Tag: 3 out of 4

First of all, and this is my fault completely, I used to get Judy Blume confuse with Beverly Cleary. In that, I assumed Judy Blume and Beverly Cleary both wrote the Ramona books. Oh boy, what a fool of a took I was. So I would say I definitely read Judy Blume books growing up, when it turns out, I haven’t read a damn thing.

That is good in a way. Because I don’t like to read the books before I watch a movie. Now, why is there a documentary about Judy Blume coming out? Oh, because one of her books is being made into a movie! Honestly, that is a surprise it took this long. In a couple weeks we will have Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret., the movie.

Now, this documentary about Judy Blume is an interesting title. Because it sounds like it could be one of her books. And honestly, it is one of her books. She made a book titled, Forever…, and now the documentary about her life’s work living on through kids of every generation forever, becomes a pretty fitting title overall. Judy Blume Forever.

If you write a book, you become immortal. Those are the rules.

Despite knowing nothing about Judy Blume before, I sort of find myself loving her now after seeing this documentary. This lady was a trailblazer and someone who really understood what middle schoolers not just needed, but deserved. Not speaking about things doesn’t make them go away. Not speaking about how kids talk doesn’t make it go away.

The fact that her books were banned and had conservatives railing after sometime felt eerily familiar to current modern outrage going on in the school board meetings. Like, the exact same arguments. Honestly, I read quite a few books that have gone on banned lists in Texas, and most of them display teenagers and middle schoolers based on reality, not what their parents hope them to be. Middle schoolers will find out and talk about sex, and puberty, and growing up issues. High schoolers will at greater and more graphic detail, and in fact, likely have sex. And Judy Blume talked about these things in her book.

Good on her. And the similarities to the book bans during her time period and how they relate to our current ones, is talked about in this documentary as well. It is almost like the experiences she went through with are ones people can relate to even though it is decades later. Huh, maybe she is Forever?

This documentary made me excited to for the upcoming film, and hey maybe, just maybe, might read one of her books finally.

3 out of 4.

Chucky has to be top five in terms of recognizable horror movie villains right? Right?
Freddy Kreuger I would assume is the top spot. Michael Myers/Jason lose points because people confuse them sometimes. Ghostface maybe. Hellraiser hasnt had as many movies for recognition.

I don’t know how I would rate this, but Chucky is certainly up there. Almost everyone knows him. Hell, I know him and I also know for a fact that I haven’t seen a single Child’s Play movie. I don’t even know if I have seen part of one on the TV before, just random clips from media and documentaries, like this one. He is iconic enough to exist outside of his films and in references. Big enough to appear in cartoons and for likely kindergarteners to know and fear.

My favorite aspect of this series is that it started out Child’s Play for the franchise, but people didn’t like calling it that. They wanted Chucky to be the name, because it is the villain. So then the movies changes their naming style to match the Chucky theme, instead of continuing to force Child’s Play on us. This might be the only franchise to do that.

Another great thing about the franchise? Since 1988, the same people have been involved with making the movies. The same voice actor, stars are used multiple times and brought back, the cinematographer, director, writer, animatronics team, all of that. This is like a family bringing this stuff on, including the TV show (but not including the random Reboot, which honestly, shame on them for doing when the original people were still wanting to continue their story. And hell, the fact that it is all connected should be celebrated more than anything).

This doll is so big, it can survive having a canon story for 30 years.

Now the name for this documentary is actually quite clever. It is directed by Kyra Elise Gardner, a name you wouldn’t recognize. But, she is the daughter of Tony Gardner, one of the main doll puppeteers of the franchise. So in all reality, she did grow up with and live with Chucky for a large part of her life. To add more family elements to the story, the main voice of Chucky, Brad Dourif, through everything but the reboot, has his own daughter in the movies, Fiona Dourif, playing a real character who has to battle Chucky and eventually gets possessed by Chucky. Spoilers? Kind of.

