightwood. This is about as good, as solid, and as interesting an indie thriller I’ve had the good fortune to stumble upon. I say this mostly because having watched so many I’ve seen hundreds that didn’t quite know what to do with the reality created, and this one is the exception to that rule. It knows what it is, and it never tries to be something or anything more. Such conviction alone should be rewarded. Sure: I could nitpick its lack of answers or clarity – as could anyone – for hours, but instead I’ll just celebrate its commitment to staying on the path … all the way to its decidedly human finish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Cinephobia Releasing provided me with a complimentary DVD of Brightwood by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
When the (limited) journey itself is the construct for the film, I’ve always struggled – as a critic – to see more in the experience. It’s a puzzle box, so it only works as well as is the puzzle conceived; and on that level Brightwood isn’t so much about depth as it is the intrinsic development. There isn’t all that much here – no insult intended but come the big finish ‘it is what it is’ – and the lack of any authentic explanation to the how’s and the why’s of the couple’s predicament might leave some viewers with a bad taste in their mouths. Still, I’d argue that it goes just far enough in presenting the mystery that maybe – just maybe – few will quibble over the mechanics despite the fact that we’ve culturally seen this story (or a mild variation of it) before … albeit with lesser trees.
Hats off to the talent: Dana Berger and Max Woertendyke make for a lovely couple (snicker snicker) who Fate, Mother Nature, and The Universe (it would seem) have conspired to keep them united despite their professed desires to consciously uncouple. Lesser actors might’ve had trouble selling the sizzle required to make Brightwood work compellingly, and they handle the gamut of emotions required to make their 84 minutes of fame here a truly frightening and confusing ‘morning in the park.’
Brightwood (2022) was produced by Noble Gas Media and Pond Pictures. DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the fine folks at Cinephobia Releasing. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the sights and sounds to this modestly budgeted independent thriller to be quite good from start-to-finish; there are some bits of sound trickery here and there that are intentionally meant to be a bit distracting, and I thought they delivered the level of eeriness quite effectively. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? The disc boasts an audio commentary, the original short film “The Pond” (which served as the foundation for the film), some deleted scenes, and some assorted trailers. It’s a great collection for a small flick.
Highly recommended.
Look: I’ve always, always admitted that I’m a sucker for just a good indie thriller – honestly, there are so few truly good ones – and I gotta give props to Brightwood. This is about as good, as solid, and as interesting an indie thriller I’ve had the good fortune to stumble upon. I say this mostly because having watched so many I’ve seen hundreds that didn’t quite know what to do with the reality created, and this one is the exception to that rule. It knows what it is, and it never tries to be something or anything more. Such conviction alone should be rewarded. Sure: I could nitpick its lack of answers or clarity – as could anyone – for hours, but instead I’ll just celebrate its commitment to staying on the path … all the way to its decidedly human finish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Cinephobia Releasing provided me with a complimentary DVD of Brightwood by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
Holy mother of dragons, people ...
I don't know where you live, but where I live in Arizona we got a wonderfully fierce rain this morning. Just a lot of wind, thunder, lightning, and -- most important -- rainfall. We've been so dry for so damn long I'm sure that the ground soaked it all up today. I woke up to it, and I stood out in the garage watching it for a bit, waiting to see if any of the neighborhood stray cats were going to show up for food. (Yes, I feed 'em. So sue me.) None did, and I can't say that I blame them.
Ah, the monsoon season ...
Well, back to business: last year about this time I had just reached the original goal of having 50 citations on each page (minimally), and I'm proud to report that it's up to an incredible 57 different trivia tidbits as of today. Birthdays are a bit light -- I do have quite a few to add when time permits -- and I discovered a few other films this morning that I'll have to do a deep dive on as I don't see much information out there in Cyberspace about them. In fact, two of them must be exceptionally rare as I'm not finding any photographs online at all. This happens every now and then; and, yes, it makes for more work for yours truly.
