Category Older Writing

Thoughts about Marvel and the ‘Thor: Ragnarok’ Trailer

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

I’ve never been a HUGE Marvel fan. I appreciate the films they release, because they are always very enjoyable and are *good* films. Their consistency could also be viewed as a deterrent, though. While consistently well made films, they seem to have fallen under the “cookie-cutter” category of superhero movies. In recent years, however, they seem to have been able to grow.

‘Doctor Strange’ was a huge surprise to me. It was an origin story, so you take the same steps as in every other Marvel origin, but it had wildly enjoyable visuals, and delightfully fresh fight sequences. Yes, the character grew and flourished in the same way that Iron Man did, so many years before, but this film felt NEW, and FRESH. Basically, it felt like it was a new Marvel.

On that same token, ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2’ was, in my opinion, amazing. It felt like the best comedy I had seen all year, yet it was a superhero action movie. It, like it’s predecessor (Guardians 1) and Doctor Strange, felt like a cool new direction for Marvel. The action was spot-on, and the characters were beautifully fleshed out. So, that brings me to the new ‘Thor’.

The first ‘Thor’, helmed with heavy dutch-angles by Kenneth Branagh, was pretty much as mediocre as a superhero movie could get. The phoned-in romance, coupled with the forgettable story, make me scratch my head as to what really happens in the film. (But, then again, I haven’t seen it in years.) ‘Thor: The Dark World’ eschewed dutch-angles for a terrible villain and an even more forgettable plot. Don’t they say that a movie is only as good as it’s villain? This movie is trash.

After those two movies, how could I hear about a third ‘Thor’ and find any kind of excitement? Well, the director is fantastic, for one. New Zealand native Taika Waititi (‘What We Do in the Shadows,’ and ‘Hunt for the Wilderpeople’) may seem like an odd choice for a big-budget superhero movie, but I believe that he has the perfect vision for a strange superhero movie (with a stranger story).

From the two trailers that have been released, one a teaser, the other an official trailer, we get a glimpse into what the film will be like. Both trailers featured great music, eye-popping colors, and genuine humor. Thor fights the Hulk was what the teaser made the film out to be. That’s rad. Now, the official trailer paints a bigger picture. And it’s exciting! I’m excited for a Marvel movie!

It may be too early to make assumptions, but I think I can say that it’s good that Marvel are taking chances with these films. ‘Ant-Man’ may have been the nail in the coffin for the old Marvel. Now, we are seeing the NEW Marvel, and it’s shaping up to be something fresh and, more importantly giving the filmmakers a chance to actually create their vision, rather than be stifled by the constrictions of the production company.

Anyway, I’m excited. Watch the trailer here.

Updates!

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

Just a quick update as a way to test my new ‘blog’ section of the site. I’ve created a Twitter handle for the site, as well as an Instagram, both @thefilmtent.

The Twitter page will be more focused on the now, as in, what am I watching, what are my reactions, etc. The Instagram will be used as a way to review things in a shorter space; sometimes I don’t need a full 500 word article to get my views across.

I hope this little project grows into something more substantial, but mostly I just want to have some fun with it.

-Casey

 

‘Baby Driver’ is Propelled by Musical Mayhem and Thrills (Emertainment Monthly – 6/29/17)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

Shaun of the Dead, a larger than life parody of the zombie genre, was released to the world in 2004. At the helm of this witty and action packed sleeper was English writer/director Edgar Wright, whose technical and comedic brilliance was just beginning to be noticed by the film world. With quick editing, flashy photography, and lightning wit, Wright had created something completely unique, even though he was retreading old ground.

Three years later, he would do the same with Hot Fuzz, which was his take on the buddy cop action genre. Hot Fuzz would lay the groundwork for his kinetic yet understandable approach to action. Through the years, his style got better and better. Each film continually grew in scope, adding technical complexities, yet staying completely engrossing and entertaining with wonderfully eccentric characters.

babydriver1

Jamie Foxx and Ansel Elgort in Baby Driver. Courtesy of Tristar Pictures

Edgar Wright’s latest film Baby Driver is fantastic, like the rest of his work, and his direction is tighter than ever in some wildly choreographed action scenes.

Baby, a young orphan played by Ansel Elgort, is an immeasurably talented getaway driver, though his latest job may be his last. Told with a heavy dose of music, the story focuses on Baby’s driving jobs with mob boss Doc, played by Kevin Spacey, as well as a newly flourishing relationship with a local diner waitress named Debra, played by Lily James. The principle cast is joined by a motley crew of criminals, played by Jamie Foxx, Jon Hamm, and Eiza González.

In typical Wright-fashion, the characters are hugely entertaining, doling out lines ranging from hysterical to criminally insane. The cleverness of the dialogue is not only punctuated by the regularly occurring musical accompaniment, but underscored. Baby is afflicted with tinnitus, which makes him listen to his iPod throughout the film.

babydriver2.png

Lily James in Baby Driver. Courtesy of Tristar Pictures

Some films fleetingly use music as a means to gain favorability from an audience, (Suicide Squad did this to an aggravated degree) but Baby Driver makes sure to utilize the music during action scenes. The gun fire builds upon the rhythmic timing in the song, and the car chases match the crescendo of the tune. A lull in a foot chase is perfectly timed with the lull in a track. Humorously, Baby even rewinds his songs if they don’t match up with his intended action. It’s so strange and fun, and it never becomes a tacky gimmick.

It’s difficult to separate the film from the filmmaker in this case, because there is clearly so much love and devotion poured into Baby Driver. Edgar Wright is not one to film a car chase the easy way: with green screen and CGI. He put the manic driving upfront and center, and it makes the action that much better. When you can see a performer doing these incredible stunts, as a way to get away from the police, it lends real tension to the story. White knuckle chases are exacerbated by the close calls and carnage that takes place on some very real cars. Not only is the driving real and impressive, but it’s gorgeously and very clearly shot. No quick cuts were used to mask any “movie magic” nor were there any gratuitous CGI stand-ins for the cars. When giving care and attention to a chase, like Wright does, it becomes more than something that has been seen in countless action movies before it. The chase becomes exciting and new.

The frantic pace of the action, coupled with the engrossing characters, script, and music, make Baby Driver the best action action movie of the summer. Here is an auteur, a director who continues to create his work, at the top of his game.

