The GullCottage  / sandlot
                            Online Film Magazine / Library / Network 

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


Your Subtitle text

This site's multi-media features are best viewed using the latest versions of 
(some font anomalies with FIREFOX and older versions of IE).  

Upgrade Now.



* The Avengers (5/6/12)  * MEMORIAL DAY 2012 – Red Tails, Memphis Belle, Flyboys, The Blue Max (5/28/12) 
Prometheus (6/11/12)   * The Amazing Spider-Man (7/9/12)   * 42 (4/17/13)   * Iron Man 3 (5/9/13)  
Godzilla – 2014 (5/18/14)   * Jurassic World (6/21/15)   * Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2/18/16)
Batman V. Superman: Dawn Of Justice (6/21/16)   * Captain America: Civil War (5/13/16)

* Kong: Skull Island (3/12/17)    Star Wars: The Last Jedi (12/17/16)  Black Panther (3/5/18)

The GRINDHOUSE: Reviews  



Also check out:
"WHO'S YOUR DADDY?": 12 of ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY's Cinematic Ancestors

(No Spoilers Review)
by CEJ  
(posted 12/17/17)


(Walt Disney / 

GullCottage rating
(****½ on a scale of 1 - 5)

Dir. by - Rian Johnson
Written by - Rian Johnson
Based on characters by - George Lucas

Prod. by - Kathleen Kennedy,
Ram Bergman
Executive Prod. - J.J. Abrams,
Jason McGatlin
Dir. Of Photography  - Steve Yedlin
Edited by - Bob Ducsay
Production Design by - Rick Heinrichs
Costume Design by - Michael Kaplan

Music - John Williams 
Running Time: 152 mins. 


Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker), Carrie Fisher (General Leia Organa), Daisy Ridley (Rey),
John Boyega (Finn), Adam Driver (Kylo Ren), Oscar Issac (Poe Dameron), Andy Serkis (Supreme Leader Snoke),
Joonas Suotamo (Chewbacca), Anthony Daniels (C3PO), Jimmy Vee (R2-D2), Kelly Marie Tran (Rose Tico),
Laura Dern (Vice Admiral Holdo), Benicio Del Toro (DJ), Dave Chapman & Brian Herring (BB-8 puppeteers), Gwendoline Christie (Captain Phasma), Domhnall Gleeson (General Hux), Lupita Nyong'o (Maz Kanata),
Billie Lourd (Lt. Connix), Justin Theroux (Master Codebreaker), Tim Rose (Admiral Ackbar),
Veronica Ngo (Paige Tico), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (voice of Slowen Lo), Gareth Edwards (Trench Soldier),
Gary the Dog (Space Gary - uncredited)

      “GAME-CHANGER (noun): a newly introduced element that changes an existing situation or activity in a significant way”. (Merriam-Webster Dictionary)

      “DUKKHA (noun): the concept that “Life, with it’s clinging and craving to impermanent states and things, is unsatisfactory. We expect happiness from states and things which are impermanent, and therefore cannot attain real happiness” (Nyanatiloka: Buddhist Dictionary)

      “It’s not simple morality play. It has to do with the powers of life and their inflection through the action of man” (Joseph Campbell on STAR WARS - 1988)

      “Oh Jesus, can 'ya just tell me whether or not THE LAST JEDI is worth my $15 or so bucks, … or $20 if I spring for freakin' IMAX!”. Alright, alright, ... Jeez! Keep your pants on! The answer on that one’s a resounding “Hell yeah, it is!  Humongo absolutely it is!”. And “Damn skippy!”as we used to say back in the RETURN OF THE JEDI days of Lionel Ritchie hair, Michael Jackson blazers and Duran Duran skin-tights. Keep in mind though that if you want the standard USA TODAY / Twitter / Rotten Tomatoes-like 15-words-or-less review blurb, then you really scrolled up the wrong site, because here we kinda like to try to peel back at least a few superficial layers of a film in an attempt to zero in on what really makes it tick. Not just "Does is suck, or doesn't it suck?", but why and how, and maybe what could have gone into earlier rescuing it from it's "suck"-like state. In other words our reviews aren't necessarily conducive to breezing through between subway stops. On the contrary we generally recommend you crack open a beer, pour a shot, light a smoke, or at the very least brew a little java and settle in for a little bit. Kind of like the way we used to do it "back in the day" with the Friday paper extended movie review you looked forward to all week long, or the Sunday supplement section where some critic you always disagreed with, but just as often admired, helped cast light on a particular angle of a film you otherwise might never have noticed. Anyway, just giving you a heads up is all.

