![Excaliburger [or, the spatula in the stone]](exhead.jpg)
vs. filmthreat.com
(or, "let's all make fun of Amy Scott"
So filmthreat.com doesn't like us too much. They didn't like "Phantom Movie" either. Hey, we can take criticism. But when a reviewer takes to making fun of us personally, and says she wants to "chop" me with a "hatchet" ... well, we draw the line at death threats really. The reviewer, Amy Scott, was just being unbelievably nasty and immature. So her "review" will not be posted in the review section of this page. Instead, I present the MST3K-style commentary it was given by the good people of rewindvideo.com, a site for amateur filmmakers that sponsored the original premiere of the film in South Dakota [which went DAMN well, all amateur filmmakers in attendance laughing their asses off]. So, without any further ado, here's my comments, the infamous review, and people I hardly know making fun of the reviewer afterward. Enjoy. And enjoy the movie. Most people think it's rather funny, you know.
|
| tygerbug [guest] from REwind Online |
| Film Threat attacks "Excaliburger" |
Posted 9-18-2001 20:16
Now if you've been paying close attention to this
forum, you know that the once-legitimate,
now-mostly-defunct-but-maintaining-a-sad-Kevin-
Smith-bashing-online-presence review rag Film
Threat didn't like my own "Dr. Fred's Episode III:
The Phantom Movie" [1999] that much.
Merle Bertrand gave it 1 and one half stars if I
recall. He called it "[a] confused and jumbled
mess."
And that's all well and good, it's almost
fashionable to mock Orange Cow's early work. But
they ain't seen nothing yet, and neither have you.
I'm sure you're already wondering: what does Film
Threat's Amy Scott think of the long-shelved but
recently-released followup to that film,
"Excaliburger, or the Spatula in the Stone" (2000) ?
Ah, the female perspective.
We got one star! YaaaY!
http://www.filmthreat.com
The full review is reproduced
below.
I can't decide if this is good publicity or not.
And I NEVER read my lines from off camera by the
way. I am the one person who always has the
script memorized. And what the fuck is Spongebob
Squarepants? Isn't that a Nickelodeon show? Is
Amy Scott a parent or something?
But yeah, maybe Excaliburger does suck.
|
EXCALIBURGER
by Amy Scott
2001, Un-rated, 90min, Orange Cow Productions (9/17/2001)
 
|   |
 Drama Nerds. They surround us. They are the guys we buy comics from, they are the girls who single-handedly support the failing peasant blouse industry. They are the men and women who’s brutal insecurities usually keep them silent. Until of course you say something about the Simpsons they can correct you on, or you bring out the video camera.
Such is "Excaliburger." A 90-minute minute budget ren-faire telling of "Excalibur." But ... with a spatula instead of a sword. Yeah, I know, that was a Spongebob Squarepants plot. Whatever. That’s not the point. The point is this actually claims to be a FILM. A film with a bunch of 19 year-old kids who make all sorts of wannabe Pythonesqe references, don’t know when to reel it in and can’t keep a straight face. Sounds great to you? Then you must be related to them.
Arthur the King (Ben Sipprell) dies after producing no heirs and Merlin (David Ashe) sticks the spatula in the stone and whoever pulls it out will end up being King. Fast food worker, Spanky (Garret Gillchrist), who sounds like the lamer of the two Darren Stevens on crack, is told to go on his quest to find the spatula. Getting in all sorts of mischief he meets a variety of wacky rouges along the way... none of whom I could tell you about since I spent the majority of the film out back, kicking the crap out of my Slam Man exercise machine trying to blow off some of that “Must chop Spanky in the head with a hatchet” steam. Hacky. Pageanty. Hammy. All that with costumes that look like Mom bought the “Big Dress Up Box” from Lillian Vernon catalog. The plot is impossible to follow and I almost shut the thing off for good several times after watching Spanky (our writer-director-leading man) read his lines from off camera. The guy WROTE the damn lines for chrissake, the least he could do for us is memorize them.
