The GullCottage  / sandlot
                            Online Film Magazine / Library / Network 
       

                        Celebrating the Art of Cinema, ... and Cinema as Art


                                                                                         

Your Subtitle text

 

Musings And Ramblings

Tear 'Em Apart (pg.2)

 

In Living Color: "Men On Films II" (orig. airdate Sept. 23, 1990)

Damon Wayans as "Blaine Edwards" & David Allen Grier as "Antoine Merriweather":
two of the sketch comedy series most popular (and at times controversial) recurring characters.
 








Site Search Index:





Haters gonna hate ... THE MUMMY (2017)






"Endless Love" (L. Ritchie) '81:  Vocal - L. Ritchie/ D. Ross
 


       LOVE GONE WRONG
 
      An important thing to consider, and yes, we get it - we really do!  While no one sets out to make a bad movie, there ARE genuinely bad movies.  Some tank and smell up the theater like a plate of bad scallops passing you in the swankiest of restaurants.  And every director has had what most generally consider to be their “plate of bad scallops” - that film which everyone loves to beat up on.  Hitchcock had FAMILY PLOT, John Frankenheimer had PROPHECY,  Spielberg - 1941, Kubrick - EYES WIDE SHUT; and the critics so brutally bludgeoned David Lean’s DOCTOR ZHIVAGO at the time of it’s original release, the legendary film maker briefly considered retiring.  


      Interestingly, we have a personal soft spot for all of those aforementioned films, ... with the possible exception of EYES WIDE SHUT that is. Sorry Stanley, we love you big time, but Jeez dude, what happened?.  And that’s okay, because we all, as paying consumers, have every right to express our opinions accordingly. 



     
Our home base is Philadelphia, PA., where we have a notorious reputation for being some of the worst sports fans in the nation.  No, …ON THE PLANET!  But it’s really not true.  It's always amazing when a sports star here has a bad season, and fans start making comments, and the star athlete complains that the fans don’t understand, and that they need to keep their opinions to themselves and all the rest.  And we're not sure how it goes down in other cities, but here in Philly that really doesn’t cut a whole lot of SYMPATHETIC ice.  PATHETIC is how most here are more apt to consider it, with the athlete complainer at best maybe getting a sarcastic “boo hoo!” in the papers, and / or an online meme with some kind of diaper photoshopped to their whining ass.  Because, …


      BIG FAN (2009)
 


     ... And we're not agreeing with this here, but we’ve known people who’ve taken out (no kidding!) second mortgages on their homes to buy Eagles season tickets.  We're sure that kind of thing goes on in other cities as well.  Remember Patton Oswalt's character, Paul Aufiero, in 2009's BIG FAN - the obsessed New York Giants fan who constantly gets into it on the radio talk show against Eagles fanatic "Philadelphia Phil" (Michael Rappaport)?  Well, the rivalry between the two towns and their fans is in real life REALLY that
intense! 


                                                                                                  

  Vincent Price deals with a drama critic in THEATER OF BLOOD (1973)

     Now, while we think the second mortgage thing is a bit excessive even for the most die hard of fans, the fact that these folks literally put their money where their mouth is, kind of purchases for them the right to express themselves vividly and bluntly. And this really isn't unlike going to the voting booth, then later raking your guy (or gal) across the coals because they didn’t live up to what they promised.


     So yeah, express away baby, when you’ve forked out your hard earned “e pluribus unum“, and the film you paid to see fell flat on it’s face, and now you feel like you got jipped.  We remember how we felt the day we exited the theater after seeing THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT.  And it’s still difficult to not want to hunt down the makers of that film and start hurting people.  So yeah, we totally get it. 


      It’s another thing however when the film hasn’t even opened yet, or isn't even finished filming, and all you’re going on is the latest “leaked” still image from the set, or a pre-production sketch or photo of a vehicle.  Or before shooting even commences when a film is simply in the casting stage, and everyone takes to the Internet caterwauling about how this is proof positive this is gonna be the worst piece of s**t movie ever made because of this, yadda, yadda, yadda … .  You know what we're talking about.   