Originally published at Emertainment Monthly:

http://emertainmentmonthly.com/index.php/review-baby-driver-propelled-musical-mayhem-thrills/

Buy here: Baby Driver [Blu-ray]

‘It Comes at Night’ Succeeds With Thrills (Emertainment Monthly – 6/09/2017)

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

By Casey Campbell

Something is terribly wrong with Travis’ (Kelvin Harrison Jr.) grandfather, Bud (David Pendleton). His skin is covered with bulbous lesions, the whites of his eyes are becoming infected with a black malady, and his breathing is shallow and stilted. Travis and his mother Sarah (Carmen Ejogo) and father Paul (Joel Edgerton) look on at the grandfather through gas masks. The older man is infected, and it’s contagious. Saying their goodbyes to Bud, Paul and Travis wrap him in his bed blankets and lay him in a wheelbarrow to take him outside. At the site of a small pit, Paul puts a pillow over Bud’s head and executes him with a pistol, while Travis looks on.

This small family, shrunk smaller by the little known infection, survives together in their house in the woods. With windows boarded up, and padlocked doors, the family seems to hide from whatever could be outside. As a taught thriller, the film plays out in Hitchcockian fashion in a single location. The family’s house is a vessel for the terror, not because of some monster lurking in the night, but because of the monster that we can become when willing to survive.

ItComes1

Christopher Abbott in It Comes at Night. Courtesy of A24

When not a white knuckle thriller, the dystopian film becomes a horror. Laying down his head to sleep, seventeen year old Travis is met with terrifying nightmares. Walking down a corridor with an outstretched lantern, he is met with an ajar door. Going in, he sees his grandfather sitting upright and looking down, before giving a heart-stopping shriek and expelling black blood from his mouth. Thankfully awoken by his mother, Travis learns that someone has gotten past the first set of padlocked doors and is trying to enter the house.

This intruder named Will (Christopher Abbott), after a grueling interrogation from Paul, explains that he didn’t know they were living in the house, that he and his family are just trying to survive. His family, living some fifty miles away, can trade with Paul’s family, as they have chickens and a goat. After discussing it with Sarah, Paul decides to trust this man and sets out to bring Will’s wife and young son back to their house.

Director Trey Edward Shults, who also wrote the film, has a firm grasp on tension. His dialogue sequence between a tied-to-a-tree Will and an intimidating, gun wielding Paul, was filmed with harsh close ups, leaving the audience little room to breathe. The camera, helmed by DOP Drew Daniels, lent to the unnatural feel of the movie, by smoothly traversing the rough terrain of the woods on a steadicam. By utilizing fluid motion and long takes, the film is more quietly taut because it feels unnatural. Daniels also manages to make darkness beautiful, in the nighttime dream sequences. Long hallways lit by a single lantern ooze fear, while being framed and shot with slowly building intensity.

ItComes2

Joel Edgerton in It Comes at Night. Courtesy of A24

While Joel Edgerton and Christopher Abbott are powerful and emotionally resonant in their roles (especially during the interrogation) the real star is the young Kelvin Harrison Jr. Stuck between appreciating his safe home and decrying his lack of freedom, Harrison’s performance subtly blends the characters feelings of hope, despair, romance, and humor. It was through Travis’s eyes that the movie is told, and it perfectly encapsulated the feelings of someone who has to survive before he has really lived.

It Comes At Night is a great example of barebones cinematic storytelling. Next to nothing is learned of the characters, nor the world they live in, yet the themes are presented clearly and you understand the bitter struggles of living as they do. Dynamic performances from the whole cast truly help this quiet horror thriller reach higher than it’s scant, yet intelligent, script reach towards.

Overall Grade: A

Originally published at Emertainment Monthly:

http://emertainmentmonthly.com/index.php/review-comes-night-mostly-succeeds-thrills/

Buy here: It Comes At Night [Blu-ray]

‘The Lost City of Z’ Fulfills with Substance and Style (Emertainment Monthly – 4/10/2017)

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

By Casey Campbell

Encased in the Amazon jungle of South America, Percy Fawcett and company are on the search for something special, something that their contemporaries shrugged off as fantasy: The Lost City of Z. Finding the traces of a lost civilization, when the consensus was that South America was full of savages, would have turned the mindset of the early 20th century on it’s head. The film, slow and steady in its execution, is no period action piece. Rather, it sets itself apart as a character study on addiction, with the jungle as a backdrop.

Writer/director James Gray took the source material, an in-depth historical novel from David Grann about the very real Percy Fawcett, and maintained focus and integrity in his adaptation. Charlie Hunnam leads the cast as the explorer Fawcett, showing real strength in the role, as the character goes through several strikingly different times in his life (including a riveting war scene).

lostcityofz

Charlie Hunnam in The Lost City of Z. Courtesy of Rotten Tomatoes

Fawcett was living with his wife in England when he was invited by the Royal Geographical Society on an expedition to survey and explore the wild and never before seen lands between Bolivia and Brazil. Like his father before him, Fawcett left his wife and young son in England. While under different circumstances (alcohol vs. exploration), the addiction is hinted at early on, as well as disruption of their family.

During his first mission, Percy becomes entangled in his obsession with the jungle, and his search for the Lost City of Z. Stumbling upon some pottery in the middle of the jungle acts as the catalyst for his unceasing obsession, driving him from his family and back into the wilds again and again. Gray’s script plays with motivation in great ways, utilizing Fawcett’s fallen family name (from his drunkard father) as another driving force to make something of himself. Yet, in doing so, he only retreads the same path his father did before him.

You don’t see Fawcett with his family very much, which plays up their dysfunctional dynamic and crafts some great drama whenever they do end up together. One stand out scene involved his young son Jack, played by Tom Holland, becoming increasingly more upset with his father for leaving once again. It is heartbreaking, as you understood where Jack was coming from, yet conflicting, because Percy’s character was so well developed.

lcz2

Robert Pattinson in The Lost City of Z. Courtesy of thelostcityofzfilm.com

Sienna Miller is captivating as Nina Fawcett, the wife of Percy, who put the dreams of her husband over her dreams of normalcy for their family. This paradox was captured by way of emotion and bolstered the film opposite Percy’s own adventures.

A good portion of the movie takes place in the jungle, as Percy takes a few different trips throughout the runtime. Each foray was replete with rapidly buzzing mosquitos, infections, and a general sense of unknown danger. Fawcett’s right hand man Henry Costin, played by a bearded Robert Pattinson, even gets a nasty case of sores on his face, which look gruesome. The jungle, though gorgeously shot by Darius Khondji, looked anything but fun.

