Film Festivals, behind the scenes. (Interview with George Aaron Climer)

George Aaron Climer

Hey, guys! Do you know what I haven't done in a while? An interview! With two of my films being showcased this year at the My Bloody Violent-Tine Film Festival in Denver, I thought it'd be interesting to flip the tables and interview George Aaron Climer, the man behind this gruesome and fun event.

What got you interested in filmmaking?

Actually it was more of a realization then anything... I had realized the thing I wanted to do was inspire people the way that I had been inspired and the medium happened to be film and j happened to be good at it. Otherwise I would've probably ended up in a science degree. Paleontology to be precise.

What are some of the roadblocks you faced on the festival circuit?

Well the first is always finding the films and knowing what's good enough for an audience or not.... And having to let filmmakers down by not hitting them back up... Beyond that same answer you always hear is "money!!!"

Why did you start your own festival?

Professionally wise I usually say - for my love of film and Colorado talent... I wanted to create a space for the often overlooked horror films of our day coming from Denver... Along with recognizing large assets and showing Denver film maker we have a family and a place. Personally, I know everyone in the industry in town for the most part or at least can pick out who n what I like and want to work with these last five years have been a networking arena for me.

So, "networking." Does it pay off in your opinion?

Becouse of it I've met some of the most awesome people, including the organizers most of Mile High Horror Film Festival. Hell they were asking me for help back in the day! I got to meet not only people in our industry but becouse it's an event you meet people in real marketing situations and can learn more about what is what.

What are some things you discovered about film festivals as an organizer?

Well my film festivals a bit different then most and with that I'd be more of an event coordinator or director.... But what I truly discovered about film festivals is how it truly impacts the amount of work you do and see on screen of your own making....truly impacting the filmmakers network and I guess presence in the community.... With that it infects/impacts yours you pick up there friends relationship etc and begin to create your own.

What makes your selection process different from others?

Well it's extremely open compared to some fests .... We look at not only the scary forms or horror but the funny and just plain weird.... Along with this we pride our selves in finding feature or guest films from past and new found film makers that aren't horror and guest spot them in the fest to create more momentum for their films our fest and as a plus it gives an option to non horror goers and filmmakers that just don't select the genre ... The selection judges are me or my business partner and usually at least one or two outsiders.

What are some challenges you've phased this year as opposed to the previous ones?

Immmm... Jesus... Well this year I've faced a llot I'm leaving town, so I've had to get someone to take over. I've had to move the festival to a new location because we out grew our location this year.

So where are you moving to? Are you planning to start a film festival there as well?

San Diego for six months for now who knows what happens from there I'll miss things and well idk sad I didn't get to really start others. I may or may not start a festival there, depends on how certain things pan out.

So, why the name "My Bloody Violent-Tine?" And why did you choose the horror genre?

The name kinda just happened between me and a fellow event maker that worked on the very first festival. Why horror? Well I'm kinda known for being obsessed with the horror genre, so why not?

What are you looking forward to the most in this year's festival?

The after-party, of course!

Any advice you'd give to other people who want to organize their own festival?

If you're in it for money, then you're doing it wrong.

Thank you so much for your time and candor, George. And "last words?"

It takes a lot of hard work dedication and politics to become a success, but it's the experience that is well worth it and career enlightening.

My Bloody Violent-Tine Film Festival

will run at the Bug Theatre on Sunday

February 14th, 2016.

Bug Theatre is located at: 3654 Navajo St, Denver, CO 80211

Tickets are $5 at the door, $7 for couples.

Can pissing off the original fanbase of an existing property lead to a massive box office bomb?

Truly outrageous... Box office results.

Pan got... Well, panned.

In these past couple of months, Hollywood tried rebooting two very different franchises, albeit those with a devoted fan following. Both films ended up a disaster at the box office and killed any possible chance of a sequel or merchandise cash in. What the hell happened? Well, let's take a look at each film. The first is a "modern re-imagining," Jem and the Holograms, a popular science-fiction cartoon from the 80a and the other is the simply titled Pan, a first in a proposed series of prequels detailing the origin of Peter Pan and his feud with Captain Hook. The fanbase violently rejected both films and the rest of the potential audiences didn't see any interest in a rehash of an old fairy or a another vapid teen drama with no real star power dealing about the ups and downs of a girl band.