I did mange to watch and review a film from yesterday: Brightwood is a nifty little independent thriller for those who like that kind of thing. As I said in my piece about it, the film might not be the most original -- we've all seen this story before -- and yet the flick has a lean efficiency and stuck the landing (as they say). That doesn't happen all that much -- especially with indie pictures -- so I give it a solid thumbs up. As usual, it won't be for everyone, but for those who like indie projects? This one was quite good.
But ... that's not why you're here ... this is why you're here ...
I don't know where you live, but where I live in Arizona we got a wonderfully fierce rain this morning. Just a lot of wind, thunder, lightning, and -- most important -- rainfall. We've been so dry for so damn long I'm sure that the ground soaked it all up today. I woke up to it, and I stood out in the garage watching it for a bit, waiting to see if any of the neighborhood stray cats were going to show up for food. (Yes, I feed 'em. So sue me.) None did, and I can't say that I blame them.
Ah, the monsoon season ...
Well, back to business: last year about this time I had just reached the original goal of having 50 citations on each page (minimally), and I'm proud to report that it's up to an incredible 57 different trivia tidbits as of today. Birthdays are a bit light -- I do have quite a few to add when time permits -- and I discovered a few other films this morning that I'll have to do a deep dive on as I don't see much information out there in Cyberspace about them. In fact, two of them must be exceptionally rare as I'm not finding any photographs online at all. This happens every now and then; and, yes, it makes for more work for yours truly.
I did mange to watch and review a film from yesterday: Brightwood is a nifty little independent thriller for those who like that kind of thing. As I said in my piece about it, the film might not be the most original -- we've all seen this story before -- and yet the flick has a lean efficiency and stuck the landing (as they say). That doesn't happen all that much -- especially with indie pictures -- so I give it a solid thumbs up. As usual, it won't be for everyone, but for those who like indie projects? This one was quite good.
But ... that's not why you're here ... this is why you're here ...
In the meantime, do check out the trivia. It's a good collection. I have a few other flicks on tap -- one I'm hoping to dig into shortly -- and I hope that your day wherever you're at in it is also shaping up nicely.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Culturally, I think we’ve always had a fascination – as a species – with not so much time travel as we have had with the future.
Knowing where we’re headed as a civilization can lead to tricky business. Experts build entire careers around their respective talents to prognosticate what’s on the horizon regarding business, economics, industry, art, and the like; but anyone with a pair of eyes and a television set knows full well that trained meteorologists at the top of their game can’t even functionally tell you what tomorrow’s weather will be with absolute certainty. But it’s this knowledge – or foreknowledge – that’s universally sought because if we knew where we ultimately were going then steps could be taken not only to enrich oneself off such an impending reality but also to actively change that direction if the next day proves to be far too much for us to endure. Since we’ve no technology to make this happen, there has been countless stories to suggest some interesting ‘what if?’ scenarios … and now you can add the independent-flavored Lola to the list.
Succinctly, Lola has been the subject of some very deserving praise earned on the film festival circuit. It’s garnered positive attention – and trophies, too – from showings in such gatherings as the Trieste Science+Fiction Festival, the Edinburgh International Film Festival, the Buenos Aires International Festival of Independent Cinema, and others. Also, I think it’s safe to suggest that it’s the kind of feature that just might see a big budget re-do in its future – if I had the ability to see tomorrow – and that would be a shame: at a trim 80-minutes, it’s probably one of the better Science Fiction and Fantasy flicks I’ve seen in the last year. Let’s just hope that if it gets a do-over that producers keep the heart and soul that makes it work instead of investing in big names, pyrotechnics, and some unnecessary screen sizzle.
This is a tale of the heart that only traffics in temporal mechanics of a sort, and it’s quite winning at that.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“1940. Thom and Mars have built a machine, LOLA, that can intercept radio and TV broadcasts from the future. Unknown to them sharing these broadcasts the devastating changes it will have on their future of the world but to them also.”
