Hey folks, Harry here... Apparently "Page Six" out of the NY Post is running a story about Matthew Bright being carried out of the screening described below by bodyguards and also claims that the reason the actors were not at the screening was that they heard Matthew was attending and they refused to attend if that was the case. NOW - given our reporter mentions nothing about the bodyguards physically removing him from the Q&A, and the rest of NY POST piece seems like a character assassination piece... well, I wouldn't trust it. I met Matthew in Sitges 2 years ago where he told me nightmare after nightmare story about the making of this film. At the same time over the course of a week in contact with him there, he was never anything other than cool and had great stories to share with everyone around. So, just wanted to give another side to that part of the story. Oh, and I agree - the resulting film is pretty damn awful. Here ya go...
Hi Harry,
I know that the festival is over, but I thought you might want to see these few reviews for movies that I don't believe have already been covered.
Since Garden State and Napoleon Dynamite (crowd favorites that we only thought were better than average...I'm in agreement with Vincent Parry) have already had plenty of ink, I'll stick with a couple of others.
Tiptoes -- **
If you don't read anything else about the festival, read this. Do you love Matthew Bright? Do you think Freeway and its "sequel" are disturbing but 100 percent fascinating stuff? Then DO NOT go see Tiptoes. Don't. Really.
When the film was introduced by Geoff Gilmore, he mentioned that there had been creative differences and that we should just "watch the film and see for ourselves." What the heck did that mean?? We were totally confused. No intro for the director, the actors, nothing...
But, after seeing the film, Bright himself came up on stage and told us the real deal. Evidently, the producers of the film kicked him off not too far into the project. He wrote the script when he was 18, forgot about it and didn't think about it until Gary Oldman called him up and wanted to get it made.
So they got to work, recruited Peter Dinklage (Station Agent) and Matthew McConahey to make this film about a guy who's the only normal size member of a family full of dwarves. Why is this a big deal? Because his girlfriend is pregnant and he doesn't know what to expect...and he's never told her anything about his family.
So anyway, Matthew Bright gets kicked off, the cast is pissed, the movie gets finished using none of the cuts that Bright would have used and, in the words of Scott, "It feels just like an after school special about how we should all accept those who are different."
Anyway, Bright goes on to say that he will NEVER watch the film, that all the actors are boycotting it and that some of the "producers" of the film had no involvement whatsoever. And he calls one of them an "asshole with teeth" (which was pretty funny). He did, however, urge people to watch it just because he poured his heart and soul into the script and was so sad to lose control of the project.
In short, this is NOT a Matthew Bright film, even if his name is attached to it. So you are forewarned. Believe me, Bright would have made Dinklage's crazy Frenchman and Bridget the Midget's scenes much much much wackier.
SAW -- ***
SAW has such a fascinating premise, it's sad that it isn't a better film. In short, two men wake up in a dirty, industrial bathroom, chained to the walls with a dead man inbetween them. They have no idea why they're there, but they must get out of the room or die.
Gradually, they discover just who is holding them...a "killer" with the moralistic vision of teaching people who don't appreciate life (druggies, suicidal folks) to value it. He "kills" (and I put that in quotes because he doesn't literally do it himself) people in some pretty twisted ways, VERY VERY similar to what happens in Seven. There's even a black detective hunting him down.
The main downfall of the movie is that it strays outside of the room. The original idea was to keep it in that enclosed space which would have been pretty unique, but the directors felt that it would have been too much like a play. Instead, the camera goes outside the room and ends up feeling like a knock-off of better movies.
When we left the theater, we had kind of nice thoughts about the film and the guys who made it (just young film students...which was cool), but the more we thought about it, the more it ceased to make any sense at all. In short, there was absolutely no reason for the killer to go after any of the characters in the movie. None of them didn't value life (unless you consider having an affair, which is a stretch) and one of of the people he ensnares actually stuck up for him at one point in the film (that was a bit of a spoiler, sorry!). So really, the whole thing doesn't make much sense.
The coolest part of the film was the creepy clown that was seen on several occasions. Seems that one of the directors/writers has an obsession with weird clowns and fits them into every single movie he makes. So look for more of that in the future!
Finally, I forgot to include a star rating for Mean Creek. It wasn't zero stars...it was more like a three. Not too bad!
Signed,
Scott and Boof