    And hey, speaking of “back in the day”, there are those saying the new STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI is on par with THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. And, while arguably just as damned good, the comparison is ultimately unfair because Rian Johnson’s LucasFilm-sanctioned take on the (Episode VII and beyond) STAR WARS universe is a brilliant (and brilliantly entertaining) cinematic animal quite unto itself. It’s a film entity the greatest strength of which lay in the fact that it intentionally strives not to be like THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, … or A NEW HOPE or RETURN OF THE JEDI, it’s immediate predecessor THE FORCE AWAKENS or any of the others. And in so doing it ends up being among the best of those others by returning to what made the earliest STAR WARS films so memorable in the first place. Ironically however in order to achieve this noble end THE LAST JEDI does a bit of what fans (and especially fanboys) usually drag out the pitchforks over - it breaks with more than a little so-called STAR WARS canon. So, how does one go back to the original while breaking canon? It really does make sense.

      Oh, but before we jump into that, something else really quick, … completely off topic, but since everyone’s been talking about it …

      Yes! It is true that Princes William and Harry (as well as actor Tom Hardy) filmed cameos as Stormtroppers, just as James Bond actor Daniel Craig had done in THE FORCE AWAKENS. But don’t beat yourself up too much trying to figure out where they show up in the film, because unfortunately William and Harry’s appearances ended up on the cutting room floor. Sorry Royal Watchers. Anyway, back to LAST JEDI not being like the other STAR WARS films …

     We’ve always loved the David Cronenberg phrase “BrundleFly” - the gene-splicing reference the director used from his 1986 re-imagining of THE FLY in order to describe how he chose to later adapt William S. Burroughs “unfilmable” novel NAKED LUNCH. Realizing it was pretty much impossible to do a literal adaptation of that story about a truth seeking junkie who takes a “black meat” (heroin)-augmented trip from America to Mexico then ultimately to a CASABLANCA-like "Interzone" of societal misfits, Cronenberg chose to take some character and narrative elements from the classic 1959 counter-culture novel, infuse the story’s main character William Lee with a backstory taken from Burroughs own life, then stir them, “Double double toil and trouble”-like within the cauldron of his own thematic sensibilities. So, what emerged on the other end was more a genetic fusion of Burroughs and Cronenberg - and which in a weird way actually details the creation of the novel NAKED LUNCH itself.

     As such Cronenberg’s film became (and remains) one of best examples of “metatextual” fiction - wherein the story itself becomes a Greek Chorus of sorts making commentary on the sort of story that it is. Or put another way - the story’s fictional narrative mirrors how and why the story was created in the first place. Not trying to get too literary or philosophical here. But in a nutshell that’s what Rian Johnson does with STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI. And in that respect he brings an independent film maker’s “art house” sensibility to what is certainly the biggest of big budget tentpole franchises in the filmic galaxy.

      It’s a stunning artistic achievement, especially considering how stacked the deck was against Johnson going in. Oh yeah, THE LAST JEDI is also a helluva fun action / adventure ride too!


Site Search Index:


     This is a “no spoilers” review and, as THE LAST JEDI has more than a few nifty character and plot surprises, we really can’t go too much into it’s story other than that which you’ve already seen in the trailers and TV spots. That said the most skeletal of plot outlines is thus ...

     After the events of THE FORCE AWAKENS, Supreme Leader Snoke (Andy Serkis) orders the First Order Fleet, under the command of Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) and Gen. Hux, to converge upon and annihilate the Rebel’s H.Q. And in a rollicking battle sequence (somewhat reminiscent of the opening evacuation scene in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK) Gen. Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher in her final screen performance) and pilot Poe Dameron (Oscar Issac) lead the Rebels rag tag caravan of vessels to safe escape via hyperspace.

     Healed from his injuries during his light saber battle with Kylo Ren, Finn (John Boyega) awakens in a medical tube then, concerned for the safety of Rey (Daisy Ridley), plans to set out to find and be with her. Picking up at the final scene of THE FORCE AWAKENS, Rey, having traveled to the water world of Ahch-To with Chewie and R2-D2 aboard the Millennium Falcon, finally meets the legendary Last Jedi himself - Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), under whose tutelage she expects to begin JedI training. She is shocked however to discover that, after his perceived failure in the training of his nephew Kylo Ren, he refuses to train her or anyone ever again.


