• You are welcome to promote here, but members are also welcome to reply with their opinions.

CRIMPS premiered last night

For those who have been following the progress of my feature CRIMPS, it was shown to an audience for the first time last night. There were about 200 in attendance. A good time was had by all (I hope).

Now comes the quest for distribution. I need to start shipping out DVDs for online movie reviews and would appreciate any suggestions/links for the best places to send an indie supernatural thriller. Thanks!
 
Hey, thanks, guys!

It was great fun -- as well as nerve-wracking, but that's always the case. I'm excited for some of the folks on this board to see it, as we tend to speak our minds here. :)

I'm still hoping for suggestions on good places to seek reviews, if anyone has any.
 
Mick, your movie is fantastic!!! Easily one of the best indies I have ever seen. It had kind of a strange start, but sucked me in big time. Not an actioner, but rather a solid movie with an intricate plot. I'm on my way to work, so I'll try and post more tonight or tomorrow.
 
WHAT! WHERE WAS I? I WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE !

Sorry I missed it :( Is it showing again in the area soon?

Also, that means your free for your next project..can I pitch you some ideas soon?
 
WHAT! WHERE WAS I? I WOULD HAVE BEEN THERE !

Sorry I missed it :( Is it showing again in the area soon?

Also, that means your free for your next project..can I pitch you some ideas soon?

Sorry, wheat, I should have thought to invite you. As a matter of fact, it is showing again this Friday the 30th at 8pm at the Liberty Theater in Astoria. Actually, this screening should prove to be the more interesting of the two. The first was for cast/crew/investors, so the audience was more or less biased in favor of the thing. This coming Friday is open to the general public, so they are more apt to be brutally honest about their opinions since they don't have a stake in it. I'll be wearing my tomato-proof vest.

Hope to meet you there, since we somehow missed each other at CrackerFunk's screening.
 
Okay, I'm back. Shades of my own flick, THE BLACK CRYSTAL! Mick has made a movie that I totally identify with - a small town's population suspects that the local witch has something to do with murder victims, yet a new guy moves in and falls for her as the locals make angry faces and threaten to beat him up. I love the forbidden love tale and I happily ate this up.

As I said, THE CRIMPS is one of the best no budget movies I have seen. I consider the best to be the controversial (because of an incest element) movie, RED COCKROACHES. It was made for $3,000, but uses SAG actors (deferred pay) who, under the amazing direction of Miguel Coyula, pull off the bizarre subject matter convincingly.

Generally, guerrilla features (no budget on up to about $99,000) are not very good, because they lack resources. A feature is so much harder to pull off and sustain than a short movie is. No one makes a bad movie on purpose, it's just what usually happens when high aspirations collide with reality and Murphy's Law takes over. With the exception of RED COCKROACHES, guerrilla features tend to get better as their budgets go up into indie territory. A lot of that has to do with the fact that these movies have hired crew/actors, so they tend to be more professional and are better apt to deal with the many obstacles that overwhelm a lesser budget. I can only guess at THE CRIMPS budget (5 figures??), but it fares well (or better) alongside larger budget indies like Patrick Johnson's SHE'S CRUSHED, Rik Carter's DARK CRIMES, Sonnyboo's HORRORS OF WAR and Pat Kerby's SIREN.


The Review

THE CRIMPS is a paranormal drama written/directed by filmmaker Michael (Mick) Alderman. Viewers who are seeking action and a lot of special effects should look elsewhere. This is a character driven tale, sprinkled with moments of tension, yet takes its time to unfold a mystery that culminates with a horrific conclusion. Violence is minimal, but there is some strong language and female nudity.

Former Coast Guard helmsman, Eddie Hooper, arrives from sunny Florida to rainy Astoria, Oregon (also the backdrop for KINDERGARTEN COP) to search for his missing half-brother, Rob. It seems that a couple dozen men have also disappeared over the last few years. The town folk don't pay the "Missing" posters a lot of heed because most of the victims were out of town travellers.

Apparently, the last person to see Rob (and many of the other victims) alive is the alluring Veronica. Veronica has a goth-ish femme fatale air about her and many local residents suspect her of wrongdoing. As Eddie starts uncovering clues, he is confronted by Detective Webber, who tells Eddie to stay away from his #1 suspect, Veronica. The closer Eddie gets, the more Webber begins suspecting his actions.