A few people have grew up with Chucky, but notably, the directors, writers, and crew, have lived with Chucky for 30 years of their life. So this is directed by someone who grew up with Chucky, and interviewing her family, and friends of family she has known her whole life with Chucky, over the movies they made, the memories they gained, and the fun they had.

This documentary is nothing like Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy. See, that one is 4 hours long and dense, with behind the scenes stories from the actors and film analysis. But each movie is almost independent. There isn’t a lot of carryover between the two. For this documentary we had the same people, talking about each film, because they were a part of it, and that is such a unique element.

I already mentioned I haven’t seen a single Chucky film yet. But honestly, the camaraderie and family nature behind these films has piqued my interest, and I think I might finally check off that aspect of pop culture before its too late.

3 out of 4.

Unicorn Boy is part of Make Believe Seattle, and it is playing on Saturday, March 25, 2023. 

As has come up in many reviews before, my high school mascot was the noble Unicorn. So, did that make me a Unicorn Boy? Am I still a Unicorn Boy now? I will say yes to both.

I was of course very happy to pursue a film with a title like that, as I need more movies that are about unicorns or at least unicorn adjacent. For some reason it is a market overly saturated in TV shows, video games, and books. But not movies. I wonder why is that. Do movie watchers not like Unicorns? I hope that isn’t a stereotype.

Stereotypes make me make these faces.

Matty’s (Matt Kiel) life is currently spiraling downward. He has friends, fineeee. But he broke up with his girlfriend. It was a little awkward the timing too. It was after she said she loved him. And he panicked shortly after, and broke up with her. Okay, sorry, it was a lot of awkward, not a little. Don’t worry, Matty realized he missed her greatly. Life wasn’t as good without her. So he could just like, call her back and apologize and they could reconnect. Surely that would work.

Well, several voice mails later, sure enough, he is not able to get ahold of her. Wild right?

Unfortunately, while in a bathroom at a coffee shop, Matty gets sort of abducted by a unicorn, and brought to a strange colorful, rainbow filled world. This unicorn, Prince Purpleton (Sarah Natochenny) also doesn’t talk much and seems to be…uhhh, broken almost. And messy. Hard to describe. But Matty is brought back to their palace, where he learns that there might be a giant Unicorn running around, threatening things. But no one believes this story but the prince. The king (Patton Oswalt) is extremely passive and the queen (Maria Bamford) is mean. What is going on, how does this effect Matty?

Well it effects him a lot, apparently. Especially when he gets revived in the bathroom, and he is taken from the Unicorn world, and he spends a majority of his time trying to get back, to help his new friends, in a world that seems to be better than his own.

Also starring Sethward, Parvesh Cheena, and Harold Perrineau.

Messy rainbows, a picture.Unicorn Boy is a lot. A lot of interesting voice work, a lot of interesting colors, and certainly a lot of interesting facial expressions. Honestly, when cartoons focus on extreme facial reactions to events, it reminds me back to Ren and Stimpy, and I never really love it. It makes me make an extreme facial reaction and I never really get over it. And I never got used to in in this film either, which leads me to looking away from the characters more than watching them, which is a strange position to be in, and might be my own personal preference.

But the best news about this movie, is that the story totally works and is worth exploring and watching. My own biases on animation aside, I think Unicorn Boy not just tells a relatively unique story, but an important story. It tackles quite a few issues. In general, grief and depression, finding yourself, dealing with different levels of abusive parents, and of course, determining that the body you are in is not the body that matches you. You know what I mean? I think you do.

And to go with the story, the voice acting itself was top notch. Our lead, Matty, is voiced by the director, writer, and main animator of the movie. Sethward is his real life friend in some comedy group, who got famous from America’s Got Talent. But we also got a few celebrities for roles, and of course, the voice of Ash Ketchum. An impressive lineup for an independent animated film.

Unicorn Boy is a movie for a lot of people, and a lot of people can probably interpret it different ways. But regardless of which way you interpret it, you should be able to recognize that it is definitely done with heart and humor in mind.

3 out of 4.

Poundcake is part of Make Believe Seattle, and it is playing on Sunday, March 26, 2023. 