As I said above, we’re a society that spends probably an inordinate amount of time thinking about what we could’ve done differently in order to make either our lives or our world a better place. I’m not suggesting that’s a bad thing; rather, I would say that in doing so many of us often sacrifice ‘the here and the now’ as an unintended consequence. Time is our most perishable resource, and it should be expended wisely … and, in that respect, Lola is likely the best 80 minutes one could spend with this cautionary tale about what we lose when we go about trying to alter Fate. Yes, that’s been written and spoken about for ages, but rarely does it get such an economical and effective presentation as director Andrew Legge and co-screenwriter Angeli Macfarlane achieve here in this heartwarming feature.
Knowing where we’re headed as a civilization can lead to tricky business. Experts build entire careers around their respective talents to prognosticate what’s on the horizon regarding business, economics, industry, art, and the like; but anyone with a pair of eyes and a television set knows full well that trained meteorologists at the top of their game can’t even functionally tell you what tomorrow’s weather will be with absolute certainty. But it’s this knowledge – or foreknowledge – that’s universally sought because if we knew where we ultimately were going then steps could be taken not only to enrich oneself off such an impending reality but also to actively change that direction if the next day proves to be far too much for us to endure. Since we’ve no technology to make this happen, there has been countless stories to suggest some interesting ‘what if?’ scenarios … and now you can add the independent-flavored Lola to the list.
Succinctly, Lola has been the subject of some very deserving praise earned on the film festival circuit. It’s garnered positive attention – and trophies, too – from showings in such gatherings as the Trieste Science+Fiction Festival, the Edinburgh International Film Festival, the Buenos Aires International Festival of Independent Cinema, and others. Also, I think it’s safe to suggest that it’s the kind of feature that just might see a big budget re-do in its future – if I had the ability to see tomorrow – and that would be a shame: at a trim 80-minutes, it’s probably one of the better Science Fiction and Fantasy flicks I’ve seen in the last year. Let’s just hope that if it gets a do-over that producers keep the heart and soul that makes it work instead of investing in big names, pyrotechnics, and some unnecessary screen sizzle.
This is a tale of the heart that only traffics in temporal mechanics of a sort, and it’s quite winning at that.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“1940. Thom and Mars have built a machine, LOLA, that can intercept radio and TV broadcasts from the future. Unknown to them sharing these broadcasts the devastating changes it will have on their future of the world but to them also.”
As I said above, we’re a society that spends probably an inordinate amount of time thinking about what we could’ve done differently in order to make either our lives or our world a better place. I’m not suggesting that’s a bad thing; rather, I would say that in doing so many of us often sacrifice ‘the here and the now’ as an unintended consequence. Time is our most perishable resource, and it should be expended wisely … and, in that respect, Lola is likely the best 80 minutes one could spend with this cautionary tale about what we lose when we go about trying to alter Fate. Yes, that’s been written and spoken about for ages, but rarely does it get such an economical and effective presentation as director Andrew Legge and co-screenwriter Angeli Macfarlane achieve here in this heartwarming feature.
Thomasina (played by Emma Appleton) and Martha (Stefanie Martini) Henry are sisters who – by cruel developments of chance – wind up bonding and maturing mostly isolated from civilization in a large home in the English countryside. Exploring their mutual interest in science, they eventually build a machine they call ‘Lola,’ an electronic device that reads radio and broadcast waves from the future. What they see is a world occasionally in conflict but one that’s drawn together with shared investments in art and music. It isn’t until they realize that they can use Lola to gain knowledge of advance military incursions by the rising Nazi menace against Great Britain and alert the proper authorities that their future grows dark and complicated: they inadvertently turn personal and national allies into adversaries, felling one unintended domino after another as history spirals out of their control.