     In all honesty during the first half of THE LAST JEDI’s 150 + mins. running time we felt the film was “okay”. Y’know, no better or worse than other STAR WARS entries, but certainly nothing more; and that its comparisons to THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK were a bit overblown. The second half however turned into one of those increasingly rare double-syllable “Da’yum!” cinematic experiences. And it was then we realized we’d been cleverly lulled into a false sense of, well, … maybe not “security” but let‘s call it “safe narrative expectations”, many of which were about to be usurped during the second half with a storytelling ferocity equivalent to the sacking of Byzantium!


     To say THE LAST JEDI takes some sacred STAR WARS totems and smashes them to bits is an understatement. And such a narrative strategy, if not handled with the balance, aplomb and confidence of a high wire acrobat, can be damned dangerous when dealing with a franchise which so many have taken not only to heart over the last 40 years, but which many now consider a part of their very lives. And hey, that ain't just mere hyperbole either! In our GullCottage STAR WARS piece from a couple of years ago, “The Kobyashi Maru of THE FORCE AWAKENS”, we took note of the fact that when dealing with a new entry in a long running franchise (be it Bond, STAR TREK, STAR WARS or whatever), a film maker isn’t just effin' with the expectations of generations of film goers, but they’re mucking about with the personal life memories - good, bad and otherwise - which each of those audience members associates with the first time they saw such-and-such entry in that franchise. Hence the STAR TREK “Kobayashi Maru” (no win scenario) reference.

     So, on one hand the film maker(s) is / are faced with the need to meet / be faithful to the expectations and personal memories of the audience - y'know, that film maker’s ultimate bread and butter. But on the other hand the film maker(s) has / have to also be faithful to the building blocks of narrative drama - two of the most important stanchions of which are character and the increasingly difficult (especially in a franchise) necessity to not let that audience know what’s coming around the next corner. If the balance is even slightly off, there are gonna be big time fan repercussions, as J.J. Abrams found out with his rebooting of both the STAR TREK and STAR WARS franchises.

     First of all, let’s put it out there that we enjoy THE FORCE AWAKENS and (especially) the first STAR TREK (2009) more than most. And with STAR TREK it’s more than anything because of it’s smashing of icons and totems in the narrative quest to not let the audience know what’s coming around the next bend. Quite simply if you’re going to go back to the younger day origins of the crew of the Enterprise, the fact that we know that later down the line they’ll meet and conquer V’ger, Khan, General Chang and the rest, … and even manage to bring a couple of humpback whales back to the future to save earth from an eco disaster; and that they’ll come through all of this ultimately unscathed … . Well, that kind of blunts the end of any real drama and suspense because no matter how dire the circumstances may appear for the young Kirk, Spock, McCoy et al, we know they’ll survive it to later face V’ger, etc.


     But by opening the 2009 film with a rupture in the space time continuum, and by (most importantly) not repairing it! by films end, as pretty much every other science fiction story has done since (heh! heh!) time began, everything is now up for grabs in their future ... and ours. Nothing is set anymore expectation-wise. In this timeline that we're not familiar with - even after 40+ years of TREK - Kirk has grown up without a father, Spock’s mother is killed and the planet Vulcan is destroyed, and Kirk knows Christopher Pike personally. This is a strange and brave new narrative world indeed!

  Director / writer Rian Johnson (L) on set with Carrie Fisher (R)

     Some felt the decimation of those TREK totems (“canon” is the phrase many prefer to use) was sacrilege and franchise suicide. And maybe it was. But it was damned clever narrative sacrilege - every bit as much as making James T. Kirk a middle aged man whose playboy days were behind him in WRATH OF KHAN, … and giving him a son to boot; then destroying the Enterprise and taking away that son in THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK. It was every bit as canon-breakingly clever as destroying the iconic organization SHIELD after it’s been infiltrated by the neo-supremacist organization Hydra in CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER, because this now forces our stalwart characters and their story creators to break from the cocoon (straight-jacket if you will) of audience expectations … as well as their own creative ones. They (and we) have to now work a little for a living, ... or at least to keep the hell up with what's going on. We can't hit narrative "auto pilot" and just cruise through the latest battle with the Klingons, Romulans or Red Skull.