Heh. Poundcake.

If you want to make an attention grabbing movie, it always starts with an attention grabbing title. And poundcake would certainly make most people curious about your film.

I mean, there is a chance it is about actual cakes. Which would for sure be a win overall. But it could also be slang and go a lot of different ways. And I am here to let you know, it certainly goes those ways.

Immediately, it is one of the more negative of those ways based on this image.

A new killer is out on the loose! Apparently. It is amazing that one could even find that out since it is in New York City, but these deaths are a bit different.

First of all there is a pattern. Everyone at that point had been a straight white male. Not too surprising there, I guess. They all had been strangled as part of their death. So there is some level of pattern there. Oh, and they also had been raped. Yep.

So despite no one seeing the killer, all of these happening in isolation, there is a clear theme and focus. And it has the city in, well, has them curious. Is this okay? Is this revenge? Is this a form of justice?

Who is to say overall, but those who have some level of minority are feeling a lot more safe about themselves during these times, for sure.

Starring Onur Turkel (also the director), Eva Dorrepaal, and Ron Brice. A lot of others too, but this isn’t on IMDB yet and I am limited in finding people.

People should talk more about serial killers at the workplace. 

To start off, this movie was a lot funnier than I thought it had the right to be. I mean, it was very low budget and its visual framings were never that creative. But it has got personality, friends. A lot of it. A lot of weird, oozing personality.

A large percentage of the film is framed through podcast recordings. Various different groups talking about current events in their lives and cities. Most of them themed around gender, race, or some sort of drug using identity. And from that we got to hear the discussions of “other New Yorkers” about their thoughts and feelings during these attacks, and how they affect their views on other people. The podcasters are real characters too, not just a narrative device, and their lives are explored for a bit in the film, including when groups break apart, change members, or share guests for interviews. Outside of the whole, murdering of white dudes angle, it was basically the other main plot in the film.

A film that also had some strange subplots, like the director playing a character really certain in his sexuality while exploring new things sexually. It related to the rest of the story, a little.

Honestly, the ending of the film, during the memorial, had me in all sorts of giggles. Quite a lot of scenes, but the ending went full ridiculous and I am happy that the film embraced the ridiculousness of the story. The write up on the festival site calls the director, “one of the most astute and fearless satirists of his generation,” which is obviously written by his team/PR group, but it is definitely some level of fearless satire going on here. In films we want originality, and if anything, Poundcake has some originality.

3 out of 4.

Mister Organ is part of Make Believe Seattle, and it is playing on Sunday, March 26, 2023. 

Did you see Tickled?

I said, did you see Tickled? You know, the documentary, from several years ago? It was pretty good, and dived into a deep world that none of us really knew about until it was exposed in the documentary. It really asked some questions that I didn’t know I wanted answered.

So of course I am excited to see Mister Organ, a new documentary by the same director. And shit, what a title. What is this about? A guy who sells body parts? Is it about health care? Is it about someone who kills and murders?

I don’t know, but I am ready to unravel some very dark and decrepit things going on in New Zealand.

From a quick glance, everyone seems to have a normal number of organs here. 

So it turns out that Mister Organ is just about a person, named Mr. Organ. Nothing illicit with body parts. The director first came across him as he worked a “clamping business”. If a private business had a special area for parking, and people parked there for not the appropriate reason, he would drive up in his car and block them in, preventing them from leaving. And he would do that until they paid a large sum, and it was technically legal, because appropriate signs were posted at that business. It obviously left a lot of people upset, having to be slightly threatened and stuck into paying hundreds of dollars.

A viral video went on about this, which led the director to investigating this issue, and trying to report on it as a journalist. But he sued back, and the case went to court. The court was not in our directors favor, and Organ was apparently a very talkative, and enigmatic fellow. Despite the lawsuit, he wanted to still talk to our director, and it just…kept, going on from there.

This is a documentary where the director is actively investigating the subject, and the subject is aware of it, and aware of their conversations being recorded and filmed, and just things get weirder and weirder for our director.