Okay, okay, ... the film wasn’t an entire waste of videtape, it had a few funny lines, a couple good actors. David Ashe who had a multitude of roles was a bright spot, as was Justin Bielawa who played Stan (Satan, get it?), despite his outdated and boringly sexist “I’m the prince of darkness and she just wants to see the bling, bling” scene with Arthur. Michelle Caruso as Arthur and Jennifer Simmons as Oona were great, considering, and I hope they at least got the Sizzler “all you can eat” for their hard work. The special effects with the dragon were pretty funny, in a very Ray Harryhousesn's blind/retarded brother way
I would have liked this film if it had been 20 minutes long. I would have loved it if it had been 10. I would have bought copies for all my friends if it was just 5 minutes of that boy felating the cucumber. Unfortunately it was 90 minutes, with only about 8 seconds of cucumber. You can force your family and friends to sit through an hour and a half inside joke... but to ask anyone else to do it is a crime.
A personal note to the boys of Orange Cow Productions. The women support your act. They deserve as much credit as the rest of you, if not more for bringing a slight breeze of quality to your vast deserted wasteland of lameness. You are lucky that you have chicks that hot hanging out with you at all. Usually, for guys like you, it takes at least a mouthful of roofies. Buy them flowers, candy, dildos, and turn the other cheek when they sleep around. Become a cunning linguist in their honor. And most of all, Thank them daily for not kicking you in the crotch.
 |
| Jon from REwind Online |
|
| Uh huh.. |
 Posted 9-18-2001 20:56 |
'Buy them flowers, candy, dildos, and turn the other cheek when they sleep around.'
Surely such intelligent remarks are the hallmark of what's left of Film Threat's credibility. That is to say, extremely little.
I find though that something like Excaliburger is probably best watched with a group as we did at Camp. The audience then plays off each other as well as the movie.. sorta like people who are into the Rocky Horror Picture Show. They get into it, like a small party surrounding the movie.
Your posting the review here isn't bad publicity for you Garrett, it's bad publicity for Film Threat. For the record, Excaliburger is EXCELLENT. You can quote me on that. I know many people who were in the room watching it in SD agree.
In her first paragraph, Amy demonstrates her notable knowledge of high-school social labels. It leaves me to wonder where exactly she fit in. (Choose one of the following stereotypes: back door smoker, closet drama wanna-be who convinced herself she was too cool for it, or perhaps a would-be jock who isn't exactly the physical type anymore.) Really Amy.. you labelled the filmmaker before you even labeled the film.
Film Threat in general has fallen into the ugly habit of pre-labelling movies and gearing their review towards that label. I've done it before myself, but later realized and learned from it. I hope they get it together and start properly critiquing films rather than judging them, but I'm not holding my breath. Thus the reason that I don't bother sending them anything.. I already know what their reviews would look like, good or bad.
Jon |
|
| bravado from REwind Online |
| Damn... |
Posted 9-18-2001 21:50
It takes a special quality to inspire that much hatred in a person without ever having met or talked to them. You should be proud, Garrett.
Wow. That was probably the most mean-spirited review I've ever read. It totally falls apart into personal attack by the end. Is there something you're not telling us here? Do you two know each other? Did you have a one-night stand and never call her back? Should have bought her the dildo, man... should have bought her the dildo...
Excaliburger was quite the good flick, and the roomful of people enjoying it together in SD speaks more for it than any review could. And, yeah, I guess some people will like it, and some people won't. Screened it for the Bravado crew recently, some enjoyed, some didn't - got some interesting comments, anyway.
So... no such thing as bad press. And no, Excaliburger doesn't suck. And that's something you can put on the poster and be proud of - "It doesn't suck".
Until later
-Alan |
|
| ambarii from REwind Online |
|
| nice work! |
Posted 9-18-2001 23:14 |
Hey...thats actually a pretty good review! There is lots of stuff you can pull out and use as a quote...I like the "Darren Stevens on crack" line myself. They LOVED your movie compared to "Wickerman: Year 0" We got a half star and two (2!) brutal reviews. |
|
| Jay BlancScreen [guest] from REwind Online |
| God Bless Film Threat! |
Posted 9-19-2001 00:50
"The special effects with the dragon were pretty funny, in a very Ray Harryhousesn's blind/retarded brother way."
Hahahahahaha...I would LOVE to get a blurb that brilliantly stupid! Mayhaps I shall send them Uterus one of these days just for the hell of it and see how badly they bash it (BTW, to the people I owe copies of Uterus to, I haven't forgotten about you! I swear!)
Coincidentally, I'm writing up an Excaliburger review and will send it to Jon as soon as I get the chance to sit down for more than two seconds to work on it. I've been busy as hell lately (the reason the people I owe copies of Uterus to have yet to obtain it). I'll probably send it to Jon on Friday.