 
Bjo Trimble & Shatner on the set of STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE  
   

     Most fans of classic STAR TREK (and TV history in general) know the story.  Debuting in September 1966, the original (now legendary) science fiction series, while pulling in favorable reviews, limped through it's first two seasons ratings-wise until NBC decided to give it the axe. 


     After series creator Gene Roddenberry confided in good friend - award winning genre writer Harlan Ellison ("A Boy And His Dog", "I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream") his belief that the show was in danger halfway through it's first season, Ellison, in an attempt to save it, drafted a letter to the Science Fiction Writers Of America, asking for it's support along with that of the show's rank and file fans. 


     Around this same time husband and wife science fiction die hards, John and "Bjo" Trimble, learned of NBC's decision to end STAR TREK, and they spearheaded a massive grass roots campaign which generated not only a deluge of thousands of fan letters to the network, but also a number of "protest marches" outside the headquarters of NBC and it's affiliates, ultimately persuading the "Peacock" (NBC's nickname, born of it's multi-colored logo) to renew the show for a third season.  While canceled after Season 3, enough episodes were now in the can for STAR TREK to go into syndication, where it ultimately energized into both one of television and film history's greatest success stories.  The power of the masses at work.








     "Success has many parents, while failure is an orphan", the adage states.  And this was true of the "SAVE STAR TREK" campaign.  Over the years conflicting stories have since circulated - including one wherein it was Gene Roddenberry who contacted the Trimbles about starting the campaign after he met them at a WorldCon gathering, and not the other way around.  And even NBC would later claim that it never had any intention of cancelling TREK after Season 2; this announcement forcing retractions from newspapers which had printed otherwise.  The fact remains however that the Trimble campaign would change the relationship between fan / consumers and content creators long before the advent of social media would take that relationship, for better and for worse, to new heights. 

  Kevin Feige ... and friend
     On the "better" side, producers such as Kevin Feige (originally hired to "consult" on Bryan Singer's first X-MEN film because of his encyclopedic knowledge of the Marvel comic book universe) would rely upon fan reactions, online and elsewhere, to other films in which he was similarly involved - including X2, Sam Raimi's SPIDER-MAN, Ang Lee's HULK, THE PUNISHER and DAREDEVIL - to later "write the book" on how to adapt IRON MAN, CAPTAIN AMERICA, THOR and THE AVENGERS upon the formation of Marvel Studios and his appointment as it's President. From IRON MAN (2008) to DOCTOR STRANGE (2016) the studio has thus far taken in approx. $8.5 billion in revenue.  So, hey, just ask Feige, it certainly pays to listen.


     The "worse" side of things however were exemplified with the "interactive" nature of the production of New Line Cinema's 2006 Samuel L. Jackson comedic action thriller SNAKES ON A PLANE.  Early clips and "leaks" featuring Jackson sick, tired and fed up with "... these mutha f**kin' snakes on this mutha f**kin' plane" generated such a national fever pitch of Internet buzz and parody on outlets such as THE DAILY SHOW, the studio actually, basing it's decision on online fan feedback, ordered an additional five days of filming, and made the rare decision to alter the film's more box office friendly "PG-13" tone to a more creatively anarchistic and explicit "R".  While SNAKES ON A PLANE ultimately wasn't a huge success, it DID make fans more aware of the fact that, at least to a degree, their opinions mattered in the final marketing of a property new or adapted.  But, as with the "two dogs fighting" and the Razzies, for some this newly perceived sense of fan-based power would take an unfortunate turn.  