Lies upon lies, a strange backstory, and a man who doesn’t shut up.

It is honestly, very hard to talk about this documentary, as it had a sort of meta feel to it the entire time. Was this whole thing a strange ruse? Did this situation lead to some exciting conclusions, or was it a total time sink the whole time? Why is he like that? These are various questions I have about it, and honestly, I won’t say all of them get answered.

If anything, Mister Organ is certainly an experience, and a wild trip if it is a trip you want to take.

3 out of 4.

Alright, alright, alright.

I mean. I thought of the candy bar. And the baseball player. Ruth and Ruby are pretty similar. That has to have been involved in the thought process to name this movie Baby Ruby. Give it some sense of familiarity.

This is a film that came to me suddenly and without warning, so I knew nothing about it, but hey, I recognized one of the actors at least.

I knew nothing like one of those literary characters. Can’t remember his name.

Jo (Noémie Merlant) is an influencer/vlogger, who has a pretty big following amongst the world. She does the nice photos, nice home set up, nice marriage, all of that. People know a lot about her! And then she also got pregnant.

Her husband (Kit Harrington) just has a regular job, but supports her. And the film opens with them returning home with their baby, ready to start their life as parents. But then this baby, Ruby, cries a lot. All the time. Constantly. It seems to hate Jo almost. When they go to stores. When they go on walks. Over night. It is like Jo cannot do anything to please this kid.

So she doesn’t feel great about this whole being a mom thing. She hasn’t even posted pictures of her kid online yet! Wow. What about her fans? Speaking of fans, she keeps running into the same people, like Shelly (Meredith Hagner), who is also a new mom, and hangs out with a lot of new moms. And they all seem so perfect. Why is their life so much better than hers? And is there something sinister about this group? About her nanny?

Jo’s visions start getting worse and worse. It’s almost like they want to steal her baby from her…

Just guess how many babies are actually in this photo!

Recently I watched a different psychological horror, about a woman in bed rest during a big amount of time before giving birth. And then there was also ghosts. But it was maybe a metaphor, maybe not. Everything spooked her. It was pretty poorly done.

Thankfully, Baby Ruby was not poorly done!

In terms of movies that are metaphors for postpartum depression, this seems to be a really good one. It doesn’t go hard into a supernatural aspect for the thriller. But it does go through a lot of situations and conversations and amplifies them up to really make it more obvious for those who have never experienced ppd. One of the biggest moments I recall was an argument between the couple, where the husband said some very obvious shitty things. The type of lines that can get normalized in society, but based on everything up that point it really punches hard.

The beginning got to be a little weird, but in reflection, I do think it stands well. I hate it when they do too much cross over between reality and supernatural, when they are going for a metaphor overall. But in this case, it is a nice metaphor, if not super realistic.

Well acted, and well thought out, and well experienced.

3 out of 4.

My first thought from this title, was that Alice Darling sounds like a name, so it is a good thing that they put that comma in there. And it turns out, I was right. Here is someone named Alice Darling, she is a singer and was on Spotify. Also her album is called Alice Darling too.

I found this out when checking to see if this movie was based on a book. The title, and aura of the film, gave me based on the book vibes. There is a chance this is the fault of Still Alice, which was also based on a book.

But sure enough, Alice, Darling is not based on a book at all! It might be loosely inspired by real events from the creator, but that is as far as we will get. Speaking of the creator, it was directed by Mary Nighy, her first feature length film, and it was written by Alanna Francis, her second screenplay. That’s right. We got a movie about some women, written and directed by some women. Honestly, this happens so rarely I just feel compelled to point this out.

Staring out of windows, being a darling, just Alice things.

Alice (Anna Kendrick) is in a relationship! Haven’t you heard? Simon (Charlie Carrick) is an artist, and has art, and does galleries with his art, and I guess he has success and makes money. He cares and provides for Alice, who still has her own independence thing going on. She has a job after all, and friends. Or does she?

