Feature-length movies at the Logan Film Festival

Within the state of Utah, there is a community of filmmakers. A lot of independent movies are created there, and it is home to one of the world's biggest film festivals: Sundance. In Northern Utah, there has been a push for its filmmaking community to be more apparent. Because of the scenic location, it is a good place for people to film, but this fact is largely unknown.

The Logan Film Festival -- which just wrapped up its third year -- has set a goal to make people in that area more excited about filmmaking. In order to do this, it seeks high-quality films from Utah and around the world.

I had the opportunity to be a judge for the student shorts category of the festival. The festival e-mailed films that ranged from 10-30 minutes, and I rated them on a scale of 1-10. In exchange for this, I was able to go to the festival for free and see what other great films there are. There were a lot of showings, and I was only able to see some of the feature-length films.

Ephraim's Rescue: 3.5 out of 5 stars

The event kicked off with a showing of Ephraim's Rescue, a film that has been available on DVD for over a year. The reason this film was shown -- according to an article in "The Utah Statesman" -- was it would appeal to a conservative audience present in Logan, Utah.

This film is based on the true story of a Mormon named Ephraim (Darin Southam), a humble, passionate man who converted to the church around the time many people of that religion were migrating to Salt Lake City, Utah. He seeks every opportunity to serve other people in any way he can. While doing good things, he performs miracles similar to what Jesus Christ did in the New Testament. Because he had received messages from God, he prepares himself for his greatest act of service yet: rescuing a group of pioneers who left too late in the season. Many of these people have been killed because of the harsh weather conditions that they have to continue enduring.

"Ephraim's Rescue" is in no way a perfect film, but considering its budget, it is well-done. It was written and directed by prolific Mormon filmmaker, T.C. Christensen, who has some good moments of dialogue. Ephraim is a relatable character in that he is not perfect even though he has done a lot of good. As someone who is a Mormon, I enjoy the message that being religious is more about helping everyone than being perfect. 

There are some criticisms I have about this film, and about a lot of Mormon films. It was definitely geared towards members of the church and not so much to other people. For someone who knows nothing about the religion, it can be heavy-handed and confusing at times. While some of the dialogue is well-written, it is also a little wooden at times, and the film depends too much on a voice-over narration. Furthermore, the pacing is a little slow at times.

A trap a lot of Mormon filmmakers get into when writing is when people talk about why they joined the church. In this film, Ephraim's brother does this and he sounds crazy. He sounds like a robot who was programmed to say certain things rather than say it from the heart. If any Mormon filmmakers read this, please take my advice and work on the dialogue of these scenes.

20,000 Days on Earth: 4.3 out of 5 stars

This film headlined the Logan Film Festival this year. It won best directing and best editing at the Sundance Film Festival, which was well-deserved. There are a lot of very interesting shots throughout this film that are meaningful to what is going on. 

Nick Cave is a singer/songwriter who does not write for a very broad audience. He writes for himself and for anyone who would be interested. This film is a semi-documentary set in the 20-thousandth day of his life. It features heavy, thought-provoking dialogue, which makes it worth watching, but it bogs the experience down a little. Like Cave's music, this film was not made to be entertaining but to expose people to deep thoughts. See my full review in "The Utah Statesman."

Jammed: 4 out of 5 stars

Evan (David Bly) and Rachel (Leah Rudick) are going to a music festival where a major band will play. It attracts the hippie culture, and they are doing a documentary about it. Everything goes wrong when the camera equipment is stolen and Rachel's wild ex-boyfriend, Mike (Chris Roberti), shows up.

This film is both hilarious and brilliant. There are a lot of gags involving the craziness of hippies while maintaining respect for the peace-loving aspect of the culture. The intelligence of the writing shows with a shift in the characters. At the beginning, Evan is somewhat of a pessimist and Rachel is more optimistic. However, in the end, these roles are reversed.

The nature of their relationship is a little unclear in the beginning, and that makes the third act confusing. There should have been a more buildup to explain this. Another aspect that should have been better is Rachel changes a little too suddenly without much reason. It seems random when it happens.

The One Who Loves You: 4 out of 5 stars

Kathryn Grant both directs and stars in this low-budget film about Gloria Bethune, a struggling singer who gets involved with a scam artist named Roy Hutchins (Briel DiCristofaro). She has no idea that the man she is dating has been lying to her the whole time, but her family and friends have a good idea. Despite all the warnings, she is still in love with him. 

Even though at surface he is a lying scoundrel, his intentions are not all bad. A lot of the film is about how Bethune hires him as her manager after being led to believe that he managed a very successful singer. Amidst al the lies, he genuinely wants to see her succeed whether it makes him rich or not, and this movie deserves praise for making its characters that complex.

I was able to talk with Grant after watching this film, and she said people have told her they cannot believe how stupid her character is. She does not see Bethune that way. She sees the character as a woman of normal intelligence who was tricked. In fact, she has been in a similar situation and was able to draw her performance from that.

The main criticism about this film is the cinematography is too bright at first. This is something you get used to it after some time. The reason for this probably has to do with the film's lack of budget, so it should not be a reason to avoid this movie.

Amber: 3 out of 5 stars

While on the run in Europe, a drug dealer finds a baby at the scene of a deadly car accident. There were two women traveling with the child who had died, and the man takes the baby so he can go places by posing as a father.