     Samuel L. Jackson ... and (mutha f**kin') friend
        




      Who remembers the pre-Internet virulent outcry when MR. MOM / BEETLEJUICE himself, Michael Keaton, was cast back in the late 1980s as Bruce Wayne / Batman in Tim Burton’s first film of the franchise?  Burton originally wanted the hair-trigger Ray Liotta as the Dark Knight after seeing him in Jonathan Demme's SOMETHING WILD. But Liotta, much to his confessed later regret, turned the role down. Once the web became THE "letter writing campaign" mode of the new century, even greater early fan outcry would erupt over Matt Damon being cast as the amnesiac human killing machine in THE BOURNE IDENTITY, with even BOURNE's screenwriter at the time not understand that casting choice. Then a vociferous wail among Bond fans (younger ones anyway, whose first exposure to the character was Pierce Brosnan's GOLDENEYE), and an online petition began making the social media rounds threatening to boycott the intended series reboot, CASINO ROYALE, if Daniel Craig was cast, and Pierce Brosnon not brought back.  In the end all three men if you recall - Keaton, Damon and Craig - would eventually receive critical acclaim, as well as later fan accolades, for knocking their respective portrayals "outta the park".      


 



     All of this bringing to the fore an important element of the creative process in general, and of film in particular.  Already the most collaborative of modern art forms, for it's very survival film MUST have a singular visionary at the helm: a conductor pulling together the various components of the filmic orchestra as it were.  If left to the power of audience preference (film making via democracy) it's fair to assume that OLD YELLER, BAMBI's mother, THE GODFATHER's Sonny Corleone, and Ally McGraw in LOVE STORY never would died. Nor would Jason Miller's Father Karras in THE EXORCIST, or any member of THE DIRTY DOZEN for that matter, have given their lives for the greater good at the climax of those films.  Taking into account audience temperament and desire is important, but it must be balanced with a decisive realization of emotionally engaging characters and narrative.
 

   SHIELD becomes the enemy in CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER (2014)



     Once again, ask Kevin Feige, as some of the decisions he and Marvel have made for their Cinematic Universe have at times shocked the loyal.  Decisions such as having SHIELD infiltrated by the neo-Nazi organization Hydra, then dismantled in CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER.  Does this supremely fuck with Marvel canon?  You bet!  But is it narrative / cinematic genius which opens up an entire new world of possibilities for future films featuring Tony Stark, Cap, Thor, Bruce Banner and the rest? Hell yes!  Sometimes the most engaging and best realization doesn't necessarily rank as "the feel good moment of the year".



    OLD YELLER (1957): Tragic, yet emotionally and dramatically appropriate, ending



      Let’s acknowledge a dark “fanboy secret” (and that phrase encompasses "fan women" too).  We’re an extremely proprietary lot.  Hell, we’re downright communal and feral.  And by fanboys we don’t just mean the stereotypical TREKKIE / TREKKER, STAR WARS, role playing game type people the media loves to view askance.  Y’know, how someone will drive by and snicker at a line of folks waiting for the midnight show of say X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST, but don't find it in the least bit unusual or obsessive when they themselves hop in a line three city blocks long to be the first to purchase the new iPhone.  No, by “fan boy” we mean those who’ve loved something long before it was trendy to do so - be it a novelist and their series of books, an obscure film or film maker, an artist, musician, or even a chef or restaurant long before it / they made that year’s “Hot Or Not” list.



                                         Fanboy Robert Englund brings the house down: PHANTOM OF THE OPERA ('89)

 
      We faithful feel as though these artists had our love long before the mainstream even knew who the hell they were; and that we helped them get to where they now are.  And hey, maybe we’re right!  Then later, when maybe we feel their more recent “commercial” works don’t quite measure up to their “independent” material from “back in the day” - from back when we alone loved them, we feel we have the right to express our displeasure.  And maybe we do.  But where does the line between that end, and turning into say David from ENDLESS LOVE begin?