Okay yes, she has a job. But it is limited, and Simon doesn’t like to see her gone so much. He also has helped change her diet to be more healthy. And he also doesn’t like it when she is with her friends so much. Her friends, Tess (Kaniehtiio Horn) and Sophie (Wunmi Mosaku), haven’t seen as much from her lately. Alice cancels her plans more often, or she leaves really early from their engagements, and just isn’t there. When Tess wants to do a week long trip at a Cabin for her birthday, it takes more convincing to get Alice to join, who is very reluctant, but she does want to go.

So she does the noble thing, and just lies to Simon that it is a work thing, and she will be busy. Why does she lie to him about hanging out with friends? Why does she fear saying anything wrong to him? Why is she so distant? Well, her friends are ready to confront her and help her out through this relationship, that might be a lot more one sided than Alice realizes.

See, she has friendship on both sides of her! Like a sandwich!

Friendship and relationships can be hard. Being in a relationship can mean spending less time with your friends, and being more involved away from them, doing less than you normally would. But is that always a bad things? Or is it normal?

That is questions I had to ask myself watching the film. Because it would be messed up if your friends held an intervention to spend more time with them, if you were just super into a new relationship. But that is one of the themes this film explores. How much is too much? How much of an emotional codependence is a good thing, depending on the stage of the relationship? And what happens if the relationship is actually really one sided, with the side being taken advantage of, or used, not actually realizing it?

I won’t use the g word here, but abuse doesn’t have to be physical. It can just be controlling and emotional damage being done. A general fear of being looked down upon. And worse, which I won’t get into.

The film did take some time getting going. The flashbacks that were often literal flashes in length, weren’t super helpful. I wish it really delved a bit more into that aspect. I think Kendrick and Carrick both did really well with their characters. It was unfortunately the friend roles that seemed to lack more. I couldn’t believe them as much, and it made a few of the bigger emotional tics jarring as a result.

If anything, this film is a real strong in its messaging of what happens if Love is actually just a codename for Control.

3 out of 4.

Little N-Name movies are all the rage! After all, we had Little Nemo, Little Nicky, and now Little Nicholas. Two of those three are based on comic strips in the past, Little Nemo came out first as a movie but…also was the first of the comic strips, okay. But like, a few decades later, Little Nicholas comic strip was made in France and a lot of people had a good time with it. Most of them were French, to be honest. And a lot more of them were people alive during that time period.

Hell during the 1950’s I was just busy not existing. So I didn’t know about it at the time. However, the two creators of the comic also did a lot of other things in their lives.

Like one of them was also the inventor of Asterix comics, a pretty famous European dude. And the other, did a lot of famous artwork covers for The New Yorker magazine for decades.

But with their powers combined, they made Little Nicholas, and this is their story.

 

If you actually had to write that tiny, you’d have to jump on each letter.

 

That’s right, this isn’t just a cute story about Little Nicholas going to school, playing, and having fun. No, this is actually about the creators! Fooled you? Maybe?

René Goscinny (Alain Chabat), famous comic inventor of Asterix and other works, who had already lived a nice life. He meets up with Jean-Jacques Sempé (), another artist, who has been given a job based off of his drawings, but isn’t known for making stories well. So he wants to use René to get the stories for his work, and they can be a tag team duo, and make something great together.

And that is it. They do that. They make Little Nicholas (Simon Faliu) and people like it. They expand his universe and people like it. They even make some shorts I guess? People like that too.

But in the movie we also have Nicholas popping from the page, to talk to his creators, to find out about their lives. So we get to have a biographical film in that regard, in between Little Nicholas segments I guess that were big in the comments, like playing with friends and family members and school.

 

“Let’s make a child together,” said the straight man to another.

 

I wasn’t sure what to expect going into this animated work. Even when I read the description, about one making the plot, the other illustrating. Based on the image, I just sort of assumed it was a guy drawing a tiny kid, and the kid coming alive, to make his plot for him to draw. A weird surreal sort of thing. Like a genie in a bottle.

