I like to support new directors, so I went to see "Midnighters", a first feature for director Julius Ramsay, with the screenplay written by his brother Alston Ramsay. Here is an interview with the director:
http://collider.com/julius-ramsay-interview-midnighters/
Spoilers may follow.
It's a decent watch, and was not disappointed. Not a bad first effort, with some flaws. The script/story is interesting, with a lot of potential, not all of it fulfilled. There are some irritatingly large holes in the story, implausibilities (like: it's completely unbelievable that they'd let the sister talk to the guy *alone* at his request), and some of the dialogue is overwritten (talky, talky, talky bad guy while he tortures the girl). Music, as so often, is poor and poorly deployed (especially egregious toward the end, with the reveal of the big haul of money). Acting is borderline - the lead girl (Alex Essoe) is quite good, but the rest are barely serviceable (Dylan McTee is just poor), oh, and the two cops are decent.
The direction is quite competent, especially for a first timer (he did some limited TV directing and a few shorts). But it does feel a bit like a first effort - there are quite a few moments and scenes that don't go anywhere (example: McTee bashes the teeth out of the corpse, and pulls out a tooth to examine it carefully... but that doesn't lead to anything - why is he looking at that tooth so carefully?). Contrary to the claims he makes in the interview, he does pull back on the violance (example - we don't *see* on screen the nails going into the fingers), to great detriment IMHO - the film would gain a solid 50% if he really did go balls out on the violance, it would add some sorely needed tension raising the stakes and emotions... BIG, BIG, mistake, IMHO.
Now for the good - I like, no, LOVE, how unconcerned the filmmakers are with explaining everything about the money, the background to the sister, and so on, and limit themselves to just the story as it happens. I think it could have used more subtlety, f.ex. it really didn't need to be hammered over and over and over and over again the trope of the loser husband sitting on his ass, while the wife brings home the bacon - it's cliche, and not particulary well done. More psychological depth would have done wonders here (this is the potential that remains unfulfilled). But the story is genuinely interesting, and most of the developments nicely motivated (except as I indicated above).
Bottom line, a decent film, worth your time, IMHO.
http://collider.com/julius-ramsay-interview-midnighters/
Spoilers may follow.
It's a decent watch, and was not disappointed. Not a bad first effort, with some flaws. The script/story is interesting, with a lot of potential, not all of it fulfilled. There are some irritatingly large holes in the story, implausibilities (like: it's completely unbelievable that they'd let the sister talk to the guy *alone* at his request), and some of the dialogue is overwritten (talky, talky, talky bad guy while he tortures the girl). Music, as so often, is poor and poorly deployed (especially egregious toward the end, with the reveal of the big haul of money). Acting is borderline - the lead girl (Alex Essoe) is quite good, but the rest are barely serviceable (Dylan McTee is just poor), oh, and the two cops are decent.
The direction is quite competent, especially for a first timer (he did some limited TV directing and a few shorts). But it does feel a bit like a first effort - there are quite a few moments and scenes that don't go anywhere (example: McTee bashes the teeth out of the corpse, and pulls out a tooth to examine it carefully... but that doesn't lead to anything - why is he looking at that tooth so carefully?). Contrary to the claims he makes in the interview, he does pull back on the violance (example - we don't *see* on screen the nails going into the fingers), to great detriment IMHO - the film would gain a solid 50% if he really did go balls out on the violance, it would add some sorely needed tension raising the stakes and emotions... BIG, BIG, mistake, IMHO.
Now for the good - I like, no, LOVE, how unconcerned the filmmakers are with explaining everything about the money, the background to the sister, and so on, and limit themselves to just the story as it happens. I think it could have used more subtlety, f.ex. it really didn't need to be hammered over and over and over and over again the trope of the loser husband sitting on his ass, while the wife brings home the bacon - it's cliche, and not particulary well done. More psychological depth would have done wonders here (this is the potential that remains unfulfilled). But the story is genuinely interesting, and most of the developments nicely motivated (except as I indicated above).
Bottom line, a decent film, worth your time, IMHO.