     Remember in the Brooke Shields film, where David goes from a young man experiencing true unbridled love for the first time in his life to a dangerous and lethal arsonist / stalker? Or how about turning into crazy-assed “Number #1 Fan” Annie Wilkes from Stephen King’s MISERY? Because she feels her favorite author has “sold out", she takes her "love" to the point of feeling justified in bashing his bones this way and that until he agrees to create a new story to her specific liking?  Hmmm? Had the Internet existed back then, Annie could have just started a Facebook page.

                                                                                                         
                                                                                        
         

                                   



FIFTY SHADES DARKER (2017) - theatrical trailer #2

(2:29)






THE BOOK OF JAMES: ONE BIG "GREY" AREA

      With the ENDLESS LOVE and MISERY analogies we see two characters driven to negative obsession by a love of something beyond their reach.  They don’t possess something they want, so they become antagonistic towards those who do possess it.  Could this also be at the core of “fan boy propriety”?
                                                    
     As for the George Lucas and Wachowski Bros. "they sold out" bashing - which in recent years has escalated into the social media version of the Bugs Bunny / Elmer Fudd "Duck Season; No! Wabbit Season!" sketch, only without the laughs, ... all there really is to say to that is, “Hey man, why not go and do your own film, and do it better“.  Nowadays one doesn’t even have to do a film per se. 




     
One of the great things about that aforementioned Internet and social media is how almost anyone can now realize their creative vision in one way or another.  We know people who’ve published their own comic books online, as well as short stories, novels, plays and more.  There are photographers and other artists who, fed up with dealing with galleries, red tape and other "S.O.B." (standard operational bull), began posting their work on their own online galleries and sites, and promoted it via Facebook, Linkedin and more, and have made a splash in doing so.  And even, “gulp”, look at the FIFTY SHADES phenomenon.  Do we have to? Oh, come now.  At the very least it's success DOES illustrate this point in the grandest of ways, doesn't it?



      While not embraced by the critics, nor originally by publishers, one has to admire the living daylights out of the never-say-die chutzpah of E.L. James.  The origin of the first novel in the series, FIFTY SHADES OF GREY, is thus. Originally published on a TWILIGHT fan fiction website - with the main characters named “Edward Cullen” and “Bella Swan”, and under the title “Master Of The Universe” (apologies to He-Man and Skeletor), James' future blockbuster encountered concerns over it's explicit sexual nature.  This led her to delete it from the site, change the characters names to “Christian Grey” and “Anastasia Steele”, then post it to her own site.  Eventually picked up by The Writer’s Coffee Shop (an e-publisher in Australia with limited funds), the now titled FIFTY SHADES OF GREY was released as an e-book and “print on demand” paperback in 2011.  Becoming a word-of-mouth hit, it was eventually picked up by Vintage Books (a subsidiary of Alfred A. Knoph / Random House), revised then re-released in 2012.  And the rest, as they say, is history. 



      Now, while James’ “I manufactured this product in my own garage, and now I‘m a millionaire” success story may be the proverbial one in a million, it doesn’t denigrate the fact that ANYone can now publish their own material online.  That today ANYone can express their creative vision for the world to see.  Now, the entire world may not actually see that work, or may not come across it for some time, as promoting then watching it hopefully rise to the top of the heap like cream is the creative version of "pick and shovel" labor with no guarantee of a positive James-like final chapter.  But that doesn’t prevent those with an opinion on how Marc Webb SHOULD have done THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN, or how Lucas or the Wachowskis or other film maker SHOULD have done something, from doing their own. 







Andy Weir's THE MARTIAN was originally self-published (2011) online in
one-chapter-at-a-time serial format for free before the entire novel was available via
Kindle for .99 cents. After selling a record 35,000 copies in three months, the film rights were
purchased by 20th Century Fox. Crown Publishing then secured the novel's print rights in 2014.