So of course I didn’t know that this was a reference to a European comic, and honestly, I still barely know that it is based on a European comic. Just because it has had, as far as I can tell, no impact on my life. I don’t think I’ve seen a short, or a comic, about Little Nicholas. I am sure where it was famous, it got really famous as just one of those post World War II quaint slice of life stories. Nothing that would excite me now, but maybe something used for very young kids still today. 

The people this movie feels aimed for honestly are likely those nostalgic about the story. I think a regular kid wouldn’t love this story at all, because they won’t give a fuck about the authors and their lives. But at the same time, the art style was very nice (and going for a Little Nicholas feel), and the idea behind this movie was pretty unique. Tell the story of two animators, in the style of one of their animations, while also giving parts of the animations story as well? Nice. Can’t wait to see someone else do a documentary about Werner Herzog’s life in the style of Werner Herzog. 

This family film, biographical film hybrid told me a unique story in a unique way. It isn’t something I know my own kids will care about, but it is still an interesting concept overall. I hope animators always continue to try new things like this. And yes, I know I am saying that despite this being a 1950’s art style. 

 

3 out of 4.

 

/

What’s this, a double review? Yes, I sometimes review more than one thing, if they are part of a series, for special reviews. But here are two unrelated documentaries showing at Fantastic Fest. Or maybe, they are related?

You see, with A Life on the Farm, it is about some old VHS tapes made in the 1990s, about Charles Carson. He was an old man with a farm, in England, who decide to start filming what can only be described as promotion films about his farm, and life on it.

With Chop & Steele, it is about a fictional duo named Chop & Steele. But the people who play this fake body building champion duo, Nick Prueher and Joe Pickett, are actually friends for decades who have made history pranking local TV news stations and collecting VHS tapes. You know, tapes they have shown at their Found Footage Festivals on tour, with audiences laughing about the absurdity of things people filmed from television or in their own homes.

One of those VHS tapes they found, being the A Life on the Farm series, which was one of their biggest hits. And hey, that is the other documentary! Boom, connection, let’s talk about both.

Oh my god, so many skeletons on this farm. 

Charles Carson is the archived star of A Life on the Farm. He has won people over through his edited shots and set up scenes around his farm, using very limited technology at the time, and doing it at his old age when most people would assume he would know very little.

But more importantly, because like him for the things he did. Like, having his dead mother, pre burial, on a wheel chair around the farm, filming her saying goodbye to the land. A lot of folks would be creeped out by a dead body, but not him. He is death positive, and just wants to ensure that they get to pay their last respects.

In terms of the footage, I bet the actual unedited stuff is great, especially with a nice MC putting it in better context, and with a group of folks. But a documentary about the footage, its history, and it being broken down, did not make it seem more exciting. It just felt weird and uncomfortable split up this way, not the jolly interesting time I was hoping and expecting.

These guys are swoll. 

Now, in this documentary we can learn more about Nick and Joe. It is how they got started, their first festivals, and their first pranks! Like pretending to be an expert Yo-Yo expert, while not being an expert Yo-yoer. And more importantly, their Chop & Steele persona, which got them real big and famous because…they were sued over it!

Yep, a parent company of a TV station, once they found out they were a prank team, sued them for Fraud and more. They wanted it to be settled, and to apologize to the station, but the pair of course did not, and wanted to go all the way with it. It did become a talking point on other morning news shows, noting that this just shows that journalists didn’t do their first job. And also, eventually it did lead them to getting to America’s Got Talent, which was a claim they made to get on the shows!

But honestly, a lot more is just about the duo and their lives. Their friendship. Their direction in life. What their future plans on. Is it acting, or writing, or splitting up eventually? It brings a lot of heart into this documentary, much more than I expected about a few pranksters. And much more than I expected after watching the former documentary in this review.

It breaches a lot of good topics, while also being funny in its own right. I can’t wait to see what Nick and Joe do in the future, and if they plan on going any new direction with their antics, or if they dial it all in and retire.

1 out of 4. / 3 out of 4.