     We’ve always felt that those fans who cling with an almost religious fervor to franchise canon have fallen into the tender trap of, as the Buddhist precept of Dukkha reminds, “expecting happiness from states and things which are impermanent, and therefore (as such) cannot attain real happiness“. This precept of “no longer clinging to that which is impermanent” is at the very core of STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI’s character and plot. And not only is this iconoclastic notion the film’s narrative drive, but it is also the basis of the creation (the reason behind) Rian Johnson’s script and film to begin with. As such the story’s fictional narrative mirrors how and why the story was created in the first place. It’s Johnson’s own “BrundleFly” / NAKED LUNCH “metatextual” take on the LucasFilm STAR WARS universe.

 Cronenberg on the set of THE FLY (1986) and his "meta" classic NAKED LUNCH (1991)

     While the STAR WARS films have always been rollicking pedal-to-the-metal swashbuckling space adventures, the better ones have also always insisted on not being empty headed ones. And we always felt the reason Abrams’ THE FORCE AWAKENS didn’t necessarily measure up (yes, we too, as much as we enjoyed it, admit it’s in the “fat free” or “2% milk” section of the STAR WARS franchise) was through no fault of Abrams own. Remember that after the sale of LucasFilm to Disney, and the announcement of a new STAR WARS trilogy, LucasFilm head Kathleen Kennedy and the Disney brass made it clear that what they wanted to create (“Get back to” was how they put it) was a more “fun” space opera - hinting that they wanted to take a few steps back and away from what some felt was George Lucas’ too heavy handed insertion of myth, religion and political history into his second trilogy of films (episodes I - III: THE PHANTOM MENACE, ATTACK OF THE CLONES and REVENGE OF THE SITH). 


     There were even protestations that SITH’s sequences within the Senate, and Annakin Skywalker’s declaration of phrases such as “If you’re not with me, you’re against me” were deliberate swipes at the Bush Jr. Presidential administration. But did Kennedy and Disney step too far back and away from such historical and philosophical  references?

 Rian Johnson (L) and producer Ram Bergman (R)


     We felt they did step a little too far back, forgetting that, as with the Force itself, it's all about balance. And by removing nearly all such historical / philosophical / religious / literary DNA from the genome of a STAR WARS film what one was ultimately left with was an enjoyable space action flick (which isn’t a bad thing in and of itself), but not so much a “STAR WARS” flick. Composer David Arnold (STARGATE, ID4, CASINO ROYALE) once opined how the classic “James Bond Theme” is such a living cellular component of the 007 film series that if you remove the theme from say a car chase what you’re left with is an “action movie”, and maybe even a good one, but not a “James Bond movie”. And the STAR WARS films’ analogous relationship to myth, religion and history is (and has always been, and as far as we're concerned should always be) similarly genetically dependent.

          Legendary STAR WARS composer John Williams (center) with John Boyega & Daisy Ridley

     The work of the late great mythologist, writer and lecturer Joseph Campbell became a touchstone for George Lucas in the creation of his original STAR WARS characters, universe and narrative scenarios. In particular regard Campbell’s THE HERO WITH A THOUSAND FACES and THE MASKS OF GOD were two of Lucas’ primary influences. And from the proverbial git-go those Campbell-esque elements were encoded within the DNA of that “galaxy far far away and a long time ago“ to such an integral degree that the STAR WARS films could more readily survive today without a John Williams score than without it's celluar platelets of mythology, religion, history and classical literature. Take a look at (and give a listen to) the standalone STAR WARS film ROGUE ONE (2016) which features precious little John Williams influence until the climax (when we first see Princess Leia) but which does amp up the Samurai philosophy (and Kurosawa film) references. It just doesn’t do so to the point of becoming obvious and distracting. Y'know, that whole "balance" thing we were talking about. There's some there to be sure, but not so much as to bludgeon you across your forehead.

George Lucas (L) at a banquet honoring author / lecturer Joseph Campbell (R) - circa 1980

     This is what the better STAR WARS entries have always done. For example, while many in the audience may not be specifically aware of how Luke and Dark Vader’s relationship echoes HAMLET, they are aware of the age-old “Love him or hate him, no matter what I do his presence is forever looming over me” state of many father / son relationships. And while the average theater goer may not be able to quote Buddhist chapter and verse, they can personally attest to the Bodhi-esque universal truth which (put into modern terms) says “In poker and in life it’s not necessarily the cards you’re dealt with which matters as much as how one chooses to play them”. In bringing this sort of thing back into the STAR WARS filmic realm, and by doing it in that Cronenberg “metstextual” manner, and while still making it as fun as hell ... . This is where, how and why Rian Johnson’s THE LAST JEDI excels to such a well rounded degree.