"Synergy," a powerful supercomputer capable of creating entire
virtual worlds was almost entirely dropped from the Jem movie
and turned into something drastically different.

So what happened? Simple. Both films managed to alienate their built-in fanbase before they even opened with trailers blatantly showing that the filmmakers completely thrown out the original materials and went into their own direction. Jem, at least the original version, was indeed about a girl band, but it also dealt with high staked globe trotting adventures, sci-fi whimsy, espionage, and everything else that made 80s cartoons so entertaining. The film version has none of that. Gone is the holographic supercomputer, along with Jem's secret identity, the orphanage she looks after, and her band's arch rivals The Misfits, known as one of few Saturday Morning Cartoon villains that actually flat out tried to murder the main characters, often on a weekly basis. Instead we are treated to a bland teen drama of four friends making it big on YouTube. Other aspects of the show are also scrambled, such as the main antagonist's gender and the remaining characters' roles and relationships. Let's just say most fans were not pleased and lost all incentive to head to the theaters on opening weekend, and the film ended up grossing only 2/5 of it's whopping $5 million dollar budget. Another, more personal issue that I have with Jem is that it seems that the Hollywood powers that be don't take "girl centric" properties seriously. Movies like Transformers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and various superior films get lavish big budgets showered on them, but a movie like Jem has no opportunity to show up its original epic scale because of its paltry budget. That turns the whole affair into a self-fulfilling prophecy, that girl-centric big screen franchises always "suck." And that is the sad, depressing, gruesome tale of Jem. But at least it gave us this "jem" of a parody on YouTube:

Now on to Pan. Where to begin? Unlike Jem, it had a huge budget, star power, and dazzlingly amazing visuals in its trailer, yet it tanked even worse, possibly taking down the careers of the art-house darling director Joe Wright and star Hugh Jackman. So many things went wrong here, the least of which was Joe Wright channeling his aforementioned "art-house" roots and adding songs by Nirvana and the Ramones into what is supposed to be a whimsical children's film. Hugh Jackman's overly "glamorous" and "flamboyant" portrayal of Blackbeard, a real life persona that has literally no Peter Pan myth, also seemed off putting. Another alienating factor was casting white actors as the Native American tribe that lives in Neverland. Overall, the film just didn't feel like it was part of the Peter Pan universe, something that has been loved and adored by children of all ages for decades. Joe Wright's brightly colored "Rococo" style production design went over the intended audience's heads. As critics pointed out, this strange heady brew of deviation turned the film into a "something for nobody," it turned into a white elephant that no one really cared to see. And thus, a colossal bomb was created and only time will tell if it destroyed any of the people involved with the film and if Hollywood will go back to Neverland.

And now comes my opinion as to where both films coincide in terms of flopping. They are both origin stories. Dull, generic, by-the-numbers cliched origin stories. Ever since Batman Begins, studios have been tripping over themselves to create gritty and serious films about famous pop culture characters' humble beginnings. So far we had to endured various "explanatory" prequels for King Arthur, Robin Hood, Spider-Man (TWICE!), Wolverine, and Maleficent. I'm sure there are more that I'm forgetting. Oh, right, there's also that the first season of Netflix series Daredevil, which is almost a textbook example of an "origin prequel." We, the built-in fanbase and the audience already familiar with the subject, have to endure an entire film until the very end when the character we came to see actually becomes the character we came to see. Jem literally teased it with us by showing a fake trailer during the credits of everything we wanted to see (Synergy Supercomputer, epic adventures, the Misfits) for a proposed sequel, which of course now will never get made. Pan makes this even worse by setting up the ending to lead into yet another prequel film that doesn't even begin to scratch the eventual characterizations of Peter Pan and Captain Hook.