Here is an interview with the director of Razzennests, Johannes Grenzfurthner!

Razzennest is a snazzy title, and something that really makes me crave pizza. Makes me want to seek out that razzle dazzle. That is all of the double z words I can think of in a short span of time, I apologize for not being able to make that introduction joke go longer.

Razzennest might be a German word meaning Rat Nest, or it can be something very different on who you ask.

Regardless of who you ask on translating Razzennest, the film itself is a film that cannot be translated into any other film for comparison. It is a film unique on its own, and we shall see why in a moment.

This is a cock. 

The Thirty Years War (which lasted about 30 years) took place in Central Europe in the 1600’s. It involved the church, of course, people getting kicked out of windows, and just a lot of religious inspired death. Razzennest is about that war, kind of.

The imagery that starts the movie, landscapes, broken buildings, statues, fill the screen, until we hear a voice. Whose voice? Why Babette Cruickshank (Sophie Kathleen Kozeluh) of course. Because she is introducing us to the director’s film commentary of the film, Razzennest. Strange names aside, you would have been confused (if you didn’t read this description first) and thought there was a mistake, but do not worry, this is intentional. Because while you will see the film Razzennest with your eyes, you will quickly see the real Razzennest was not just the friends we made along the way, but the fake director commentary on top of it.

Because director Manus Oosthuizen (Michael Smulik) is an asshole, and has a vision, and hates dumb questions and mispronounced names. And the beginning of the commentary is full of conflict and angst. But unfortunately, darker forces are afoot in their commentary room, and things will only get weirder and scarier from there.

Also featuring the voices of Roland Gratzer, Joe Dante, Jim Libby, Anne Weiner, and Bob Rose.

This is a hole in the ground. Razzennest is a HARD film to talk about, because honestly, just mentioning the type of film it is feels like a spoiler, even though that happens immediately. It almost felt like telling people to “get ready for the fake trailers” in front of Tropic Thunder. Just let it happen. But I also know it would be hard for me to talk about anything else, than the commentary track, since that is 95% of the film.

Yes, it still has visuals. But the visuals were clearly chosen to not be distracting, but aiding instead. Real footage of places in Europe, of old destruction, of old structures, of nature, and former battlegrounds. But there are no characters on that screen. There is not other dialogue, or interactions. It is just scenes spliced together, sometimes aggressively, to enhance the commentary story. It often matches the tone and uncomfortableness in some ways with the commentary, clearly being extremely deliberate with the editing so that it is an enhancer, not a hindrance.

In terms of the dialogue, you know, the 95% of the film, it has a pretty varied cast of characters with distinct enough voices and mannerisms to not confuse the viewer. Without knowing exact amounts, the first 1/3 of the film is meant to just be uncomfortable, awkward, and a bit silly and funny. But there are hints of what to come. And damn it, I can keep at least that part a secret still. After all, this is a Horror Comedy, not just a Comedy.

The film’s goal is to both make fun of the pretentiousness of arthouse award winning indie films, while also, at the same time, being one itself. It is punching across, not down or up. It was done on a shoe string budget, with an idea that Hollywood would never try out, because it would be a hard sell for audiences.

I had to go back into my memory banks, the only experience I had that was similar to this was Sounds Dangerous!, which was a Drew Carey audio show attraction at Disney World. The audience was given headphones, and were mostly in the dark, to experience this audio story telling device, with many sound cues to make the audience get all weird feeling. It was unique, and yet, Razzennest is clearly unique-r.

Razzennest is adding complexity to it, by having visuals, by making it meta, and by both deconstructing a genre while partaking in the genre at the same time. There is really nothing like Razzennest, and I honestly can’t imagine too many things being like Razzennest in the future either. Unless this sort of film starts to take off, like Found Footage films did after The Blair Witch Project.

I fully recommend checking out this movie if it is ever in your vicinity, although I realize that will likely be hard for some time. Because there is nothing else like it available. Until we get Razzennest 2 in twelve years, to tell a similar story, but with water!

3 out of 4.