James Gray managed to take a historical novel and translate it to the screen in great fashion. It is the best way that a nonfiction novel could have been brought to film. Gray fleshes out the characters, and uses them as vehicles to progress the plot. Extraneous details from the novel were left out in favor of focusing on Percy Fawcett and his extraordinary drive. There are addictions, and there are dreams. Percy Fawcett was addicted to his dream.

Overall Grade: A

Buy here: The Lost City of Z

‘Train to Busan’ is a zombie movie, but on a train

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

By Casey Campbell

Busy investment manager Seok-woo (Yoo Gong) has little time for his daughter Soo-an (Soo-an Kim), even on her birthday. Seok-woo is implored to bring his daughter to Busan, where his estranged wife resides. Boarding a train harboring an unfriendly guest in Seoul, the whole locomotive is plunged into a life or death struggle with a zombie outbreak.

Train to Busan (Busanhaeng in it’s native Korean) could have been great. It could have expanded on the oversaturated genre of zombie movies that have done little new since 2002. But, in the end, it spiraled into a generic tropey zombie movie that I’m sure you’ve seen before. I certainly have.

Busan2

Yoo Gong, Dong-seok Ma, and Soo-an Kim in Train to Busan. Courtesy of Express

The unfortunate thing is that the first half was great. It had some exciting and (thankfully) easy to follow action which, uniquely, flowed through a train. That in and of itself was a neat idea, if executed well. The claustrophobic nature of being stuck on a moving train with a bunch of other freaked out people is horrifying alone, but the addition of zombies was a fresh idea for the genre.

After Seok-woo and Soo-an were hit with the zombie apocalypse, they met a motley crew of survivors. There was a baseball player and his cheerleader friend (girlfriend?), two elderly sisters, and a pregnant woman and her husband. Of the extraneous characters, the pregnant woman and especially her husband were the best. In fact, the husband Sang-hwa (Dong-seok Ma) was the best character in general. The most dynamic of the bunch, Sang-hwa lends humor, levity, and best of all action. He actually does things! He incites many scenes, and I cannot thank him enough for that. Sang-hwa was a badass whose weapon of choice was his bare hands.

BUSAN1

Yu-mi Jung and Dong-seok Ma in Train to Busan. Courtesy of Google Play.

This is the kind of movie that relies on idiotic characters that sit and stare at horrific scenes for tension. That’s not tension, that’s lazy writing. Lazy and infuriating writing. I’m sure that if I watched a zombie rip someone’s throat out, I wouldn’t lounge on the ground and watch. I’d probably get up and sprint as fast as I could in the opposite direction.

In straying from the generic zombie movie, if only for a short time, Train employed a gimmick in which the zombies only attack when they can clearly see a human. That means that if the train goes through a tunnel, the zombies lose contact with their prey, and they become almost docile (unless they hear a noise, then they pounce). To put it in context, Walking Dead zombies (walkers, meh) smell humans, these ones need to see them. The best scenes in the film were when this idea was explored and I thought it was a unique addition to an overblown genre.

Earlier I mentioned lazy writing, and this film is rife with it. Some horror movies employ subtlety when contextualizing ideas. It Follows masterfully played with the stigmas that come with sex and early adulthood, while never actually coming out and saying it directly. This movie decides, early on, to denounce stockholders and investors, calling them “bloodsuckers.” It’s a commentary on the capitalistic vampirism of money making, and delves into what such a leech would do if in this situation. (It also, briefly, makes you think the lead had something to do with the spread of the viral outbreak.) The film’s lack of subtlety becomes aggravated to the point of blatancy, and the line between cultural commentary and zombie horror became blurred.

Horror is a genre known for it’s social commentary, but there is a difference between subtle dialogue, and transparent activism. George A. Romero’s transcendent Night of the Living Dead (1968) created zombies as we know them now.  His zombie follow-up Dawn of the Dead (1978) turned in a story about a group of survivors hiding out in a local shopping mall. Guess where the mindless echelons of zombies flock? The local shopping mall. While not beating you over the head with its ideology, Dawn still had a few things to say about the state of the consumer capitalistic country at the time. Busan has plenty to say, and decides to hold the viewer’s hand rather than let them understand the underlying message.

Train to Busan does nothing new (bar the sight gimmick, which I really did enjoy) and came off as preachy. The characters (while never fleshed out) and the initial setup of the film were interesting, though neither really amounted to much. For a film that is receiving rave reviews, I was expecting something a bit more groundbreaking and less tropey.

Buy here: Train To Busan [Blu-ray]

‘Going in Style’ is funny, yet familiar (Emertainment Monthly – 4/07/2017)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

Age is just a number, as made clear in Zach Braff’s new heist comedy Going in Style, which features Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Alan Arkin. The trio—the youngest of which is 79—delivers fantastic chemistry, humorous physical comedy, and action with ease, despite their ages.

Retired friends Joe (Caine), Willie (Freeman), and Albert (Arkin) live peacefully after working most of their lives at the same company. After the company they worked for ships out to another country, their pensions are ended, and they are left without money. Too old to get other jobs, the three decide to rob the bank that played a part in freshly screwing them over.

going-in-style2-e1491522454836.jpg

Morgan Freeman, Michael Caine, John Ortiz, and Alan Arkin in Going in Style.    Photo Credit: Warner Bros.

While playfully utilizing the leads ages for the sake of comedy, the film also deals heavily with mortality. It was surprisingly jarring to see these men discuss how long they had left to live. Death is the most definite thing in life, yet seeing legends discuss it packed the film with a more emotional heft. The scene in question can be contextualized by the characters discussing how much money they would need to steal. Joe asked Willie and Albert how long they thought they had left so that they could take only so much of their pension that they would have been receiving. But, you quickly remember that this is a comedy when realizing both Caine and Freeman’s characters were high from a previous scene.

Alan Arkin is perfect in his role of Albert, an old man who couldn’t care less about anything. He easily steals every scene he’s in and came through with some of the biggest laughs. His detached nature lends well to the “all or nothing” quality of the mission. The men are happily willing to go to jail, where they figure they can get better housing and healthcare than on the outside.

going-in-style4-e1491522527267.jpg

Alan Arkin, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine in Going in Style. Photo Credit: Warner Bros.