Producers J.J. Abrams (L) and Kathleen Kennedy (R)

     The most iconic and symbolic point around which the entire (to date) nine film STAR WARS series has come to pivot occurs at almost the exact half-way mark of the second film in the original trilogy - THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK. It's the scene where Luke enters “the Tree” - which he senses is filled with an indecipherable / nebulous kind of evil. When Luke asks Yoda what’s within the huge cave-like hollow trunk of the tree, the Jedi master tells him, “Only what you take inside with you”. And those who know a little somethin’ somethin’ about ancient philosophies / religions know how this was a thematic shout-out to the significance of the “Bodhi Tree” under which the Buddha sat and came to a life-changing revelation and rebirth.

     A sacred tree was also significant in the life of the young boy Muhammad who, traveling with his Uncle to Syria, stopped to rest under the shade of what would come to be called “The Blessed Tree”. It was here that a life changing revelation concerning his imminent prophethood would be foretold. And many believe the Christian rendition of “the Tree” and it’s revelation / rebirth significance is seen in Christ’s crucifixion on the cross - this theological interpretation most likely because alternating later translations derived from the original Greek in which the Gospels were written tend to use the words "cross", "tree" and "wood" somewhat interchangeably throughout various parts of the New Testament. Now, …

LAST JEDI's "Temple Tree" (top) and its historical / religious antecedents  (bottom L to R):
Buddha's "Bodhi Tree", Muhammad's "Blessed Tree", and Christ's "Crucifixion Tree"

     Whether the aforementioned “Tree” instances are interpreted as literal history or metaphorical, they all have since entered the collective consciousness of the human race to such a degree that today, from Jungian psychological archetypes, to “rebirth / revelation” pop cultural visual references in films such as BLADE RUNNER 2049, CONAN THE BARBARIAN, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and more, “the Tree” carries a great deal of mythic, religious and historical psychological weight. And to see how “the Temple Tree” visual symbol is used in THE LAST JEDI in its relation to the concept of the Force in particular, and the nature of good and evil in general, is as iconoclastic as one can get, … especially considering who in the film makes that reference and why!

     In this instance and setting our characters come to realize (with some difficulty) that they must not become too attached to the symbol, ... to the sacred text, ... to the socio-political idea and / or the ideal at the expense of forgetting to actually live what the symbol, text and idea / ideals are meant to represent. For when we forget to do that, the idea / ideal becomes dangerous religious or political totalitarian dogma, even if we originally took up that text or idea / ideal with the best and most honorable of intentions - y'know, like wanting to make the world a better place. It can be a thin line between idealism and tragically dangerous demagoguery when an individual or society is so married to an ideal that they come to force it (no pun intended, swear to God!) as "the only way". Just ask Victor Frankenstein, Henry Jekyll, Captain Ahab, ... and even Annakin Skywalker! 

     In the same way in which the tree in THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK became a touchstone for all of the STAR WARS films which followed it, it’s not hard to believe that the LAST JEDI "Temple Tree" will become a starting block of sorts from which all future entries in the franchise will (subtextually at least) draw thematic inspiration. Branching out from that tree we as an audience come to realize that none of the major characters in THE LAST JEDI (well, maybe except for Supreme Leader Snoke) are 100% good or 100% evil. In this film we indeed do learn what happened during Luke’s training of Kylo, but the way in which Luke and Kylo individually saw, remember and interpret the incident carries monumental repercussions.

     Elsewhere in the film we delve into that standard (clichéd) tropism of the action adventure and sci fi genre where the good guys get fed up with the bean counters and politicians trying to cover their own asses. And those good guys take quick, decisive and heroic (if rebellious) action on their own. Only in THE LAST JEDI it reaches an ultimate conclusion which we don't necessarily expect. And this time around the "bean counting politicians" may not be as tight-assed and wrong as cliche' loves to paint them in such films. Could this possibly be because, kind of like in real life, our good guys don’t have all of the info / backstory as to why the (so-called) “ass covering politicians” aren’t doing things the way our heroes think they should be doing them? It’s here in particular that Laura Dern’s character, Resistance Vice Admiral Holdo, becomes an unexpectedly intriguing addition to the mix. And speaking of unexpected, the relationship between Luke and Rey takes a rather unexpectedly complicated turn or two. And the relationship between Rey and Kylo really takes some unexpected turns! But that’s the world in which THE LAST JEDI takes place as opposed to the often cleanly delineated one of the previous STAR WARS films.


