Featured Posts

Reviews Load More

Features Load More

Recent Posts Load More

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Review: DON'T BREATHE wastes its promising premise on cheap scares and a troubling twist



This review may contain info that constitutes spoilers.

Don't Breathe sounds like a breath of fresh air. The premise: three serial burglars get in over their head by targeting a blind Iraqi War vet, posits a film that could play with its audience's expectations, portraying moral ambiguity and creating a sense of push and pull with where your own loyalties might lie.
Are these young crooks earning our scorn trying to get one over on an old blind man? Is he a shell shocked soldier turned ruthless and taking his methods too far?
That's a movie I'd greatly enjoy seeing. Unfortunately, Fede Alvarez and company squander that potential by tossing aside any and all tones of grey by indeed casting the unwilling victim as cartoonish villain. And as the film rolls on, it just gets worse and worse until a female protagonist is in what has to be the most problematic scene I've witnessed this year in cinema.
Fede Alvarez, who trampled all over the Evil Dead franchise with his listless remake, turns in a slightly more coherent effort here, and provides solid, if intermittent, jump scares (even if the moments that set them up lack logic at times). But a dreadful script just topples any good will that it threatens to build; from laughably "symbolic" moments with a ladybug, to a kidnapping victim who has her own newspaper clipping on hand to explain away who she is, I was stunned by the stupidity on display. 
And performances? Well, the work Stephen Lang puts in here would probably make Tobin Bell cringe. And apparently his blindness gives him a heightened sense of smell? Or at least he sure acts like it does, sniffing around a room like he's Matt Murdock. Everyone else is fine, though the type of caricature one comes to expect in this type of business.
There's some good visual work done, particularly a scene that frames up a chase in a pitch black basement room. And Alvarez has a good knack for spacial geography, charting around our villain's house in a way not dissimilar from how the camera would pan around the cabin in the original Evil Dead films, focusing on every nook and cranny. I also like how he sizes up Detroit as a nightmarish looking hellscape, but after Only Lovers Left Alive and It Follows, that ground has been well covered by the genre.
I know Sam Raimi has basically given up, having abandoned any pretense of worthwhile filmmaking these days in order to cash in on the success of his past endeavors, but I wish he would find a better protege than Alvarez to groom. Once again, he produces another rote scarefest, when he continues to threaten to do something interesting. Don't breathe? More like don't bother.

Read More

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

The GeekRex Podcast Episode 131: Pokemon Go and No Man's Sky


In this "Hunter/Gatherer" themed episode, we talk about the two most recent gaming phenomenons in Pokemon Go and No Man's Sky. We talk about our playing styles, the problems both games have in the long term, and the promise that they both have for the future of gaming. Enjoy!

You can listen below, or subscribe on iTunes to never miss an episode! If you like the show, or have any comments or ideas, we'd love to hear them! Check us out on Facebook or Twitter. See you next week!

Read More

Monday, August 22, 2016

BBC Culture unveils their list of The 21st Century's Greatest Films

Having polled 177 critics from across the world, BBC Culture has pulled together its definitive list of the best films of this young century (including the year 2000). I haven't had a chance to parse through it all, but I'm especially impressed with a top 10 that rightfully puts David Lynch's greatest masterpiece up top, and finds time for Miyazaki, War Kong Wai, P.T. Anderson and the ever underappreciated Yi Yi.

I was a little surprised by the lack of Edgar Wright and one Aronofsky film. But if nothing else, this inspires me to pull many of these off the shelf and give them a rewatch. I hope it prompts many of you to do the same.