Going in Style presented nothing new, but what it had was good enough. This may be due to it being a remake of a 1979 film of the same name. The direction was nothing special, which is surprising for Braff based on his earlier work like Garden State, and the score was obnoxious by being punchy and cartoonish.

The soundtrack, on the other hand, was great. Director Braff describes the song choices as “a mix of music that the characters might listen to.” Included are Dean Martin, Otis Redding, and Sam Cooke, as well as A Tribe Called Quest.

going-in-style3-e1491522497790.jpg

Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, and Alan Arkin in Going in Style. Photo Credit: Warner Bros.

The core of the film is in the humorous antics played out between the leads as they set up the heist. One scene involved Willie and Joe attempting their own low scale heist in a small supermarket. Their “escape” was hysterical.

Overall, the film succeeds at creating chemistry and sympathy for the leads. Over-sentimentality is used in some scenes, though not enough to dampen the experience. It’s funny, accessible, and harmless while containing discussion about our society and the treatment of elderly.

Overall Grade: C+

Originally published at Emertainment Monthly:

http://emertainmentmonthly.com/index.php/review-going-in-style-is-funny-yet-familiar/

Buy here: Going in Style (2016) (BD) [Blu-ray]

Hilariously Distasteful, ‘Prevenge’ Kills at BUFF (Emertainment Monthly – 4/05/2017)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

On a blisteringly frigid evening in late March, a collection of horror lovers and cinephiles lined up at the Brattle Theatre in Cambridge, Massachusetts to ring in the first night of the Boston Underground Film Festival, or, BUFF. On tap was Prevenge, a slasher comedy which showcased the clear talents of writer, director, and lead actress Alice Lowe, in her first directorial feature. Prevenge was a hilariously dry, gory blast, with moments of heart sprinkled throughout. There are worse ways to kick off a film festival.

You’d think that a writer/director would have enough on their plate. Now, imagine a writer/director who is seven months pregnant that also stars in their own film. Despite the factors pulling her in several different directions, Alice Lowe put together a great film, told in a refreshingly interesting way.

prevenge3-e1490325792972

Alice Lowe in Prevenge. Photo Credit: Shudder

The story here is weird, perfect for audiences of BUFF, where weird films go to flourish. Ruth (Lowe), a pregnant widow, goes on a killing spree per the request of her unborn fetus. The baby delivers disembodied lines of high-pitched dialogue with results ranging from unnerving to hilarious, and it works. The story unfolds in a way that propels this film higher than others in the genre. Lowe feeds the audience bit by bit until the drive behind the killing is made clear. This is mostly through unforced dialogue and flashback imagery.

In a similar social-conscious vein like Jordan Peele’s Get Out from earlier this year, Prevenge sets its sights on feminism. Both advertise as horror but deliver much more substance in their delineation of social taboos through clever writing and humor. The protagonist Ruth deals with men who objectify her, and women who look down on her lack of a man.

Ruth’s killing spree is done with humor and great character. Each murder is preceded by a humorous build-up of tension that often resulted in the audience loudly exclaiming bouts of laughter or humored disgust.

prevenge2-e1490325742132

Alice Lowe in Prevenge. Photo Credit: Shudder

As the first feature under director Alice Lowe’s belt, Prevenge flows easily and flashbacks are used fleetingly. While not a prerequisite for a good rating, it must be said that the film was shot during an impressively short 11-day schedule. The length of the shoot is important here because it shows how deft Lowe is in her direction. To create this professional and tight finished product in such a short time on its small budget is incredible.

If you’re tired of being beaten to death with exposition and want a humorously inventive experience, Prevenge is for you. It’s fun, gross, and strange. If it opens into a wider release, seeing it with an active audience of horror fiends enhances the experience.

Overall Grade: A-

Originally published at Emertainment Monthly:

http://emertainmentmonthly.com/index.php/review-hilariously-distasteful-prevenge-kills-at-buff/

Buy here: Prevenge [Blu-ray]

A gateway drug for arthouse: The Brattle Theatre

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

The Brattle Theatre’s 12-foot-tall, blank screen crackles to life as Warner Brothers’ shield logo appears, accompanied by tooting of trumpets playing the Looney Toons theme. The audience of mostly children and parents sit near the front, ensuring the smaller kids have a chance to see the animated action.

The Cambridge theater, a staple of film restoration and cinema in New England since 1953, shows a Looney Toons marathon during one week every February. The marathon week always lands at a time when many children enjoy their school vacations. The marathon was started by the predecessors of the current administration of Ivy Moylan and Ned Hinkle. Moylan has been the co-owner and executive director of the theater since 2001, when she and creative director Hinkle took over the lease.

Ivy Moylan prepared for their third day of cartoons. Her staff rushed here and there, often animatedly telling stories during preparation in the back room. In a loose blue and white vertically striped button-up, Ivy couldn’t help but get excited about the coming presentation.

“Even if it’s not a ‘special event,’” Moylan said, “it is a special event, because it’s not your normal movie theater.”

On Feb. 21, a Tuesday, a father in the audience, Doug, was able to bring his young son Roland to the Looney Toons screening. Roland was thankful for the experience, and Doug was glad to show his son a classic.

“It’s nice that they set it up during vacation week,” Doug said. “It’s a great place to bring my son.”

brattle2

Courtesy of cambridge.com

As a “calendar house,” the Brattle utilizes holidays and culturally significant days to curate fun film experiences for their audience.

“You want to create a program that could potentially get people interested in coming out,” Moylan said.

Curation is all about creating a certain vibe through the figurative lense of film. Whether that means showing classic holiday films during Christmas, campy horror titles in October, or Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho on Mother’s Day, curation takes dedication and an intimate knowledge of film. Curation has a lot to do with its reception from an audience as well.

Film curation must do two things, according to the Film Festival Research Network, a website created by film scholars Marijke de Valck and Skadi Loist. First, the curator must create a program that can “highlight, promote and contextualize” a film. Secondly, and possibly more importantly, the curator must remain dependent on the audience’s reaction. Without the audience, there is no program.

Anna Feder, director of programming at Emerson College’s Bright Lights, curates experiences with direct input from the audience after screenings, in the form of discussions. In programming for Bright Lights, Feder said that a quarter of the showings are directly related to Emerson, often showing shorts and features made by alums, students, or staff. Feder also underscored the importance of balancing the needs of the students, as well as the public, with a wide variety of films.