Benicio del Toro as the questionable "DJ"

     The world of THE LAST JEDI is (not unlike ROGUE ONE) populated with many more cynics who see divided loyalties as less a “betrayal” as much as it is a simple matter of everyday practicality. And those kinds of characters who back in the Lucas STAR WARS days could always be counted upon to stand up, charge and “Do the right thing” regardless, find the spark of their ideological motivations constantly challenged, bludgeoned and increasingly difficult to ignite. But while some consider these kinds of narrative thematics “dark” in what should be a "fun" movie, we’ve always felt that such darkness makes the final moments, when the best of the best rise above their own fears, doubts and crushed beliefs to still do what is right BECAUSE IT’S RIGHT, and not because it’s a teaching or based upon dogma or tradition, to be the dramatic moments which shine brightest and inspire the most. And if you don’t cheer during THE LAST JEDI’s final act, well, then we can’t help you, ... nor can all the Force in the galaxy. But for others we think you’ll find STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI to be just what the franchise needed - a fresh infusion of respect for what came before coupled with a need to tear it all down in order to remain faithful to the simplistic elegance of the original intent.


     The characters in THE LAST JEDI, both “good” and “evil“, learn that in order to be faithful to the precepts of what they’ve held dear for so long, they must essentially destroy the almost idolatry-like hold those precepts have come to have over them. And Rian Johnson’s film similarly understands that in order to remain faithful to, and be as entertainingly refreshing as, the original trilogy, it also must smash and burn some of the totems which have come to wield a strangle-like hold over the film series for years. Similar to David Cronenberg’s “metatexual” classic NAKED LUNCH, THE LAST JEDI’s story itself makes comment on the creation (and the creative process) of how and why the story was made.


     The working definition of a game-changer in the STAR WARS cinematic universe, THE LAST JEDI emerges as not only one of the best films in the entire nine picture LucasFilm franchise, but quite possibly one of 2017’s best realized films period - on par with this year's earlier LOGAN, WONDER WOMAN and WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES as tentpole epics somehow, amazingly, unbelievably brought to multiplexes with, at their core, within their very souls, an independent filmmaker's sensibilities. And kudos in this regard to not only those films' directors (shout-outs here to James Mangold, Patty Jenkins, Matt Reeves and Rian Johnson), but to the producers et al who bravely bequeathed to them the authority to bring a more personal vision to a bread & butter studio franchise. This sort of thing is not the usual. But bring on more of it as it's a trend we could damn sure get used to. Oh, and in this regard respectful shout-outs to folks such as Zach Snyder, Charles Roven, Peter Chernin, Kathleen Kennedy and J.J. Abrams - all of whom are normally on the negative receiving end of critical comments and commentary.  Not this time around though. On this one a little honor where honor is due.  As for what happens next? Well, as usual ...

     To be continued.

     Till then, let's go out and save the galaxy together, huh? 

     "May The Force Be With You!"

Farewell Carrie Fisher (1956 - 2016)


Based in Philadelphia, PA, screenwriter / director Craig Ellis Jamison is webmaster of the GULLCOTTAGE / SANDLOT online film magazine / library as well as creator / producer of its "CreaTiV.TV" network, YouTube "TUNEPLAY FILM MUSIC" channel, and THE MOVIE SNEAK PODCAST. He's dir. / writer / co-producer of the documentary feature STEVE VERTLIEB: THE MAN WHO "SAVED" THE MOVIES. And (to unwind) he recently began penning the

A professed film music and jazz junkie, he's accused of being a workaholic, but more accurately feels he'll take a vacation when he's "earned" one. These days he's usually found chained to the desk in the wee hours - with a lovable pain-in-the-ass Lab / Shepered / Pitt mutt named Ripley at his side. - banging out web articles, scripts and a soon-to-be-published tome on the socio-political history of the science fiction, horror and fantasy film entitled

Drop a line and shoot the sh*t with him on Facebook, or connect via

Website Builder