If there is one positive thing to co

me of these two flops is the end of the insipid "origin prequel."

~Evgueni.

Seeking an expert for the end of the world... And a business plan appraisal.

I'd like to digress from my usual entertainment industry rants and discuss something dryer, yet more important. So please entertain me for this one blog post.

As some of you might have read on my Tumblr page, I am in the process of finishing my master's degree with Full Sail University and am currently focusing on completing a business plan for my production company, Thanatos Films. I decided to look over several industry experts and see what their views on the value of a business plan are.

Kevin Gieger

First, I'd like to begin with Kevin Gieger. Kevin is an industry veteran that is responsible for many visual effects in Hollywood films, as well computer animation with a lot of Disney films. Although his IMDb profile is rather slim, he is still actively working behind the scenes. Kevin now runs his own digital animation production company called "Magic Dumpling" and lectures aspiring entrepreneurs who would like to begin their own businesses and encourages them to proceed according to their development activity plan and to deviate from it. My favorite point that Kevin made is that during a pitch, one must always have a good business plan to go hand in hand with a creative plan, which is crucial when pitching a film or a television show to a potential investor.

Chuck Blakeman

The second expert I'd like to look over is Chuck Blakeman, mostly because he is so radically different from all the other experts I read about. I could find a whole lot about his past, but from what I did find, I saw that Chuck Blakeman is successful entrepreneur and business mentor. His view on business plans is very unique in that he believes that a business plan is a waste of time since it's something we use to plan for the future, yet we cannot predict the future. Chuck feels that a business plan is something that needs to be implemented in broad strokes and perfected as it goes.

What I gathered from these two radically different industry experts is that there is really no wrong advice to when starting a business plan, as long as you know what you are doing. I do agree I must have a financial vision for my idea, just like Kevin Gieger suggested, but I must not also let my business plan bog me down and not allow me to find other creative ways to succeed with my endeavor, just like Chuck Blakeman suggests.

~Evgueni Mlodik.

Yes, Hollywood is a sexist place and industry. Have we just now noticed?

From http://media.santabanta.com/joke/visuals/9575.jpg

In recent weeks, such noted female actors as Carey Mulligan, Rose McGowan, Rachel Weisz, and the ilk have condemned the blatant and often disgusting institutionalized system of sexism that has plagued the film and television industry in Hollywood since its inception almost one hundred years ago. Yes, they are correct and yes, that is a huge problem, but… Why are we only now noticing this trend?

Hollywood has always been a hellhole of chauvinism, sexism, and debauchery. It’s what it’s known for, so why the shock and righteous indignation now? Has our culture finally “woken up?” Hardly. I think this is just another trendy topic to feel offended about, like grade school bullying and transgender struggles, to name a few. And that I think is a major problem. If a topic simply becomes trendy and fashionable to address, it then becomes marginalized. Yes, it’shorrible that Adam Sandler’s leading ladies haven’t gotten younger since themid-90s or the prevailing system of casting couch exploits and abuses aspiringactresses in the field, but what can we do about it besides just making angry blog posts, letting established actresses vent about the issues via social media, and “starting a conversation?”

I know I’m being a hypocrite since I’m doing the same thing; complaining about an issue online. However, I hope this blog starts a whole other “conversation” about the subject of sexism in Hollywood. How to stop it? What can we do to address the situation without glossing it over and letting it become marginalized. I fear that eventually the Carey Mulligan and Rose McGowan stories will blow over and people will forget about this huge issue, however they shouldn’t. First thing that needs to be done is to break down the system. Studios need to realize that times are changing and certain old school thinkers need to be let go. If more modern thinking female executives would join the Hollywood force, I feel the exploitation of women would drop, or at least even out the field with male talent.

What we must remember is that sex, power, scandals, and filmmaking have always been a heavy brew that makes up Hollywood. These things have been happening for decades andrepeatedly “exposed,” but nothing good ever came of it. It’s time to take a different approach  if we want changes

~Evgueni Mlodik

When Brand Protection Turns Depraved

The "Kardashians of Christ."