     Today it is also becoming increasingly common, with newer lightweight digital cameras, and consumer friendly and consumer-priced over-the-self FX and editing software, for aspiring film makers to be discovered via mini-movies they post to YouTube and Vimeo.  Have you seen Marcus Alqueres’ 9 minute 2013 short THE FLYING MAN?  It’s stunning! 


   THE FLYING MAN (2013)



      Paraphrasing the “Occam’s Razor” problem solving principle into “All things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one”, we’re convinced the ONLY things today preventing one from stepping up to the plate and taking a few swings at realizing one's own version of something is a) laziness, or b) more likely fear - a fear of failure in that one may not measure up.  And this is reminiscent of the old axiom "Those who can, do; and those who can't, teach", as well as Woody Allen's hilarious addendum, "... and those who can't teach, teach gym". 


      Say what you will about Lucas, the Wachowskis and Marc Webb (and people say a lot).  Yeah, they were paid well, but they paid their dues first before getting there.  Those familiar with Lucas’ trials and tribs during the filming of the original STAR WARS know how he was constantly on the cusp of being fired from his own film; and even wound up in the hospital with what at first was believed to be a heart attack caused by tension combined with a lack of sleep and a failure to eat properly. 





      Continuing the tension fest, even after the success of EPISODE IV: A NEW HOPE (we still call it STAR WARS), while shooting it's follow up, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK (funded mostly from Lucas' own pocket), that film was almost shut down by the entertainment division of Bank America when it went over budget.  And as if that weren't enough, EMPIRE's problems didn't end upon completion of the film.  Before release the DGA (Director's Guild Of America) fined Lucas and his director, Irvin Kershner, and sought to pull the film from planned distribution because it was structured, as was the first film (which the Guild allowed), with a “cold start” wherein the main cast & crew credits were brought in at the end rather than at the beginning.  "Cold starts" are commonplace today but they weren't back then. 


     Protecting his director, and seeking to maintain a creative continuity with the first film's "credit roll", Lucas personally paid all fines to the DGA and other guilds.  Then, after the success of both films he (as he'd also done on AMERICAN GRAFFITI to the surprise and delight of many), split small percentage shares of the films profits with principal cast and crew. 


     So, in our eyes, Lucas more than paid his dues.  It was his original vision for which he fought when no one else wanted to see it made.  Upon getting it made he fought to keep it afloat when others sought, in one way or another, to prevent it from being seen. Then after that vision became a hit, he shared it's fortune with those he felt helped make it happen.  Yeah, we too aren't crazy about digitally altering Han Solo's confrontation with Greedo - so that now Greedo shoots first.  We don't dig the (later obviously aborted) attempt to link the mystical nature of the Force to genetics via "Midi-Chlorians".  And we sure as hell can't stand Jar Jar. 



     But, for us at least, these are minor quibbles in what has emerged as (yes, including the second trilogy - and say what you will, but the final act of REVENGE OF THE SITH is a masterpiece!) one of the most stunning ongoing cinematic achievements in history.  The fact that interest in the franchise is, after nearly four decades, still at an all time high. And the fact that each subsequent film has broken the box office records of it's immediate predecessor ... .  And with us now in the midst of a new trilogy and "stand alone" films ... . This is indication / pretty clear confirmation that, in laying the foundation for the STAR WARS universe, the often maligned George Lucas obviously did something right.  We believe a large part of that was a willingness to put his butt on the line in the first place.  No mean feat.    


     When all is said and done, and whatever one may feel about Lucas as a producer / film maker in recent years (and the recent none-too-kind reception to his animated film, STRANGE MAGIC, isn't upping his rep in the eyes of some), he's proven himself a card carrying member of the “Put up or shut up” club.  Would that others would be that "climb-out-on-a-tree- limb-then-begin-sawing" passionately brave about their own vision.  ‘Nuff said.