Thankfully, the script manages to juggle an incredible number of responsibilities – global conflict, love and loss, and questions of right and wrong – with some amazing if not downright crafty deftness. Nothing gets glossed over in the inevitable rush of events, and Appleton and Martini are both awarded their own respective plotlines which they deliver upon wonderfully. All the while, all of the developments revolve around ideas of sacrifice, never stopping to run off in the direction of something that could produce more spectacle or maudlin diversions. It’s a tale of two sisters – and just how far they discover both can go – in trying to fix what they’ve broken along the way, even at the expense of their separate or shared happiness.
Lola (2022) was produced by Cowtown Pictures, Head Gear Films, Kreo Films FZ, and Metrol Technology. From a quick search online (as of today’s date), the flick is available for purchase online via such streaming platforms as Amazon Prime, YouTube.com, and GooglePlay. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I think it’s fair to warn viewers that Lola is constructed largely like a ‘found footage film,’ so it helps to go in understanding that there will be the usual sound issues as well as some herkyjerky camera work. Personally, I didn’t think this effect was all that distracting, though I’ll admit that the sound engineering in a few spots was only fair. Lastly, as I viewed this via a streaming link, there were no special features under consideration.
Highly recommended.
Fans of SciFiHistory.Net know too well that I’m a fan of the ‘found footage format’ (which, miraculously, most critics seems to hate), but take note: Lola both is and isn’t a ‘found footage’ film. Essentially, it uses the ‘found footage’ construct – with clearly theatrically edited sequences – in order to enhance what could be an otherwise middling tearjerker into something vastly more profound. Instead of descending full-on estrogen into ‘chick flick territory,’ Lola uses those elements as well in order to ask viewers what they would sacrifice to fix the past, present, and the future? That’s a deep exploration, indeed, but it’s one I’ve rarely seen conducted more presciently in an incredible 80-minutes. Excellent performances. Top notch ideas. Stunning execution. A real winner in the marketplace where drama meets ideas.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Dark Sky Films provided me with complimentary streaming access to Lola (2022) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
Thankfully, the script manages to juggle an incredible number of responsibilities – global conflict, love and loss, and questions of right and wrong – with some amazing if not downright crafty deftness. Nothing gets glossed over in the inevitable rush of events, and Appleton and Martini are both awarded their own respective plotlines which they deliver upon wonderfully. All the while, all of the developments revolve around ideas of sacrifice, never stopping to run off in the direction of something that could produce more spectacle or maudlin diversions. It’s a tale of two sisters – and just how far they discover both can go – in trying to fix what they’ve broken along the way, even at the expense of their separate or shared happiness.
Lola (2022) was produced by Cowtown Pictures, Head Gear Films, Kreo Films FZ, and Metrol Technology. From a quick search online (as of today’s date), the flick is available for purchase online via such streaming platforms as Amazon Prime, YouTube.com, and GooglePlay. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I think it’s fair to warn viewers that Lola is constructed largely like a ‘found footage film,’ so it helps to go in understanding that there will be the usual sound issues as well as some herkyjerky camera work. Personally, I didn’t think this effect was all that distracting, though I’ll admit that the sound engineering in a few spots was only fair. Lastly, as I viewed this via a streaming link, there were no special features under consideration.
Highly recommended.
Fans of SciFiHistory.Net know too well that I’m a fan of the ‘found footage format’ (which, miraculously, most critics seems to hate), but take note: Lola both is and isn’t a ‘found footage’ film. Essentially, it uses the ‘found footage’ construct – with clearly theatrically edited sequences – in order to enhance what could be an otherwise middling tearjerker into something vastly more profound. Instead of descending full-on estrogen into ‘chick flick territory,’ Lola uses those elements as well in order to ask viewers what they would sacrifice to fix the past, present, and the future? That’s a deep exploration, indeed, but it’s one I’ve rarely seen conducted more presciently in an incredible 80-minutes. Excellent performances. Top notch ideas. Stunning execution. A real winner in the marketplace where drama meets ideas.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Dark Sky Films provided me with complimentary streaming access to Lola (2022) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