Category: REVIEWS

By Naseem Ally. ‘Word Slingers: The Story of Self-Publishing’ is a documentary film that follows the journey of two self-published authors, looking to get their work in the hands of readers, in what is a competitive pursuit full of woes and triumphs.

With commentary from a number of authors, publishers and those closest to the ambitious individuals, they give their frank opinions on whether or not they could possibly achieve some kind of success, and their hopes for the future. ‘Word Slingers’ focuses on two main protagonists, Adam Shepard and Giles A. Anderson.

At the beginning of the film, Adam is at a flea market in North Carolina, selling copies of his book ‘One Year Lived’ with the help of his wife. ‘One Year Lived’ tells his story of taking a one year trip around the world, in seventeen countries on four continents, with essays on the lessons learnt during the expedition.

Adam’s very confident demeanour helps him to sell two copies for $20, a lot more than he originally anticipated. His drive is evident, and we see him continue with this attitude over the duration of the film, as he’s seen handing out free copies of his book at college campuses, as well as giving talks and signing copies at his former college.

Later on, he’s stuck with the dilemma of having too many books to shift and has them in a storage unit, where we see him disputing with his wife about what he’s going to do with all these remaining books, which according to her, could be a loss. Adam’s very defiant and adamant that he’ll make it work no matter what – even if he continues handing out free copies.

In the middle of the film, he goes into a mini-rant after looking at the sales of his books and noticing that only twelve copies sold for $63.24. He’s visibly frustrated by this; considering the fact, he had paid editors quite handsomely to edit his book, while some author ‘probably had their mom do the editing’. Adam’s very Kanye-esque in terms of his confidence.

As a viewer, you’d have to respect Adam’s ‘hustle’ and drive to see things through even though the cards do not seem to be in his favour at certain points. Most people in this situation would call it quits and resort to their ‘Plan B’, but he possesses traits such as tenacity in particular, that we see so often in those who are successful in their given fields.

Giles A. Anderson has a similar drive to get his name out there in the world of self-publishing, however, he doesn’t quite have the same level of confidence and cockiness as Adam. Giles is somewhat unsure of himself and does not hold the same conviction as Adam. Giles is a social outcast who has an obsessive knack for horror stories and had some questionable items around his home, that he was more than happy to show to the camera crew. Even his wife had some raised eyebrows.

To say Giles book is ‘dark’, is an understatement. He generated some shock value among readers, but to his own credit, he found a niche that works and according to him, he wants to build a ‘cult’.

Similarly to Adam, Giles printed many copies of his book that weren’t moving any units and in order to get the word out there, he held readings at local book stores to build up his ‘cult’ of readers, who could perhaps increase the notoriety of the book via word and mouth.

He’s trying to juggle all this whilst raising two young children, one of whom, his son, in particular, wants to follow in his father’s footsteps of selling robots and books. Bless him. Like Adam, Giles dreams of being a full-time self-published author but it’s clear to see the occasional self-doubt creep in when he mentions that it just happened to be his 33rd birthday, and he wishes it was his 23rd instead.

Perhaps a sign he’s considering how much left he has in the tank?

If I had to look at the two and say who’d be the most likely to really pull this off, it would have to be Adam. Even though he may not be selling as many copies, as he’d hoped for, his drive and determination to at least spread his message of inspiring the next generation of college students, to take risks and get out their comfort zone is awe-inspiring in itself.

He does mention about branching off into public speaking, as an alternative to self-publishing, so he clearly has options. Good on him. The film was shot in a variety of locations and pretty much captured middle America. With great shots of colleges, local businesses and financial districts, it made ‘Word Slingers’ feel very authentic which I appreciated.

‘Word Slingers’ didn’t feel too scripted either which is the case with many documentary films, and this shied away from that which is a plus.

There’s some solid camerawork featured, for instance, in one of the earlier scenes of Adam selling his book at the flea market, with the great North Carolina sunshine acting as the backdrop. The leafy suburbs and college campuses gave this film a laidback vibe which fitted the pacing of the film really well.

Cut in between all this, were interviews with authors and publishers in their offices and in open spaces, that added some nice touches to the overall aesthetic of the film. The sounds used in ‘Word Slingers’ matched with the overall mood of the film. The subtle riffs of the piano in the background complemented the scenes of the authors making frantic trips in their cars to the next location to sell or promote their books.

A good majority of the scenes had sounds tailor-made for them and they didn’t feel out of place, which further drew me into each scenario. There was nothing too grandiose to comment on in terms of the score in this film, but there was nothing terrible either. It worked sufficiently well, especially considering the premise of the film.