The Brattle, in its outreach, has worked with film festivals like Independent Film Festival Boston (IFF Boston) to solicit sneak previews, and Boston Underground Film Festival. The latter of which Anna Feder has experience with, specifically at the Brattle. Her work brought her to the Brattle between 2005 and 2011, before moving on to Emerson

Like Feder’s Bright Lights, the Brattle has had to distinguish itself.

“We view ourselves as a gateway drug for arthouses,” Moylan quipped. Unlike other theaters typically found in museums or colleges, which feel inaccessible for certain audiences and cultures, the Brattle is a place for every walk of life. “We work hard for this to be an inclusive and open space.”

Ivy is proud of the accessibility of the theater. It has a concession stand, sells popcorn, and showcases trailers, like a traditional theater.

“It means that we are accessible to people who feel comfortable finding a less than traditional movie theater,” she lauded.

The Brattle tries to spice up every showing, from screenings of Blue Velvet, in which the crew passed out baggies containing a fake ear and ants, to The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension, where they handed out bubblegum. Not only do they bring in audiences, but they are culturally important and equally exciting viewing experiences for acclimated cinephiles and appreciative fans. It is a theater that succeeds at curation because of how dutifully it dotes on it’s audience.

The theater even takes into account when younger kids have their school vacation, so that they can experience classic cartoons with their parents.

“That’s all folks” scrawls across the cartoon’s final panel. The lights raise, along with a grade school aged girl with a popcorn bucket on her head, smiling ear to ear, a possible future attendee of this historic theater.

‘Kong: Skull Island’ forgoes character for fun (EIV News – 3/20/2017)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

Kong: Skull Island was a bit like a delicious, yet very saturated meal. It’s enjoyable, but after an hour, it leaves you empty. Does that mean the film was bad? Anything but. It was a fun ride, even when it made no sense at all.

As a monster movie, the film was completely worth the ticket price. This is absolutely one to catch while in theaters. The visuals were great, the titular character was a blast to watch, and there was enough chaos to keep you satiated for the barely two hour run-time.

The film’s opening credit sequence informs the audience that this is not the 1933 Kong, but a new Vietnam War era incarnation. From there, Bill Randa (John Goodman) gets approval from a member of the Senate to take scientists to a never-before-seen island that he hoped to discover before the Russians (remember, this is Cold War era America) and I found his reason in this scene to be pretty clever. It employed fun world building, and a good way to quickly get the story moving.

Kong is paced pretty well. There is barely any downtime, and the story picks up and runs after Goodman’s talk with the senator. From there, Randa requests a military escort.

The issues surface when taking into account the amount of time the audience spends with the “characters”. You don’t go into a King Kong movie, or any monster movie really, assuming the human side of the story will be nearly as entertaining as the massive fight scenes. I figured the humans would be the B-story to Kong’s A, or at least the humans would add something to the Kong section.

Kong Pic 2

Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson in Kong: Skull Island. Courtesy of Warner Bros. Entertainment

Having such an impressive supporting cast really should have helped make their story interesting. Tom Hiddleston shined as Loki in The Avengers and Brie Larson earned an Oscar for her defining role in Room, so why are they so boring and useless in this project? Hiddleston played the macho mercenary with some life, but the script surely didn’t give him much to work with. I can’t remember Larson delivering a single line of dialogue that wasn’t rife with cliché and cheese. Other members of the cast include a severely underused John Goodman, an atypical Samuel L. Jackson, and Shea Whigham as detached soldier #4.

There was a running line throughout, playing off of a letter that one of the soldiers was writing to his son. His letter began with “Dear Billy,” and the supporting characters would recite this two word phrase, followed by whatever they were going through, either for laughs or for dramatic purposes. This line was so belabored and beaten to death, that after a character said “Dear Billy…” for the sixth time, my eyes rolled all the way around my skull.

John C. Reilly was easily the best character of them all, as a long forgotten World War 2 fighter pilot whose plane was shot down over Skull Island. His character was played with such life and humor, you really grasped onto him for levity.

Now, again, because the characters weren’t great does not mean the film was bad. It can only take away from the film if you were expecting a high brow drama. Even if you were expecting something more akin to Peter Jackson’s 2005 King Kong, you’d be going in with the wrong mindset. Where that was a lengthy, character driven epic, this is a visual feast. It’s Vietnam War era Kong, with beautiful shots of a blood red horizon with the over 100-foot-tall Kong towering over the region. It looks great.

Kong’s design is good, and much more man-like than the 2005 version, which looked like a large gorilla. Here, Kong is indeed King of the island. Creatures and human inhabitants all cower at Kong’s enormous feet. Since the funnest part of the film is with it’s creatures, I won’t divulge who or what he fights. There are several large scale creature fights, and they are all awesome. I’m glad the filmmakers focused on the fights in this film, because they were fun as hell.

I look forward to a future where the Godzilla from Gareth Edward’s 2014 film and this Kong can fight. Given that these two films are from the same production company, and in the same cinematic universe, I am excited to see what comes next.

Originally published at EIVNews:

http://www.eivnews.com/archives/5072

Buy here: Kong: Skull Island (BD) [Blu-ray]

What I (and a fellow critic) take out of film criticism (The Odyssey – 3/21/2016)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

The inception of my interview with one Emerson graduate and film critic, Evan Crean, was incentivized by a project for the speech class I am enrolled in. What began as a way to speak to someone in my future profession and get a grade, became enlightening on a level above any letter marked on a sheet.

My first encounter with Crean’s work was back in December, a week before we were let out for Winter Break. Emerson was holding a film criticism panel with Boston Globe critic Ty Burr, and the man I interviewed, Evan Crean. Crean graduated back in 2008 with a B.S. in Broadcast Journalism, and shortly after found himself putting to paper his thoughts on film.

I took many a tip from Mr. Crean’s well stated responses to my several questions. One such question requested the skills necessary to “make it” as a film critic. While most think of critics or reviewers as people who write their opinions, he expressed that the written word is not strictly the home of a critic’s thoughts. Vocal communication is needed as well, especially for Crean, who hosts a brilliant podcast from his website, reelrecon.com. But aside from his podcast, he sat in on the previously mentioned film criticism panel at Emerson, in which he answered audience questions and spoke on criticism as a whole.