A lot can be said about the Duggar Family and their fall from grace. These “Kardashions of Krist,” so to speak (yes, I know I misspelled “Christ”) were the right wing media darlings for years, since their first TV special on TLC back in 2008 that eventually lead to a reality tv series deal called 17 Kids and Counting, that later evolved into 18 Kids and Counting, and 19 Kids and Counting. You get the picture. However, if you don’t, let me elaborate. Jim-Bob and Michelle Duggar are a wealthy family living in Arkansas. They seem to adhere to some quasi-Baptist and Evangelical form of Christianity that is known as “Quiverfull,” essentially your basic far-right wing fanatical version of conservative Christianity that also promotes extreme procreation, having as many an offspring as possible. The Duggars were extremely fortunate that a huge chunk of their progeny were twins, which is a rather efficient and quicker way to procreate. Due to the novelty of having so many children, the Duggars ended up with a reality show deal which made them even wealthier, while their religious andleanings made them the darlings of the Right-Wing media. The family have rubbed elbows with such Right-Wing “icons” as Mike Huckabee, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santorum, Glenn Beck, and the ilk. They were proud supporters of Huckabee’s presidential campaign and Michelle Duggar, contrary to the biblical teachings of women keeping silent, has done a lot of political lobbying withinArkansas to strip GLTBQ members of any semblance of human rights and respect, but I digress…

Jim-Bob and Michelle Duggar, the reality tv darlings of
Right-Wing Christian media.

19 Kids and Counting was a gigantic hit for TLC. With most overt political and religious views of the family edited out for broadcast, the show presented Duggars as a wholesome, eccentric, fun, and loving family. Their merchandise deals went through the roof, there were talks of spin-offs chronicling their older children’s own marriage and families, but then lightening struck. In May of 2015, someone leaked an old police report that revealed thattheir oldest son, Josh, repeatedly molested three of his sisters when he was fifteen (they were around five and seven) and their babysitter while they slept over an unknown period between 2002-2003. The media erupted into chaos; it was a case of schaudenfraude run amuck, with everyone virtually forgetting the victims and gloating that a member of this righteous and wholesome family that shoved their “traditional values” down everyone’s throats was essentially a sex offender, covered up and enabled by his parents. Before this, Josh Duggar was a beacon to the right wing movement. He was offered a high paying position of the far-right religious group “Family Research Counsel” and was a huge political lobbyist, endorsing many politicians and actively campaigning to end civil right progress for LGTBQ citizens, as well trample all over marriage equality, but now he was exposed as a fraud. He, who constantly lamented about the disintegration of traditional values and families being disintegrated, turned out to be a pervert. Josh had to resign from his high ranking position with the FRC and he publicly confessed to what he did. Oddly enough, theymaintained some strong support from the Christian community, many of who dismissed Josh’s actions as a “teenager’s whimsy.”

Until May of 2015, the Duggar brand was
going strong, selling many books,
t-shirts, and the ilk.

Nonetheless, the Duggar brand crumbled. TLC suspended the show before canceling it all together and the Duggars went into damage control overdrive, giving interviewson the right leaning Fox News, having their daughters stand up for Josh on live television, and heavily promoting the more "innocent" aspects of their family, like the older daughters' marriages and pregnancies. Some hope remained to revive their television income with a series of spin-offs and they still had sales from their merchandise, but in August of the same year as the molestation allegations, another bomb dropped.

Joshua James Duggar, the man who
eventually toppled the Duggar Brand.

On August 20th, 2015, the online hook-up site for married couples, Ashley Madison, got hacked and the perpetrators leaked over 38 million subscriber names online, one of which was, wait for it, Joshua James Duggar himself. Another fall out ensued, this time putting the final nail in the Duggar brand of a wholesome Christian family. The leak unravelled even more dirt on Josh, detailing him cheating on his wife and having a secret Facebook account he used to contact strippers and prostitutes. This time, no damage control can help the Duggars.