Breaking it down

Directing: Mick is more than just a director, he is a filmmaker. It is a testament to his cumulative talents (producing, directing, writing, editing and photographing) that this movie is as good as it is. He is very calculating and patient; taking ample time to plan and execute. I've asked for this movie to be shown at the Las Vegas IndieMeet for the past couple of years, but Mick was Color Correcting or Sound Mixing and there was no rushing it. The quality is apparent.

Mick's strength as a director is that of a capable story-teller. The movie is very consistent. On the other hand, I think he could benefit from being more aggressive. For example: There is a scene of a man getting attacked by sea ghouls (you read that right!). Four monstrous hands grab the victim from behind, but they do so in such a way as to not hurt the actor or mess up the make up. In other words, those hands should have grabbed the actor with the kind of force that startles the viewer. There are some other attack scenes, which are decent, but could have been more scary and violent. I wanted to see a guy seemingly get away from the ghouls, only to be pulled through his car window or something. I mention this, because this movie is good enough to get distribution and being more aggressive could have heightened the scares and given this a couple of - "You know the cool scene where the ghouls attack that guy?!"



Acting: There are some fine performances in this that go above the norm of this budget category. Walt Plummer is solid as Eddie. Though I would have liked to see more expressions from him, he does a good job of carrying the movie.

Walt.jpg



Briana Ledford plays the prime suspect, Veronica. She looks like she could kill you, if she wanted to but she has those alluring eyes. Her voice is also effective - "Find what you're looking for?"

Briana.jpg



Bill Honl looks and sounds the part of Detective Webber. I thought he could have been a little more "in your face," wielding his authority in a more intimidating way, but he's good. He is like an indie version of Dennis Franz, see...!

Bill.jpg


c191575cb7272e5c32ec2219647fd91d.jpg



Marcella Laasch, as Sheila, pulls off what I think is the strongest performance, amongst a solid acting troupe. In fact, her part as the wannabe lover is a big part of what sets this movie apart! Kudos to Mick for writing it and to Marcella for pulling it off.

Marcie.jpg



There is also some fine support from Hollie Olson as Ida and Frank DiMarco as Carl. Many of the extras were convincing, like a bully in the bar.



Writing: Definitely a strong point! My sole criticism would be that I didn't see an arc in Eddie's character. Some writers define a character's arc (the internal journey such as a coward becoming a hero) as the story, while the rest is plot. It wouldn't be fair to write this kind of review, without some nitpicking. Obviously, I have written enough for you to realize how fond I am of this movie. That said, the writing on display here is first rate!

Not only does Mick take a story about a factual shipwreck and unravels a satisfying mystery that you can actually follow, but he populates it with really interesting characters. I already mentioned Veronica and Sheila, but the amount of detail to Eddie really makes you want to go along on his quest. There are some nice touches like how he is over-qualified to be a charter boat captain (the job he gets at the movie's onset), his love triangle, how he lives on the boat anchored to the eerie docks, a couple of really good exchanges with his boss Carl, etc. Eddie is someone you get to know and that is very rare these days.



Cinematography: 2001 Productions is Mick's video business, when he's not making movies. The guy knows how to shoot commercials, industrials, etc., so that professionalism is put to good use on THE CRIMPS! The movie starts with a couple of boom shots. For instance, the camera hovers above a spinning fan and floats down into the room as Eddie walks through the front door. Thankfully, these shots (unlike some movies) aren't over-used, otherwise they would start calling attention to themselves. There are just enough dolly, boom and moving shots to suggest a high level of quality.

There are other elements at work, a lot of them gorgeously subtle. Many shots have been fogged and Color Corrected. One of my favorite shots has Eddie looking over the pier and the water is reflecting the wavy light back onto his face. Some shots are at sunset and even though they appear dark, you can see a bay bridge and horizon. Also beautiful are shots of the bay with glimmering water in the foreground, docked boats in the middle ground and big fat moon in the sky! Mick also grabbed wild life shots, like sea gulls, and large seals, which add nicely to the atmoshere.