An equally important lesson I took from the interview was, in his words, “practice, practice, practice.” While even he recognized it’s now clichéd nature, he expanded, “the more you do it, the better you’ll get. Kind of like a muscle. With exercise you build strength and confidence in your own abilities.” This is a fact not just for film criticism, but anything at all that you set your mind to. With that being said, he transitioned into the most formative piece of information he had to offer: be yourself.

That is, in itself, another rather clichéd statement. Who else can you be, than yourself? But it holds an immense amount of weight, especially how he divulged what that meant. He expressed that people will have differing opinions on your work, whether handled maturely and with constructive feedback in mind, or as a belittling child taking to the internet to express their pent up aggression. Either way, I’ll paraphrase, stay true to yourself, because they are only your opinions, and opinions change. The personality that is brought into the review helps distinguish you from another. And like the last tip, this idea transcends film criticism to encompass most aspects of life.

Like most people at Emerson, I love film, and I love talking about film. But, I am a writer first, so I’ve used my words to express my opinions on film via The Odyssey, and on my own time. I believe film criticism is important. It allows your thoughts on a movie to be conveyed, while an audience has the ability to chime in, whether with their agreement or their denial of your claims. Either way, it opens up a discussion for one of the best mediums of entertainment, subjectively of course, film.

I also believe that his website, which features a genuinely funny podcast, and many different kinds of reviews, to be worthy of your time. Check it out, at reelrecon.com.

Originally published at The Odyssey: 

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/fellow-critic-film-criticism

In both character and content, ‘Hannibal’ Season One excites with charisma and intellect

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

Season one of NBC’s crime thriller Hannibal aired back in 2013, and I’ve been hearing great things since. After three years on TV, the Bryan Fuller created series was cancelled, despite critical praise and high ratings. Speculation cited the inability to include Jodie Foster’s Clarice Starling character from The Silence of the Lambs in season four as a reason to conclude the series, or the immense amount of viewers watching illegally. With the knowledge of a short run, critical and commercial love, and a beloved character portrayed over a longer form medium, I began the series with excitement, and have ended the first season not only satisfied, but completely enamored.

The character of Hannibal Lecter has gone through changes over the years, many to the disdain of fans. The character was created by Thomas Harris in his novels. Though initially brought to the screen in Michael Mann’s 1986 Manhunter, and played by Brian Cox, Hannibal Lecter (spelled Leckter in Manhunter) became a household name after Jonathan Demme’s 1991 The Silence of the Lambs. Lambs saw Anthony Hopkins taking over the role of Lecter, an incarcerated serial killer who cannibalized his victims. This was the best of the film adaptations, due mainly to Hopkins’ portrayal of the brilliant cannibal. What followed were lackluster prequels and a sequel. The only consistent element in the following films were Hopkins’ great character, as sinister and manipulative yet charismatic and intelligent. Given the last three films in the franchise ranged from mediocre to downright bad, it is understandable fans of the character were afraid of the prospect of a series. Bryan Fuller is a great show-runner, especially for this series, because he clearly cared enough to get the character right and sought out an equally terrific actor to fill the shoes of Hopkins’ legendary cannibal.

Mads Mikkelsen plays Hannibal in the show. Here, Hannibal Lecter is an accomplished psychiatrist with a history in surgery and a knack for artisanal cooking. Mikkelsen is an actor whose career I have seen flourish from his work on Nicolas Winding Refn’s Pusher trilogy and Valhalla Rising, Casino Royale, The Hunt, and recently Doctor Strange. That is some range, and that doesn’t even scratch the surface of his career.

In the show, he plays the character through his eyes, much like his predecessor. Never one for extravagant shows of emotion, Lecter tells you what you need to know from what he doesn’t say. A sideways glance or a squint help translate his inner workings. As a psychiatrist, Dr. Lecter is terrifying. He leaves little bread crumbs in the psyche of his patients, leading one to have a full psychiatric break throughout the season. As a character, he is infinitely interesting to watch; he can be charismatic and smooth in one instance, and then brutal and cold-blooded the next.

Hannibal plays second fiddle to the lead of the series, Will Graham. Graham is first introduced as an eccentric police academy professor who can put himself into the shoes of serial killers, at the scene of the crime. He does so by empathizing with the killers, and understanding how they tick. (What could possibly go wrong?) Played with dedication and intricacy by Hugh Dancy, Graham is fascinating to watch, especially as the series progresses. Though, in the name of spoilers, I will say no more. 

The season begins with Graham being requested by Jack Crawford (Lawrence Fishburne), the head of the Behavioral Science Unit of the FBI, to look into a case. While the case is mostly dealt with in the first episode, it lingers in Graham’s mind until the season finale. The structure of the show surprised me. It takes on a “case of the week” style, while continuing the conflict brought on by the season premier. I’m glad it was serialized yet brought new interesting conflict each episode in the form of crazy crime scenes. Each case adds to the characters of Lecter and Graham, though Graham in particular, as the havoc begins to whittle away at his mental state.

The series takes place in the Maryland area, which requires the viewers to suspend their disbelief at the vast amount of crazy murders taking place in one small area. Though, this is the same universe in which a cannibal is named Hannibal, so in the name of entertainment, I can look past my admitted nitpick.

Overall, the series is fantastically entertaining and if this first season is any indication, the show will continue to be great. The supporting cast are fun, and can even lend some comic relief in the darker episodes. The story is crafted well, and the characters are conniving enough to make even their most outlandish actions believable. The thirteen episodes flowed together and I was always excited to see more.

Score: A

Buy here: Hannibal: The Complete Series Collection Season 1-3 [Blu-ray + Digital HD]

‘Furious 7’ is not a very good movie (The Odyssey – 2/22/2016)

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

By Casey Campbell

I recently got around to seeing the latest iteration in the surprisingly and unnecessarily long running Fast and Furious franchise, and it is not a very good movie at all. What was once a decently fun, car-centric action series has turned into several too many movies featuring dizzying set pieces and truly idiotic characters in a wholly unbelievable world. If you are one of those people who say, “Oh, just turn off your brain and enjoy the movie,” then please stop reading now, as this may disarm you with logic.

So, as a fair viewer and critic, I will begin with giving credit where credit is due. Fresh off the success of two great horror films, James Wan was given the chance to direct Furious 7, after previous director Justin Lin decided to move on with his career. The film is, for the most part, well shot. When the camera doesn’t linger on the barely clothed behind’s of women in every city the characters enter, the shots are usually decently framed. Also, the tangible chemistry built between the two lead actors, the late Paul Walker and Vin Diesel, is clear and works. Overall, the movie looks alright and the two leads seem like they’re, as Diesel’s Dom Toretto loves to say, “family.”