I felt the running time for ‘Word Slingers’ was longer than necessary and it could have been a lot more concise. Some of the scenes in here felt manufactured and could have been made shorter. Looking back, these scenes were slightly amusing. Particularly the scene of Adam and his wife arguing in the storage unit about the number of books they’ve still yet to move. It was funny to a degree, but it felt like they were trying to fabricate something like they were on the reality TV channel E!

I didn’t particularly enjoy how they closed the film. It felt like it was left on a cliffhanger and there was no real ending to it. This film constantly felt like a back and forth between each of the authors ‘day in a life’, with commentary sprinkled in between from pundits, but ultimately, it had no final destination.

I would have liked to see both authors perhaps, meet in a diner and talk about their endeavours and explain to each other their journey and what they hope to achieve in the next, say, 3-5 years.

It just felt a bit, well – that’s it?

‘Word Slingers’ ended in underwhelming fashion. Especially considering they had gone through all that effort to follow these guys around, only to end up with no real conclusion of what they want to get out of this. I felt it could have had a stronger ending.

Overall, this was an insightful look at a topic that perhaps most audiences wouldn’t give too much thought towards, and to a degree, it educates the audience on what goes into getting a book self-published, whilst also appreciating the work ethic and determination you need to have to enter this domain or any, for that matter. Especially, when the odds seem stacked against you.

Like the famous saying goes, ‘Keep Calm and Carry On’.

In my last Trailer Talk article, I stated that the film industry needs to take more risks and release wackier films, instead of conforming to the norm of sequels and remakes. The day after the article was uploaded, I found out about the new short film by David Lynch called ‘What Did Jack Do?’

‘What Did Jack Do?’ is a 17-minute short film that was released on Netflix on 20^th January 2020. It was written, directed, edited by and starring David Lynch (‘Eraserhead’ and TV show ‘Twin Peaks’).

The film revolves around a detective interviewing an attempted murder suspect…which is a talking monkey. 

As you’d expect from David Lynch, this is a strange film. While I’m still not sure I enjoyed it, I’m glad I watched it. The film’s black and white visualization and its framing makes this piece of work seem almost film noir-ish. The dialogue and tone of the film embraces this genre too, and the film portrays itself seriously, to the point where you forget that one of the characters is a monkey. The story would work just as well if Jack was a human character.

This is a unique approach to a scenario audience have become familiar with (the interrogation). However, the editing should’ve been tighter and more concise in the first half; most of the shots were painfully, and unnecessarily, long.

As well as this, the script needed a rewrite as some dialogue went nowhere and were just meaningless phrases and puns that served no purpose to the overall plot. It also has a musical number, sung by Jack, which just occurs out of nowhere and, again, served no purpose.

While I’m not sure I enjoyed it, I’m glad I experienced ‘What Did Jack Do?’. I appreciate the amount of work and effort that was put into it, especially since David Lynch did most of it including writing, directing, editing, acting, set design and set construction.

It’s an oddly welcoming return for David Lynch and, in its short runtime, it gives audiences a unique spin on the Interrogation scene that has become so well known in the film industry. 

Go Down Death is the arthouse feature debut of up and coming writer/director Aaron Schimberg. Based on the folklore of Jonathan Mallory Sinus (a presumably fictitious writer) Schimberg’s film depicts a town which seems to be somewhere between the living and what’s beyond.

His tale takes the audience on a ride as the story flits between each set of characters in a somewhat unconventional way as the characters are all established. However, before the story really digs in Schimberg keeps his audience on their toes as his filming style is anything but ordinary.

The audience meet a little boy and a doctor who talks about human nature in a way that an adult would never do with a small child, but with the child responding thoughtfully and in an informed way. There’s also a prostitute who converses with a client while they both sit comfortably naked on a bed.

Then there’s a man who has had both of his legs amputated from the knees down who talks about what it means for the rest of his body to lose his legs – but not in the way the audience might think. In fact, there are many things the audience may not be expecting and even when the audience finally thinks they have it all worked out, the final act throws everything out the window.

Schimberg’s final trick is to force the audience to yet again think about the strange and unexpected direction that the film has taken and what it all means. However, like the rest of the unconventional, chaotic and experimental nature of the film, don’t go expecting to be given any answers as to what’s going on.

For those who enjoy a film where every little detail is not laid out in front of you and a lot is open to interpretation then Go Down Death may be the film for you. Those who enjoy something a little more mainstream will obviously avoid this film, but for those who love to explore, dissect and discuss the nuances of film making with others then Go Down Death might be just the thing that you can get your teeth into.

It may just be a little infuriating that after some time even the most avid film fans may not find that there are any answers at all.