Music/Sound:

Holy cow! Mick got a composer (Tylor Neist), conductor (Erica Melton) and live musicians. This is pretty special. The rather large ten part ensemble is made up of flute, oboe, clarinet, bass clarinet, two violins, viola, cello, horn and trombone all recorded in an old church hall. The live performances, including some cool plucked and trilling of the strings was then mixed in with sampled harp and percussion. There is a repeating "ba bum ba bum bah" Crimps progression that reminds me a little of the score done for the movie SIGNS; it is very distinctive.

The quality of the soundwork is very nice. I would have preferred some more "oomph" when it came to Eddie hitting his head on a pipe (too soft) and breaking a window. Otherwise, the dialogue is crisp and the ambience is kept in the background as it should be.


Locations: Hey, it's Astoria, Oregon! You see the bay, docks, boats, a huge crossover bridge, a tour in a Maritime Museum, various town shots, a coffee shop, bar and creepy Shanghai tunnels. The production makes the most out of relatively few locations which we get to know, just like the characters.


Summing up:

Do you like ghosts, a femme fatale and a man caught up in a mystery? Then this movie is for you. One of the strengths of THE CRIMPS is that it keeps things fairly simple - there aren't that many characters (though plenty of extras), there aren't that many locations, so it's a movie you can get to know and follow. Had there been more characters and locations, it might have become complicated and hard to follow. I think it's just right in a BLOOD SIMPLE type of way. I am reminded a little bit of Hitchcock when watching this.

This movie has a dramatic tone and there is always going to be someone who says "You should have put more comedy in it." Maybe, but I think that is pretty shallow when people say that, because I really respect a serious tale, when done well. Mick writes and executes this with a straight face and it works like a well oiled machine.
 
Last edited:
Now comes the quest for distribution.

Mick, I don't know if you are open to making a couple of changes, but here goes... When the movie started and you see the glowing ghost girl - the first thing that went through my mind was "no budget CGI." The glow around her has a distinct border, as opposed to fog that streams off into the actual surrounding. My suggestion would be to remove the glow and have her just standing there. Honestly, I don't think there should be an effect and it would add to the reality (and mystery) of the scene - "Is that really Veronica, only with different hair?"

Imagine how effective the scene at Veronica's house would be, when you see the grandmother's picture and realize that her ghost is up and about? There is already established doubt with Veronica, making that change would add to that. I also think it might improve your chances of distribution, as the first few minutes of a movie are most impressionable.

I thought the stuttered (dual image edit) shot of the man trying to crawl, along with that glowing girl image a lot to grasp, so early. Two different effects were going on at the same time, but I think the stutter effect by itself would be fine.

I did like her glowing eyes, though! I thought the face distort should have been more subtle, where the actress actually makes a scary (but real) expression and you can slightly augment it or mess with the eyes.


scary_face.jpg



This may be a bit much, but Andrew Kramer has an interesting effect at Video Co-Pilot:

http://www.videocopilot.net/tutorials/demon_face_warp/
 
Last edited:
Wow, Mike! I don't know what to say! Thank you for taking the time to write all that!

Ha ha, yeah, I think I pointed out the similarities to Black Crystal back when I first watched it. It really is uncanny.

I agree completely about Eddie's (lack of) character arc. It was much more prominent in earlier drafts of the script, but inadvertently got lost in the rewrite process. I'm surprised my manager didn't call me on that, since he's usually pretty savvy about such things. Originally, the arc was supposed to involve a fear of the water/drowning that Eddie developed after the Coast Guard incident. It's touched on a bit in the movie, but never gets resolved. Also, he's supposed to be bitter toward women after the recent split from his wife, but that subplot got lost in trying to streamline the action, much to my regret.

It's likely I will do another edit pass on Crimps at some point, so I will definitely keep your suggestions in mind. I was never really happy with the glowing effect -- I'm a total beginner when it comes to CGI. Oddly, it never occurred to me to just leave it out altogether! (Ironically, btw, A.K.'s Demon Face Warp technique is where I learned to do the transformation effects. :) )

Several other people have given constructive criticism as well. For example, some thought the tunnel scenes went on too long. My intent was to build tension, but some felt the pace dragged a bit there.