Now, you may wonder, what is the point of this diatribe if my blog concerns mostly entertainment related news and events? Well, you see, I don't see the story of the Rise and Fall of the Duggar Family as just a tale of self righteous hypocrisy, humility, and religious controversy. Sure, it's all there, but looking at it from a more practical (and some may say cynical) perspective, this is a classic tale of not protecting your brand. This is as much TLC's fault as it is the Duggars. When you design a franchise, like 19 Kids and Counting, make sure you scrubbed and found any dirt on your subject that could risk the quality of your brand. If TLC's producers dug deeper, they would've found out about the police report and that some years earlier, Oprah Winfrey cancelled the Duggars' appearance on her show because her fact checks discovered about Josh's past. Josh Duggar should never have been promoted as a wholesome family man with so much dirt, the show needed to focus on other members of the family without the dark past, or

the family themselves shouldn't have been offered a contract and turned into right-wing celebrities, since their sordid sexual secrets were the antithesis to what they were marketing. The lesson here is, essentially, very bad market research and brand protection. TLC created their Duggar brand without any prior research and watched it go up in flames. It's not the first time this happened, if any of us can recall the Honey Boo Boo scandal. Now they need to cut their financial losses once and move to the next freak show that would create a good reality show, hopefully without any creepy sexual scandal in tow. Fool me once, TLC, fool me twice... Someone on their development team needs to get fired.

~Evgueni Mlodik

Legal Drama is the Real Drama

There's no business like show business and there is no business like show business litigation. It's been a while since I posted anything on my blog, so what better way to celebrate my grand return than with a look at some of the legal troubles within the film entertainment industry?

First up is the little heard of scandal regarding The Purge franchise. The writer and producers of The Purge have lost the motion to dismiss idea theft charges by one Douglas Jordan-Benel, who claims the concept of the film was stolen from his spec script, titled Settler's Day. Now, both parties have to head to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The case seems rather murky and convoluted. When Jordan-Benel submitted his script to various studios, there was an implied contract that he would be compensated if his ideas were to be used, which, obviously, seems to have been broken. However, the people behind The Purge seems to have countered those claims by using California's Anti-SLAPP statute, which is something used to weed out frivolous lawsuits. Under the stature, a judge can throw out a case if he feels the likelihood of the plaintiff winn

ing is slim. Obviously, this didn't work and the court case progressed. Now, Hollywood is always prone to idea theft and intellectual property claims, but this court case, if won by Douglas Jordan-Benel, might open the floodgates and set precedents that will allow many people with small evidence to claim idea t
heft and file lawsuits, which could cost the industry millions in legal fees and settlements.

It's hard for me to judge this situation because I haven't read Settler's Day, but I've seen The First, a horror film about a Neo-Utopian society taking over the United States in the near future, a feat accomplished by allowing the citizens run amok and murder, maim, and plunder for one night out of the year. It's an interesting concept, but in my opinion it was a very mediocre film. However, I must point out that I've seen the same concept used in an old Star Trek episode, a Latin American art-house film, and even an episode of The Powerpuff Girls. Not to mention where this concept seems to have come from, the Spartan practice of Crypteia. My point being is that this concept isn't exactly new or original, therefore if the script of The Purge did copy Settler's Day in more ways than just the premise, I fully support Douglas Jordan-Benel's lawsuit and hope he wins his due royalties and credit. It might affect Hollywood in the long run, but it'll teach the studios that settling and buying can be a lot less of a hassle than nonchalantly walking off with other people's scripts.

Now, here's another interesting case It seems the Zorro trademark was deemed invalid in Europe! Seems Sony Pictures was slapped in the face by the European Union copyright court that stated that the name "Zorro" is not distinctive enough to warrant a trademark. The mess began when Robert Gabell, an American composer, contested Sony's copyright name of Zorro because of his stage musical, titled Z - The Musical of Zorro (Not to be confused with another musical version of Zorro, both of which are getting staged and left and right across Europe, to much audience confusion.) Gabble claims that since character of Zorro comes from two public domain sources (1919 novella and a 1920 film starring Douglas Fairbanks), the story and characters seen in those works are fair game. The court sided with him, and stated that Sony cannot copyright Zorro because it's a public domain property that anyone has access too.