Congrats on the excellent review, Garrett. You should be proud. I would be!
Jay |
|
| J.Brugmann from REwind Online |
|
| HUH!? |
Posted 9-19-2001 01:06 |
WTF what THAT?! And who the heck is Amy Scott? Does she actually have an EDITOR!? Somebody who'd read the thing and go, "Uhhh...Amy? That last paragraph...that's got to go..."
She's like, actually upset that you have attractive women in your movie(s). That just baffles me. "Become a cunning linguist in their honor." WTF?!
That was such a BIZARRE review. She even attacks the freaking COSTUMES...*sigh*...
..stupid Film Threat...
===
JoHn |
|
| C.L Carter [guest] from REwind Online |
| I agree... |
Posted 9-19-2001 01:40
I find her dire comments both desperate and overly obvious. She is very pretentious and I stand to say that her review was an insult to her credibility.
As with Wickerman: Year0, this isn't the first time I've heard less than adequate words come from her fingers. |
|
| warrenEBB from REwind Online |
 |
| weird. |
Posted 9-19-2001 11:30 |
well, sent them a complaint.
but they're probably too hip to care about complaints.
(least that's the impression i got when i read what the site was about).
can't believe she said (basically) "this was made by the kind of people we used to pick on high school. can i please have an excuse to continue to pick on them!"
what a noble stance!
jesus.
weird.
seems like the review isn't intended for people that made the movie or watched the movie. although it expects them to read it. rather the review seems to strive to shit on the movie for the casual reader. to let people know "you ain't gonna see this movie, so the least you could do is just hate the living hell out of it and the people who had fun creating it!" ... guess it elicited a response...
plus the children's cartoon reference seems like an attempt to show unquestionable hipness. wtf?(hell, WE ALL KNOW THAT SPONGEBOB SHIT! cuz we watch it all the time!) (with our children...?)
(no really, as a side note, the only reason i know what spongebob is because is because a friend's kid loves the show). (i'm not proud...)
(btw, are potty mouths tolerated in this forum?)
and "meets a variety of wacky rouges" ...
Sequel idea!
damned dirty rouges...
(is that petty? to point out a typo? sorry. just getting riled up)
and she called you a date rapist dude!
Damn!
(with the roofies jab). your movie was so bad that ... YOU'RE PROBABLY A DATE RAPIST! :} i love it!
but to her credit, she didn't shut the thing off before the end.
maybe in the end this teaches us that:
a) we have seen a new style of movie making, and few will appreciate it...
b) we have witnessed a new style of movie reviewing, ... and few will appreciate it.
either way. sleepy time. |
|
| zenmaster from REwind Online |
| ah, film threat... |
Posted 9-19-2001 16:00
here's the deal... for a lot of "movie reviewing" it isn't actually about talking about how good or bad the movie is... its about how clever and creative you are in thrashing it. That's always how film threat kinda struck me... more about how cool and witty the reviewer is then anything else... but whatever...
I think you're stuff great, garrett... i mean sure, its rough around the edges, but its waaaaaaay funnier than something like American Pie 2 or Hardball.... |
|
| Jon from REwind Online |
|
| Wha? |
Posted 9-20-2001 02:39 |
Hardball was supposed to be a comedy?! Oh.
Jon
PS - Actually I haven't seen it, but the EPK was wonderfully generic. |
|
| GMP Mike [guest] from REwind Online |
| 100% fun |
Posted 9-20-2001 02:59
I must agree with Zenster on this 100%. That "review" was just some bitch trying to sound clever cause it's hip to trash movies in that "witty" style of writing. She didn't really review the film, but really just shined her own nuts with a telephone. The "C" word shall never more appropriatly be used upon her. |
|
| zenmaster from REwind Online |
|
| sexism rawks! |
Posted 9-20-2001 03:23 |
Y'know... I was thinking... I pretty much support everything here at Deviant Films... and so, I've now decided that all the girls in my movies should buy me pizza, slurpees, and porn... and should give me head... lots and lots of head... and be greatful that I don't slap their freeloading asses back into the kitchen...
hmmm... =\
film threat is righteous |
|
| J.Brugmann from REwind Online |
| Correction. |
Posted 9-20-2001 09:14
I believe Warren's post should read:
Your movie was so good, you're probably a date rapist.
Or, in a perfect world, maybe that would be so...
===
JoHn |
|
Back to Excaliburger