Now, the rest of the film really falls apart with the fight scenes, which sadly fill about ¾ of the movie. During a fight scene, it is essential that the audience feel at least a slight amount of threat and danger when the hero finds strife with a villain. In this movie, one filled with basic superhumans who can survive driving down a mountain and being constantly shot at, a scene in which two characters have a hastily edited, and poorly choreographed fist fight means nothing. Indonesian action film The Raid features fight scenes that have you white-knuckled throughout. The characters in that film are human, and every single one is expendable, leading to always tense and exciting fights. But comparing a genuinely well made film to Furious 7 does nothing for my argument.

It was somewhere between the third and fourth films in this franchise (which has three more movies in the making) that the characters became incapable of death. It must have been around that time that these characters also lost all common sense and logic. Brian O’Conner (Walker) has a wife and child at the start of Furious 7. With a new kid on the way, O’Conner’s pregnant wife does what any sane person would do: hides the fact that she’s pregnant so that he goes out on an incredibly deadly mission, rather than letting law enforcement handle it (I assume the characters in this universe aren’t aware of their heightened un-killability).

Jason Statham’s character is the reason the team must come back together for another deadly mission, because he was the brother of the last films antagonist, and blows up the O’Conner’s home. Thankfully, luck (as usual) was on the family’s side, as they all found themselves outside at the time of the explosion. But, even though the explosion took place outside as well, they all were okay because they, uh, ducked… or something. Sure, that’s fine. In the scene before, Statham beat the one and only Dwayne Johnson, the largest human ever, in a hand to hand fight, and then sent him flying out of a window from a lethal height, onto an SUV. If you worried whether he had died or not, you clearly are new to the series.

The villain, Jason Statham’s Deckard Shaw, is one of the most underutilized and underdeveloped characters in the film. Now, I wholeheartedly respect Jason Statham. The man has proven himself in the status of “action badass”, but this is just sad. Logically unsound, yet omniscient in his task to destroy Toretto’s team, he knows where they are at all times. Even when they globe-hop in every other scene, he crashes the party (literally, at one point). His grinning grizzled face is always either driving into an action scene, or cockilly strutting in, holding a machine gun. There are too many times where I, as the viewer, contort my face into a questioning grimace of disbelief.

A film can be outlandish and crazy, and still be great fun. This film sure is outlandish, and it is absolutely crazy, but I truly cannot call this fun. It felt more like a chore to stomach the fantastical, death defying acts portrayed on screen, than it was a fun experience. I also cannot call it a good movie. As the most critically acclaimed of the series, I find myself bewildered. This, the most clichéd and unceasingly dumb movie of the series, made over $1 billion worldwide. The lazy deus ex-machina was used endlessly throughout, whether in the form of Tyrese Gibson jumping his car through a forest to meet back up with the heroes on a terrible mountainous highway chase sequence, or Dwayne Johnson driving an ambulance into a drone. In fact, never have I laughed harder than when seeing The Rock driving an ambulance through an overpass onto a drone, that was flying towards the heroes. The omniscient Rock stole an ambulance and drove it, screaming, to that exact point. The logistics alone are hysterical. Plus, after an explosion, he got up and walked up to a mini-gun and lumbered away, ready to wreak more havoc.

The ending of the film was nothing less than hysterical, in a really bad way. I did not get pulled into the emotional heft that is the ‘Letty bringing Dom back from the dead with the power of love’ scene, and instead laughs at the events that brought these idiots to this point in the “story”, so am I the one that’s in the wrong? Surely $1 billion and critical success means that, right? Well, with two watches under my belt, I left with a drearily bad taste in my mouth, and the unfortunate realization that this was the final film of all around good guy Paul Walker, whose death devastated the film community.

Amateur filmmaking is taking home billions of dollars, and that’s pretty unfortunate, as there are many ideas that actually take chances which go unfunded. I have many more qualms with this travesty of a film, but I don’t think it deserves any more of this writers or the readers time.

Buy here: Furious 7 (Blu-ray + DVD + DIGITAL HD with UltraViolet)

‘Daredevil’ Season 2: In Review (The Odyssey – 3/28/2016)

Casey Campbell 1 Comment

By Casey Campbell

In recent years, the Marvel brand has become a powerhouse in cinema, releasing two films a year. This continuously broadening MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe) has branched out to the small screens too, most impressively with the Netflix program “Daredevil”. The series recently aired their second season, and frankly, I loved it.

“Daredevil” is a show that, had it been like any of the other Marvel films, could have been another cookie-cutter addition to the Universe. Thankfully for the faithful viewer, this series packs a Hulking punch in terms of tone, action, and overall design.

Upon returning to Hell’s Kitchen, we find the blind lawyer by day, masked vigilante by night Matt Murdock, and his legal team partners Foggy Nelson and Karen Page plunged into an even darker world than before, when the The Punisher begins his bloody quest for vengence. No spoilers here, but faces new and old begin to surface and it makes for one endlessly interesting show.

Tonally, this is Marvel’s darkest. Violence is shown up close and personal, with blood and viscera up for display in an unflinching fashion. The fight scenes are handled immensely well. In an age when directors typically use the technique of quick cuts/shakey cam to confuse the audience into submission, the “Daredevil” team sets up fight scenes so that the viewer can actually see the performers moving coherently. It proves to the viewer that the production team actually cares about what is being made, and that’s alright with me. That being said, shot composition is beautiful throughout, and I noticed many long takes.

The addition of new characters was both needed and well executed, like with Frank Castle, AKA The Punisher, and Elektra. Their stories play out in a way that seems fluid to the story already in motion, and backstories are slowly given through flashback, or dialogue. It also happens that I found these two characters to be the most interesting throughout the season.

I typically watch Marvel films as a source of mindless entertainment. Each film feels like the last, structurally. While this show also builds upon the world already being built by the Disney owned company, it feels much different. No longer is the comic book film dependent on its humor to get the audience on board. “Daredevil” employs characters with depth and struggles in order to present a world that very well could happen.

The problem with this season is that it loses steam by the end of the season. After bringing back some auxiliary characters from the past season, Season 2 lost some of that exhilarating momentum it had built up. Also, while it’s clear that The Punisher is an absolute badass, even he cannot know where Daredevil is fighting at all times, making his constant interrupting and helping unrealistic and deus ex machina-y. But those are quite minor, in the scope of these 13 fantastic episodes.