They also felt we see too much of the creatures too soon. I agree with that in theory, but felt it was a marketing consideration, since some viewers might be frustrated by too little "flash".

I'd be curious as to your opinion of those, if you're game.

Thanks again!
 
Last edited:
Thank you for taking the time to write all that![

That's got to be the longest review I've done. The stronger I feel about a movie, the more there is to say. :yes:


I agree completely about Eddie's (lack of) character arc. It was much more prominent in earlier drafts of the script

It was probably better that you didn't force it. I have been equally guilty of that in my work.



I will definitely keep your suggestions in mind. I was never really happy with the glowing effect......Oddly, it never occurred to me to just leave it out altogether!

I really think that leaving it out will heighten the drama and make it more real! It also takes out something that people can criticize.



(Ironically, btw, A.K.'s Demon Face Warp technique is where I learned to do the transformation effects. :) )

In this case, subtle is better. I don't think the whole face should distort, but perhaps a little something with the eyes. (The pic I posted in my previous post creeps me out.)



Several other people have given constructive criticism as well. For example, some thought the tunnel scenes went on too long. My intent was to build tension, but some felt the pace dragged a bit there.

They also felt we see too much of the creatures too soon. I agree with that in theory, but felt it was a marketing consideration, since some viewers might be frustrated by too little "flash".

I'd be curious as to your opinion of those, if you're game.


There was some good tension in the tunnel, which was the creepiest location. Almost anything can benefit from tightening, but I was not bothered by it.

I don't think you should be playing to the marketing consideration with the early ghoul scenes. You see plenty of them, later. What this movie does best is unfold a mystery. You should play to its strength. Often times, "scary" is what you don't see. I don't know if you have more POV type shots in your coverage, but the attack scenes should be fairly fast. However, I want to see just enough ghoul that the viewer isn't confused about what's coming after Eddie in the tunnels.

One thing I kept thinking was that you could have used more eerie percussion noises/sounds to punch up scares. When the hands grab the guy, the sound should be really pronounced and on top of the music for a second. Reverse a buzz saw or something! :)


I was talking to my wife about your movie, so I showed her the first few minutes, even though she was trying to read a book. She agreed about the glow part. She didn't like that the guy caught his toe in a crack and have it twist his leg so bad. If you cut anything down, I think it should be some of that opening scene. It seemed to show quite a bit of him, then the ghost, back at him, the ghost.... It could be half as long and really thrust us into the movie because.........

......I told my wife that you had some distribution difficulty with past projects, but when she saw the following scene where Eddie pulls the boat into the bay and noticed how you went in and out revealing the characters and surroundings (and she thought Eddie was cute) - she said this looks like something interesting to watch. She asked how could some of the crappy looking movies get distributed and something as nice looking as THE CRIMPS not?

This movie isn't about flash. Your strength lies in the great tale and how professional it looks. Keep the focus on those things.
 
Sorry, wheat, I should have thought to invite you. As a matter of fact, it is showing again this Friday the 30th at 8pm at the Liberty Theater in Astoria. Actually, this screening should prove to be the more interesting of the two. The first was for cast/crew/investors, so the audience was more or less biased in favor of the thing. This coming Friday is open to the general public, so they are more apt to be brutally honest about their opinions since they don't have a stake in it. I'll be wearing my tomato-proof vest.

Hope to meet you there, since we somehow missed each other at CrackerFunk's screening.

I checked with my date, we will see you Friday!
 
I checked with my date, we will see you Friday!

Cool! :cool:

Thanks again, Mike. Your feedback is very much appreciated.

I am so looking forward to the day when I can sit in the same room with another film professional and get instant feedback, rather than having to bust my ass by myself, then send it out into the world before I find out what works and what doesn't.
 
You should have sent the roughcut to IndieMeet. We could have done an audience survey! I was asked by one filmmaker to physically destroy the DVD, after showing his movie. I love seeing an early cut and we've been lucky to premiere stuff like ANTI-HERO and BIO-SLIME, before they become available.

At any rate, I wish we lived in the same area. I admire what you do.
 
Back
Top