Change Your Image
marshallever
Reviews
Butterfly Kisses (2018)
Interesting movie that is put together well
Raving or good reviews are not necessarily fake - everyone has their own opinion and I'm fine with that. I generally rate Studio productions harder because they have a lot more money and access to A list actors, etc. Indy films are different and many of them are filmed on budgets under $100k so you have to do a comparison between budgets to see how well a director actually did.
This particular movie has a pretty minimal cast and crew and likely had a budget for the whole movie that was less than what a studio production spends just on craft services (food).
I am not a fan of found footage or documentaries - so from that aspect it was tough, but my son loved it and he watched it 4 times and he believes it is real as we have been to that train tunnel.
Sound: great job on the sound and sound track that is studio quality
Cinematography: Loved parts of it, but cringed on some - but that was mainly the found footage which was not supposed to be good.
Story: pretty interesting and got you wondering and also interested in some of the characters
I thought the main character's name really was Gavin York and they did a great job convincing you it was - mainly because of the use of real people like Mike from DC 101. Like I said I'm not a fan of documentaries, but the documentary portion of this was pulled off well and that part seemed legitimate and perhaps it was - the Gavin character pissed off a lot of people and I don't think that was acting, I think some were really pissed, but if not, then their acting was pretty damn convincing. This was also straight up a movie and it didn't rely on a bunch of explosions, special effects, to make people think it was good.
I would like to have seen more scares - but that's my preference for horror.
The director and those associated with the film also created back stories, so when my son searched he found stuff to make him believe it was real.
With a larger budget I think this director would beat most of the Studio directors. On a side note we recently watch "US" and that movie sucked, horrible acting, horrible script, editing was bad, that's a movie I would be ashamed of.
So considering budgets, genre, etc. this movie is a solid 8 - mine are solid 3's (If this had a $100M budget, I'd rate differently.
The Shadow People (2011)
I liked it
When reviewing movies, I try to review them within the directors experience, budget, etc. as it is not fair to compare an indy movie with a $500 budget to a Hollywood movie with a $150,000,000 budget. If I match the contents and quality and factor the cost, most Hollywood movies would have a suck rating. If an indy film maker could make a film with the same quality level as Hollywood for under $10,000 then that is one hell of a person. You see, in most indy films the director has to do a lot of work. I made several movies and did most of the camera work, acted, directed, created all the props, created all the special effects, did all the lighting, wrote the script, did the casting, prepared all the food and drinks, did all the editing, did all the audio, did all the scoring and music creation, and more. To bash me or other indy film makers is just plain stupid and to compare or rate us against Hollywood is just ignorant. I have a feature film in distribution right now and made it for under $1,000, it's an OK movie, nothing great, but if I had $10-100 Million, yeah I would have had Paid professional actors, high quality cameras, crews and would have done nothing but edit. So in regards to Shadow People, is it the greatest movie, no, but it is a good movie within the context. I think it is great that the director was able to write the script and complete the project and he did it without any significant budget.
In the realm of ultra low budget indy films, I give this one a 7, perhaps higher. The movie was entertaining and I watched the whole thing without leaving, which compared to some recent Hollywood movies is a definite plus and I will refer specifically to RIPD (what a suck of a movie), Sharknado, and more stinkers out of Hollywood.
This is a decent movie for a person starting off in the movie industry and demonstrates what they can do with a little. If he had more money, I am sure this would have been a good movie that would have done well at the box office.
One way I look at movies for rating is to figure out the cost per viewer = Total Number of Times Movie was watched / Total Cost To Make the Movie. So if a movie cost $10M and was watched 10M times the cost would be $1 per time watched; if a movie cost $1,000 and was watched 2,000 times the cost is $.5 per time watched. That is how you can compare low budget indy to high budget Hollywood. You really can't compare the box office take, because there is too big of a gap on Advertising, so you simply can not compare. In fact, you really can't compare them, so don't. When you review a movie, be smart about it.
Roulette (2012)
The tension in the movie kept building and building and then near the end it was a strong release of tension. This movie will certainly put you on the edge of your seat.
I had the opportunity to see this film in the theater as part of the movie's premiere. The movie certainly keeps you engaged as you learn about each of the characters and how they got to where they are. The script was well written and really gave you an understanding of the characters, to the point where you could empathize with them or hate them. The tension in the movie kept building and building and then near the end it was a strong release of tension. This movie will certainly put you on the edge of your seat.
Acting: While the actors are not well known, they all did an excellent job portraying their characters. I ended up not caring that they were not big name actors, but what they did was at the big name level.
Directing: The director obviously took a lot of time and effort in the direction and development of the actors to get great performances out of them.
Production quality: the soundtrack was well done and helped keep you in the movie. The quality was very good with good coloring and lighting. Sound quality was very good and seemed to be mastered professionally.
After the premiere the cast/crew and director were available for questions and discussion. There was a lot of interaction from the crowd as they were really excited by the film. The cast/crew were very professional and discussed what it took to make the movie and how they felt about their acting.
When we were told about the budget (very very low), we were surprised as it had the quality of a mid range budget film (which I would have expected to be in the $1M-5M range.
This movie is definitely worth watching, you may watch it more than one time. I will definitely watch movies produced by this crew and wish them the best of luck and success.
note: I had no part in this movie other than watching it as a premiere. You can look me up on IMDb or Facebook and see I am not part of the credits. Anyways the cast/crew did a great job on this movie and it is a lot more interesting than most Hollywood movies - get over the 3D crap or sharks in a tornado - that stuff sucks. You can call my review fake or say I am the shameless producer, I'll take credit for this film and add it to my IMDb. It is a well done independent film and I appreciated the level of effort the cast and crew put into it.