The Medium

Director:
Ben Wydeven
Studio/Production Company:
Makeshift Pictures
Genre:
Mystery
Sub-Genre:
Supernatural Thriller
Length:
Short

Website:
http://themediummovie.weebly.com

Score:
1/5

It is a tall order to approach the mystery/thriller sub-genre within the confines of the short subject film. A mystery by definition requires a slow buildup and accumulation of information that is difficult to execute in a truncated time frame. Having to do so while following the relatively strict precepts of a supernatural thriller is a treacherous cavern that neophyte director Ben Wydeven attempts to traverse in The Medium, but the task is resoundingly beyond his grasp in a film that cannot even ascend to the level of mere cliché.

As the film opens, we happen across Raven James (Jarrod Crooks) who himself just happens across the spirit of a dead woman residing in an abandoned movie theatre. Under the guise of a rag and bone man he gains entry into said theatre in order to investigate. There he meets it’s new proprietor, Tom Geidman (Jeffrey Glenn), a beast of a man with all of the personality of a closet psychopath. In short order Raven reveals himself as a medium, one who can commune with the spirit world. The two engage in a battle of dim-wits as they uncover the mystery of the apparition, to deadly consequences.

Things immediately start off on a bad foot with the opening credit sequence, which inexplicably run for nearly 10% of the film's entire running time. I know that may seem like a minor gripe but it sticks out like a sore thumb right from the outset. This lack of discipline in the editing is carried throughout the film as jump cuts are employed to an obscene degree. A veritable barrage of visions/flashbacks are played ad nauseum to induce a sense of suspense but actually serve to mask the poor writing. It’s also inconsistent because of the constantly shifting perspectives. We are lead to believe, and understand, that Raven sees his visions in these bursts but the effect is muddled by constant close-ups of Tom as if he is having the visions as well. Though the story is so uninspired that no manner of visual panache could have saved this material which was flawed from the script level.

Subsequently the performances suffer the least. Jeffrey Glenn as the hulking Tom is easily the strongest element going here. He doesn't overcome the poor writing but he delivers exactly what is needed from the character. Jarrod Crooks as Raven, on the other hand, struggles throughout. Having a weak lead is the kiss of death for any film, especially for a film that boasts a cast of...two. As presented, he comes off as a strange young man not at all exuding the experience and/or confidence that is implied. The character would have worked better had an older actor been cast. The suspension of disbelief is lost due mostly to Crooks' inability to inhabit the persona that the character requires. Add to that the fact that he seems to have an abject inability to facially emote and habitually mumbles his lines making them at times inaudible - a blessing in disguise considering the writing.

I would be remiss not to mention the poor production values that plague every aspect of the film. While the authentically dilapidated theatre provides the perfect venue for the film, very little of it is effectively highlighted by Wydeven. The compositions are uninspired and lack even a utilitarian's eye. Instead of embracing the realities of digital photography in low-light situations he seems to be at odds with it. No-budget films are expected to lack the bells and whistles in the production department, so much of the film's technical limitations are understandable and to a degree excusable. However, when you're consistently pointing the boom mic at the louder of the two performers in 2-shots one has to wonder whether more resources would have made a difference. As it stands the film barely works on any level, least of all as a form of entertainment.
 
Last edited:
Auteur response

Wow... that was brutal. Is that your first ever review? :weird:

First things first: this is not an angry retaliation email. I'm an educated journalist- I've reviewed movies before and I know that being honest and neutral is important. And as a filmmaker, I was eagerly awaiting the worst possible review I could get - because it makes every other positive comment (or negative comment) look that much better. :cool:

You're the fourth person to review the film. Everyone else, at the very least, enjoyed the film, and of all the hundreds of people who have watched the film at the festivals or bought it on DVD over the last three years, no one has ever straight out said it does not work as a form of entertainment. One critic even suggested other indie horror filmmakers should take notes. :lol:

Anyways, thank you for the review, although reading it can be comparable to getting gang rapped by a group of black guys in a dark alley in Harlem, I do appreciate you taking the time to write the review. :rolleyes:

While I disagreed with a lot of what you said, I do agree on a few things (yes the opening was too long, but it built up to something- remember the transition from past to present? Per your comment, I have since cut the opening from two minutes to one.)

Hope things go well writing future reviews at Indie Talk.

The Medium can still be found online, now at our new site.

--BHW
 
Welcome to the site. That review is about 3 years old. I'm glad you've gotten better reviews.

:welcome:
 
Back
Top