By Fergus Henderson. In Meryam Joobeur’s Oscar nominated short Brotherhood, the heavy and ingrained dynamics of family exact a tragic toll. Set over the course of several fraught days at a Tunisian family’s farm -where the slow, silent rhythms of their agricultural lifestyle have swallowed up their unspoken emotions – the uneasy status quo is about to be ruptured by the return of long-missing eldest son Malek. Malek (Malek Mechergui) is returning from Syria after abandoning his family to fight for Isis, and he brings with him a young girl named Reem (Jasmin Yazid), apparently pregnant with his child.

This, as we find out, is not the whole story. Communication unfortunately does not come easily to this family, and a tragic revelation later on will throw everything before into question. Brotherhood gracefully avoids the potential pitfalls of its challenging premise by instead delving into the sadness and strife caused when family needs to communicate but can’t.

Joobeur cannily realises that whilst confrontations often spell out how a family dynamic has deteriorated (and there are confrontations), the most honest way to get at the emotional truth is to observe it.

What Joobeur finds (in earthy, visceral camera work and a disarming Academy ratio) is a family held in place by two powerful parents, the stern Salha (Salha Nasraoui) and unyielding Mohamed (Mohamed Grayaâ). Both actors imbue their characters with a powerful sense of emotion withheld for what they imagine is their children’s own good. Grayaâ in particular sets a scowl over his face that seems to hold a universe of discontent.

In the opening scene Mohamed stoically instructs his hesitant middle son (Chaker Mechergui) to kill an injured sheep. This, we see, is simply how things are. Do as I say, kill the sheep, hide your feelings. Joobeur uncovers the repressed sensitivity of the young actors so naturally that when they do finally speak their thoughts it feels revelatory. Such expressions spring from the bond, as the title suggests, of brotherhood, the boys’ shared experience of life under their parents.

On all counts Meryam Joobeur succeeds. Brotherhood marks another step forward for an incredibly promising filmmaker already accomplished in her craft, sensitive to the story and to the characters, attune to environment and nature, making bold choices with authority.  Her talented cast deserve huge praise for their fully realised turns.

The only issue in Joobeur’s understated approach to characterisation is that you may want more of the characters before the climactic ending. It looks like Joobeur anticipated a bigger story too: she’s developing the plot into a feature film called Motherhood. If this short is anything to go by, Motherhood will be monumental.

Nefta Football Club. By Fergus Henderson.

Along the border between Tunisia and Algeria, two young brothers encounter a donkey. The donkey is wearing headphones, and it carries a dangerous cargo. Elsewhere along this border two men nervously wait for this same donkey, and what it carries.

The decision that older brother Mohamed then makes as he takes the donkey’s cargo marks the turning point from childhood to adulthood. In many ways the fallout from his decision explores the redemptive innocence that a dangerous adult world can snatch away.

Nefta Football Club is director Yves Piat’s first short in over a decade. Whatever the reasons for this long hiatus, Piat has re-emerged with the weight of wisdom, and the wisdom in this case is to handle this potentially heavy story with levity and sweetness. Like the best coming of age stories, the consequences of Mohamed absconding with the donkey’s goods carry a heavy threat – Piat’s touch, however, is mercifully light. Whilst the narrative tension of the story is filled with threat, the story is more interested in the innocence in our hearts.

Then there is the humour, which is woven effortlessly into the story. The banter between the brothers Mohamed and Abdallah rings with fraternal affection. Eltayef Dhaoui, as Mohamed, perfectly captures the false bravado of a young boy stepping into the adult role he believes he can handle. He tries to protect young Abdallah (Mohamed Ali Ayari) from the gravity of the new world he has entered into, recognising the innocence he must protect even whilst appearing to sacrifice his own. Incredibly, having just written that, it is important to note again that Nefta Football Club is a comedy.

The donkey, as it turns out, was supposed to be listening to a totally different artist, which would lead the donkey home –unfortunately the man in charge of the donkey’s aux misheard the other (a punchline of wordplay too funny to spoil). Even these men (played by Lyes Salem and Hichem Mesbah) are defined not by their nefarious deeds but by the humour and pathos of their bumbling miscommunication.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP30vp2mCeg

In the end, this lovely short seems to say that whilst innocence is fragile, especially in difficult and desperate situations, it is alive in everyone. Obviously as this is a comedy, this innocence is located in the miscommunications of its characters, but it is poignant nonetheless to emphasise that our foibles can represent our best and sweetest qualities.

Piat and his wonderfully talented cast should be commended not just for making a genuine comedy out of tricky subject matter, but for making it so beautifully humanist. He is in the process of developing his debut feature film, certainly one to watch out for.