“Daredevil” is a fast-paced, character driven action series which feels more HBO than Marvel, and it deserves your viewing, or rather you need to view it.

Originally published at The Odyssey: 

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/daredevil-season-2-in-review

Buy here: Daredevil – Season 2 [Blu-ray] [2017]

‘Love’ bridges romance and reality with comedic results (The Odyssey – 2/17/2016)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

Netflix is home to some successful and award winning programming, such as ‘Orange is the New Black’, and ‘House of Cards’. The streaming service’s newest show, ‘Love’, just nearly reaches the highs now associated with Netflix’s rather impressive track record.

The Judd Apatow produced, ten-episode running first season was, for the most part, a genuine, moving, and humorous take on modern romance, and the trials and tribulations that accompany it. With an impressive team of writers backing the script, including star Paul Rust and producer Judd Apatow, the story flows well. I found myself putting off work to finish watching the show in one sitting, which I accomplished.

‘Love’ is the story of Gus and Mickey; Gus being an overly nice man, and Mickey being an intense yet indecisive woman, both when it comes to love. The series opens with the two juxtaposed in their own doomed relationships, and how they deal with the fallout of each. The story then turns its attention to their meeting, and friendship.

The show impressed me with it’s take on the topic of love and romance. Where many programs or films will focus on the relationship, this focuses on the very human characters. Characters grow and develop, and the things they do seem realistic. When one makes a mistake, it affects the relationship, which in turn affects the two people. This aspect of the program was heightened by the great acting and chemistry of the two leads.

Tonally, the show is a bit bipolar and floppy. But, I believe it to be metaphorical of all relationships, as there are ups and downs, as depicted in the rising and falling drama and humor. ‘Love’ uses the medium to it’s advantage, utilizing a range of emotions displayed over ten episodes. This can be jolting at times, especially with the seemingly uncharacteristic actions of one of the leads during the final few episodes, which in itself is my only real gripe.

The main problem with the first season is when characters make huge mistakes that they would not have done earlier in the series, seemingly only to create more drama and strife. A minor mistake, characteristically made by one of the leads, then spurs on the final half of the season in what wreaks of wasted potential. That being said, a story called ‘Love’ features very little love. I can get behind a relationship series focused more on the awkward idiosyncrasies of relationships and people, just don’t give it a misnomer.

Overall, the series seems to be in good hands, though the writers should focus on what these characters would do, based on what they have already done. That way, the audience does not feel backlash at the hands of these once believable and likeable characters. Highlights of the show include female lead Gillian Jacobs’ Mickey, as this endearing yet flawed character comes to terms with her life and the affect she has on others.

Give it a watch, if you’re in the mood for a well paced, character driven story.

Originally published at The Odyssey: 

https://www.theodysseyonline.com/feel-the-love-on-netflix

‘A United Kingdom’ Boasts Great Performances, but Little Else – (Emertainment Monthly – 2/17/2017)

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

By Casey Campbell

A United Kingdom, Amma Asante’s new film, was loosely held together by great performances, but plagued by a plodding story and inconsistent pacing. It told the true story of a prince from Botswana (David Oyelowo) who married a white woman from London (Rosamund Pike), and the racial societal struggles they endured throughout the 1940’s and 50’s.

Oyelowo’s Seretse Khama is played with passionate restraint, having to overcome racial injustices both in his college city of London and at his home in Bechuanaland, Botswana. The speeches he gave were stirring and emotional, and his more internal conflicts were delivered through physicality. Pike’s Ruth Williams was bold and charming, yet conflicted with being accepted at neither her birth home or African adopted home. Together, Seretse and Ruth were perfectly charismatic, and were an absolute joy to watch. They were easily the strongest part of the film. Unfortunately, due to the plot, they aren’t together for nearly enough of the runtime. The supporting cast fill their roles well, with very villainous, sometimes cartoonish performances from Jack Davenport and Tom Felton.

The film was never bad, but it was also never great. It was all very competently made, but it was stuck in base mediocrity, where the true story deserved better. From the start, the film races to get it’s characters to Africa. Short and choppy expository scenes frequent the opening 15 minutes. When they get away from London, the pace evens out and the characters get more room for depth and development. A distinction that can be made with this film is in the romance, and how director Asante stays away from melodrama and crafts a genuine love story.

The main problems stem from the script. These characters are based on real people with real stories, so the script should have been tight and true. The script was lacking a plot for the most part. There was the initial romance of the leads, followed by their tumultuous time dealing with the ignorance of racists. This may be due to the film being a romantic political drama, in which there are two heavy subjects going up against each other. The story it tells is abundantly important, especially in today’s volatile political climate. If only it could have done so in a more compelling and tidy way.  

Overall, the film was okay, but given the gravity of the story, being just “okay” was a detriment. Even the score was largely forgettable, if not completely understated and generic. Great performances certainly pulled the script from obscurity, but this isn’t one that needs to be seen in the theater.

Originally published at Emertainment Monthly:

http://emertainmentmonthly.com/index.php/review-a-united-kingdom-boasts-great-performances-but-little-else/

Buy here: A United Kingdom

Poor plagiarism and even worse editing, House of 1000 Corpses (2003)

Casey Campbell 1 Comment
house-of-1000-corpses
Sid Haig as Captain Spaulding. Photo Credit: drafthouse.com/show/house-of-1000-corpses

By Casey Campbell

Zombie’s directorial debut left me sick, though not for the reasons he would have wanted. The story plodded on with no real characters or motivations. The editing was inconsistent and frustrating. The acting was forced and poor. Save an interesting third act, the film lacks heart and quite liberally takes from other, better, horror films before it. I was sick of watching it by the middle of it’s runtime.

Continue reading “Poor plagiarism and even worse editing, House of 1000 Corpses (2003)” →

Welcome!

Casey Campbell Leave a comment

Welcome to The Film Tent, a film-centric journalistic outlet for a college student with a deep love for movies. Why is this called “The Film Tent,” though? Well, I intend for this site to be a welcome environment for everyone to discuss film, in an all-encompassing tent of ideals. Are you an avid film watcher with a vast knowledge of Golden Age cinema? Are you mostly into big budget summer blockbusters? No matter what your discipline, this site is intended for open discussion and learning.

– Casey Campbell