The film is well-made and interesting, but it is unbearably dark. While the main character has some charm, he only uses it to get what he wants. He is a psychopath whose only motivation is to keep himself alive and out of jail.

People who read this blog know that I enjoy darker movies/television shows. One of my favorite series is "Breaking Bad," which has some very dark moments. The difference between that and this movie is the main character in "Amber" has no redeeming qualities at first, whereas Walter White is relatable. The protagonist in this film eventually changes, but it takes a long time for this to happen, and when it does, it is unclear why.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

"The Maze Runner" Review

The Maze Runner

3 out of 5 stars
Recommendation: Wait for it to come to Redbox or Netflix

Family appropriateness rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars
Rated PG-13
-Images of monsters may be scary to young viewers
-Some disturbing, bloody images
-Mild language









It possesses a sense of mystery to keep you interested, but "The Maze Runner" is blander than it should have been.

Thomas (Dylan O'Brien) has been thrown into a society of boys living in a large field. No one knows where they came from. They only know their names and the fact that the answers to their questions are somewhere beyond the walls that surround the field. A large opening appears every morning that leads to a maze. In order to get to the outside world, the boys have to find their way through the maze, but no one has ever done so.

The boys seem content with being there and not finding their way out of the maze. The reason for this seems to be that they have already tried everything and are hopeless. Thomas is different from the rest and wants to find his way out, despite what the designated leader, Gally (Will Poulter), says. Gally thinks the established rules are of upmost importance. When Thomas starts disobeying them, the leader gets angry at him.

The movie stays interesting in that the details are mostly unknown, and very little is ever discovered until the end. However, had it been in the hands of more capable writers, it could have been so much more.  Being about a society built by boys, it could have been a modern-day take on "Lord of the Flies," contrasting the personalities of each boy and juxtaposing their community with real world society. 

Instead of that, the script gives little more than exposition. The characters are simply there to talk about the fact that there is a society and that there are rules in it. There is little character development, and little discussion as to why the society works in the first place.

Though Thomas is different, the writers do not give him or most of the other boys very much personality. The characters are all there just for the purpose of pushing the plot forward, and it is difficult to identify with any of them. There is also a female character introduced later in the film named Teresa (Kaya Scodelario), but the filmmakers do not seem to know what to do with her. She could have been cut out of the movie, and it would not have changed anything.

Will Poulter delivers the best performance as Gally, who is most defined character. He is a stubborn boy who has a by-the-book view on morality. However, a lack of depth given to the society raises a lot of questions as to his motivations. In the end, he is a two-dimensional character who comes off as annoying.

Like my page on Facebook: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

"Boyhood" Review

Boyhood

5 out of 5 stars

Family appropriateness rating: 3 out of 5 stars
Rated R
-Strong language and descriptive sexual content throughout.
-One scene features boys looking at naked images, but they are not clearly shown.
-I rated this up a little because it is only rated R because it is a realistic depiction of life that anyone can relate to.







"Boyhood" will make you reflect on life while watching an entire childhood pass by in just three hours.

The film follows a boy named Mason (Ellar Coltrane) over a period of about 12 years. When the film starts, he is five years old, and by the end of the film, he is 18 and starting college. It is one of the most ambitious films ever made it was filmed over 12 years with the same actors. The beginning was filmed around 2001 or 2002, and the end was filmed within the last year. This means Mason literally grows up before our eyes.

Every actor stays consistent over the years. Not only does it show Mason grow up, it shows the ups and downs of his mother's (Patricia Arquette) life through the eyes of him and his sister, Samantha (Lorelei Linklater).

The first hour is less about the children and more about their struggling single mother. Separated from their father (Ethan Hawke), she goes through several relationships that affect Mason and Samantha's well-being.

In the beginning, their father is an irresponsible man. He plays in a band and dreams that he will make it big. His life is not shown as explicitly as the mother's, but it is clear that reality hits him in the head as he becomes older.

The beginning focuses so heavily on the adults because Mason and Samantha do not have defined personalities when the film starts. While Samantha never gets much of a character arc, Mason has definite interests in the beginning that stay consistent in the end. He does not care very much about sports. He cares more about science and learning. As the film progresses, it shows him become interested in the arts.

By the second hour, the film is mostly about Mason. His personality becomes more defined in his teenage years. Essentially, he becomes confused about the purpose of life. He is full of teenage angst and does not trust the system.

Rather than telling the audience "one year later," it simply cuts to another scene that shows a slightly older version of Mason and Samantha. The movie brilliantly shows a passage of time in its pop culture and news references. At the beginning, Mason comes home and watches "Dragon Ball Z" on television. A few scenes later, he plays a Gameboy Advance. In one scene, there is a news report of the Iraq War, and the father talks about how he thinks George Bush is using 9/11 as an excuse for it. Not only does this give the audience a point of reference for what year these people are in, it becomes highly nostalgic. In a way, it is a modern day film adaptation of Billy Joel's "We Didn't Start the Fire."*

The acting is cheesy at times because it deals with child actors. Ellar Coltrane as Mason gets better as the film progresses, but Lorelei Linklater does not improve much. Patricia Arquette also gets noticeably better. She goes through something traumatic while Mason is in elementary school, and when she emotes, it seems forced. However, at the end of the film, when she expresses strong feeling, it is more natural.

Like my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/criticalchristopher

Follow me on Twitter: @ChrisCampbell02

*If you have never heard that song, go look it up on YouTube. It is awesome!