I must say, I wholeheartedly agree with the European Union. Zorro has always been a public property as long as I can remember. I've seen cartoons, films, tv shows, and stage plays based on it long before Sony started making their Zorro films, so I don't understan

d what is so special about their take on the story that warrants a copyright and effectively removing other people's access to it.

Last but not least story I read is a rather ridiculous lawsuit filed by Lionsgate against Ameritrade for using their trademarked line from Dirty Dancing, "nobody puts baby in the corner." The Ameritrade add is a spoof of the famous final scene, showing a banker about to embrace a giant piggy bank, with a caption "Nobody puts your old 401(k) in the corner." Lionsgate claims that they have future plans for this "valuable property" and that Ameritrade is lying to customers by implying they're in partnership with Lionsgate. Now, Ameritrade have launched their own tirade against Lionsgate, essentially saying they're being harassed and their claims of copyright infringement are baseless and overreaching.

I must say, I wholeheartedly agree with Ameritrade. What they did was a parody, which is protected under the 1st Amendment and the Fair Use clause. Lionsgate has no case and it seems to me to just be an excuse to drum up some publicity for a tired old franchise. "Future plans for this valuable property?" Yeah, right!

Well, hope you guys enjoyed this post and tata for now!

~Evgueni Mlodik

In defense of Ike Perlmutter.

Marvel CEO Isaac "Ike" Perlmutter.

A lot has been said about Marvel CEO's Ike Perlmutter's alleged leaked email where he put down the concept of female superhero movies and, of course, the politically correct crowd grabbed their torches and pitchforks and went after him. But I have a question for these keyboard warriors, have they even read his email or even know the basic functions of the film industry?

Now, I do think people are making a bigger deal out of this "scandal" than it truly deserves because it comes on the heels of online community criticizing Marvel for not showcasing their female superhero franchises as much as they could've. Fans' outrage spanned from either casual annoyance or outright accusations of sexism.

The "Holy Trinity" of box office bombs. See a pattern?

But the problem isn't with Marvel or Ike Perlmutter. I think it goes deeper. In my opinion, it goes to directors, writers, and producers of superhero films who seem to think female audiences deserve less than their male counterparts and continuously churned out lesser quality material that in the end destroyed any potential female lead superhero movies lead.

Contrary to popular belief, Perlmutter didn't really say anything sexist or anti-women in his email. The email, addressed to a Sony Executive, simply pointed out how female superhero movies made in the past couple of decades horribly bombed at the box office, and he had a point. Perlmutter listed the notorious bombs Catwoman, Elektra, and Supergirl (and there are many more, like the nearly unwatchable Tank Girl and Red Sonja) and how much money they lost. The only thing more notorious than their box office intake, however, is their awfu quality. The films suffer from horrible writing, bad direction, abysmal acting, and worst of all, incomprehensibly bad writing. None of the female lead superhero movies mentioned by Ike Perlmutter were well received either by critics or the audience, in addition to their flopping at the box office. None of these movies count as "good" movies aside from (or lack there of) their profitability.

A big issue with female superhero films is that we cannot connect with the lead character due to inherently sexist nature of the writing. Why must female superheroes only fight "girly" things? Be it a cosmetic company (Catwoman) or a beauty spa (Elektra), the idiotic pretext begins to alienate the average viewer, as is their equally insipid alter ego person, like Supergirl's sexy uniform boarding schoolgirl. I feel that Perlmutter's email was taken cruelly out of context, because he was specifying WHY those films flopped and the mistakes he would like HIS female superhero movies to avoid because he does not want them to become another pop culture/box office casualty.

Maybe, instead of crucifying Marvel, Disney, Sony, and Ike Perlmutter and dismissing them as "sexist pigs" we need to encourage these people to put in more effort into female superhero movies. If the quality improves, so will the box office intake, but this "self-fullfiling prophecy" schtick of creating subpar movies they know no one will see has to stop now.

~Evgueni Mlodik