                                   



                                                                    Christopher Walken & David Cronenberg on THE DEAD ZONE ('83)



   
TEMPTED BY  
   THE FLESH



      Finally, in reference to “the paying of one’s creative dues” and "criticism vs. the rant"…


      One of our all time fave directors here at the Cottage is David Cronenberg.  Up there with Chaplin, Hitchcock, Lean, Frankenheimer, Sturges and Aldrich,  we’ve always found Cronenberg to be both a magnificent visual stylist who also knows how to make said visuals simultaneously speak of and to the psychology of his films’ characters, as well as to that of his film audience.  Think on the brutal visceral potency of THE BROOD, VIDEODROME, SCANNERS, THE FLY, NAKED LUNCH, DEAD RINGERS and A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE.  Also think of how those (yes, at times ickily disturbing) images also work as visceral POETRY from which one can’t avert their eyes.  And as for this director’s delicacy in capturing the truth of human emotion, and his ability to coax breathtaking performances from his actors, look no further than the heartbreaking Jeff Goldblum in THE FLY, Jeremy Irons in DEAD RINGERS, and the hypnotically soulful Christopher Walken in THE DEAD ZONE (perhaps the actor's greatest portrayal) for proof that Cronenberg is a true cinema artist, and not just an “FX technician with a camera and a budget”. 


      Over the years, alternately having been both critical darling and “whipping boy”, the always-intriguing-to-listen-to Cronenberg, spoke in May 2014, with Victoria Ahearn of The Canadian Press on the very same topic as ours  - that of "the online rant vs. educated and fair criticism".

      “Is Social Media Killing The Professional Critic? Experts Weigh In” (V. Ahearn)


Cronenberg (L), Peter Weller (R) and Mugwump friend (center) in 1991's NAKED LUNCH
    


      “I think the role of the critic has been very diminished, because you get a lot of people who set themselves up as critics by having a website where it says that they’re a critic, Even now if you go to Rotten Tomatoes, you have critics and then you have ‘Top Critics’, and what that really means is that there are legitimate critics who have actually paid their dues and worked hard and are in a legitimate website connected perhaps with a newspaper or perhaps not.


      Then there are all these other people who just say they’re critics and you read their writing and they can’t write, or they can write and their writing reveals that they’re quite stupid and ignorant. … Some voices have emerged that are actually quite good who never would have emerged before, so that’s the upside of that. But I think it means that it’s diluted the effective critics.”
 

                                                                                                                               
- David Cronenberg -





 
"Mack The Knife" (K.Weil / B. Brecht) Instrumental Guitar Solo - by Dadifan (2014)
 




     A final example of “Good & Evil Dogs”, true love gone wrong, and the flesh-tearing brutality of the fanboy rant can be found in returning to BadassDigest and Mr. Devin Feraci - who’s January 2013 “The Razzies Are Total Sh*t For People Who Hate Movies” we felt quickly, succinctly and logically laid out his argument. 

    
     Fast forward however to October 2014’s “GOTHAM Is The Worst Thing To Happen To Batman Since Joel Schumacher”, and, … well, when a writer begins a piece with “The new BATMAN-without-Batman show is silly, broad and too full of shitty winks to ever be enjoyed”, the reader (be they pro or anti GOTHAM) immediately realizes the reviewer has dived off the cliff of intelligent criticism, splashed down into the lake of nothing but four-letter-word-punctuated personal opinion (which in and of itself isn’t a bad thing), and is now proudly backstroking across the surface of insufferability, with a tad of proprietary "fanboy journalist" arrogance (which IS a bad thing).  In some respects he almost comes to fit Cronenberg's description of the second kind of "critic". And even that wouldn’t be so bad if those proprietary fan-based opinions were occasionally buoyed with just a reference or two from outside sources, or a tilt this way or that to an example from film history which coincides with the writer's own conclusions.  Y'know, all of that stuff learned back in High School English Comp class which is still valid and rings true today.  That doesn't seem to be an unreasonable expectation from a piece (whether written in someone's bedroom or the office of the New York Times) which will presumably be read by others.





     Read by a few or by a great many, it doesn't matter.  For when one sets themselves up as the "expert" in any topic / category, one automatically assumes the responsibility of taking those you wish to educate and / or inform through the labyrinth of facts and opposing facts, data and opposing data, to a final summation of how your reading of those facts and data support your claim. And sorry Devin,"Too full of shitty winks..." falls flat on it's face as it's not far removed from the cliched' elementary school playground final resort putdown answer to any question, "Your Mom!"


   Mel Brooks - "It Is Good To Be The King": HISTORY OF THE WORLD PT. 1 (1981)
  


     In not keeping those scales of journalistic criticism properly balanced; in not separating the wheat of personal "like / dislike" from the chaff of gleeful artistic assault / attack which can stem from it, we run the risk of our own Jekyll / Annie Wilkes headlong plunge from level headed individual with a justifiable concern, to the social media / journalistic version of blabbering, irrational, flesh slashing sociopath - where we are no longer engaging in dialog, discussion and education, but exemplifying a  "see me / hear me" declaration of self perceived power and authority.  An almost despotically desperate “I have a column and I am king!” state rather than a “Let’s get into this and examine and debate it intelligently because we love it, and hate to see when it’s done poorly” take / sensibility.  We believe this is the “separating the men from the boys” delineation Mr. Cronenberg was making.  It is surely ours.
 

                                                                                                                                CINEMA PARADISO (1988)
     

      How 'bout we leave the bone crushing to Annie Wilkes, and flesh tearing to Leatherface,  the “Phantom”, Willard’s furry little friends, and (of course) to Mack The Knife - y'know, to the experts?  As lovers of cinematic craft, we’ve certainly the right and responsibility to express our displeasure with sub-par material and execution.  But we also owe it to ourselves, and the craft we claim to love so dearly, to do so in a manner which is not sub-par or below the creative station of any of us, … especially those within that film industry itself.


     So you see, we weren't that crazy after all, huh?  Told 'ya the "inductive reasoning" thing would string it all together by the end.  So, for what it's worth, there 'ya go.   


     Whew!  This one took awhile to finish too.  So we think we'll celebrate tonight by watching what again, ... LAWRENCE OF ARABIA,  DELIVERANCE,  BEFORE SUNRISE,  ZERO DARK THIRTY, THE UMBRELLAS OF CHERBOURG?  Nah, we know ...

     HUDSON HAWK! 

     Remember, ... look below the surface!

     Once again, ... just sayin'. 

     Happy Summer-going Movie Season all!

     



                                                                                      CEJ - February 2015 (rev. 2/12/17, rev. 6/22/17)

pg. 1,2,





CRAIG ELLIS JAMISON

Based in Philadelphia, PA, Craig is author of the screenplays NECESSARY EVIL, O.T., THE SECRET SONG,
ROUGH ASSEMBLAGE, 13 O'CLOCK, FATHOM, NEGATIVE INGENUITY, KISS ME FOREVER, BOTTLED LIGHTNING INC., INNUENDO, APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION, CAMP DAVID (co-author), 10,000 SNOWMEN (co-author), and the upcoming book
"THE INHERENT POWER OF GENRE: THE SOCIO-POLITICAL HISTORY OF THE SCIENCE FICTION, FANTASY AND HORROR FILM". He is Editor In Chief of The GullCottage / Sandlot Online film magazine / library; founder of the CreateTiV.TV online network (launching late 2017); director / writer / co-producer of the documentary feature STEVE VERTLIEB: THE MAN WHO "SAVED" THE MOVIES; and creator / producer / co-host of the cinema podcast series THE MOVIE SNEAK
(formerly "The Grindhouse: With Craig & Jim")

Visit the GullCottage / Sandlot on Facebook and Twitter

Connect with CEJ via 
Facebook @ https://www.facebook.com/craig.jamison.73
email @ info@gullcottageonline.com






Website Builder