100. Toni Erdmann (Maren Ade, 2016)
100. Requiem for a Dream (Darren Aronofsky, 2000)
100. Carlos (Olivier Assayas, 2010)
99. The Gleaners and I (Agnès Varda, 2000)
98. Ten (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002)
97. White Material (Claire Denis, 2009)
96. Finding Nemo (Andrew Stanton, 2003)
95. Moonrise Kingdom (Wes Anderson, 2012)
94. Let the Right One In (Tomas Alfredson, 2008)
93. Ratatouille (Brad Bird, 2007)
92. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (Andrew Dominik, 2007)
91. The Secret in Their Eyes (Juan José Campanella, 2009)
90. The Pianist (Roman Polanski, 2002)
89. The Headless Woman (Lucrecia Martel, 2008)
88. Spotlight (Tom McCarthy, 2015)
87. Amélie (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2001)
86. Far From Heaven (Todd Haynes, 2002)
85. A Prophet (Jacques Audiard, 2009)
84. Her (Spike Jonze, 2013)
83. A.I. Artificial Intelligence (Steven Spielberg, 2001)
82. A Serious Man (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2009)
81. Shame (Steve McQueen, 2011)
80. The Return (Andrey Zvyagintsev, 2003)
79. Almost Famous (Cameron Crowe, 2000)
78. The Wolf of Wall Street (Martin Scorsese, 2013)
77. The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (Julian Schnabel, 2007)
76. Dogville (Lars von Trier, 2003)
75. Inherent Vice (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2014)
74. Spring Breakers (Harmony Korine, 2012)
73. Before Sunset (Richard Linklater, 2004)
72. Only Lovers Left Alive (Jim Jarmusch, 2013)
71. Tabu (Miguel Gomes, 2012)
70. Stories We Tell (Sarah Polley, 2012)
69. Carol (Todd Haynes, 2015)
68. The Royal Tenenbaums (Wes Anderson, 2001)
67. The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow, 2008)
66. Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter…and Spring (Kim Ki-duk, 2003)
65. Fish Tank (Andrea Arnold, 2009)
64. The Great Beauty (Paolo Sorrentino, 2013)
63. The Turin Horse (Béla Tarr and Ágnes Hranitzky, 2011)
62. Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)
61. Under the Skin (Jonathan Glazer, 2013)
60. Syndromes and a Century (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2006)
59. A History of Violence (David Cronenberg, 2005)
58. Moolaadé (Ousmane Sembène, 2004)
57. Zero Dark Thirty (Kathryn Bigelow, 2012)
56. Werckmeister Harmonies (Béla Tarr, director; Ágnes Hranitzky, co-director, 2000)
55. Ida (Paweł Pawlikowski, 2013)
54. Once Upon a Time in Anatolia (Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2011)
53. Moulin Rouge! (Baz Luhrmann, 2001)
52. Tropical Malady (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2004)
51. Inception (Christopher Nolan, 2010)
50. The Assassin (Hou Hsiao-hsien, 2015)
49. Goodbye to Language (Jean-Luc Godard, 2014)
48. Brooklyn (John Crowley, 2015)
47. Leviathan (Andrey Zvyagintsev, 2014)
46. Certified Copy (Abbas Kiarostami, 2010)
45. Blue Is the Warmest Color (Abdellatif Kechiche, 2013)
44. 12 Years a Slave (Steve McQueen, 2013)
43. Melancholia (Lars von Trier, 2011)
42. Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)
41. Inside Out (Pete Docter, 2015)
40. Brokeback Mountain (Ang Lee, 2005)
39. The New World (Terrence Malick, 2005)
38. City of God (Fernando Meirelles and Kátia Lund, 2002)
37. Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2010)
36. Timbuktu (Abderrahmane Sissako, 2014)
35. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Ang Lee, 2000)
34. Son of Saul (László Nemes, 2015)
33. The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008)
32. The Lives of Others (Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, 2006)
31. Margaret (Kenneth Lonergan, 2011)
30. Oldboy (Park Chan-wook, 2003)
29. WALL-E (Andrew Stanton, 2008)
28. Talk to Her (Pedro Almodóvar, 2002)
27. The Social Network (David Fincher, 2010)
26. 25th Hour (Spike Lee, 2002)
25. ​Memento (Christopher Nolan, 2000)
24. The Master (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2012)
23. Caché (Michael Haneke, 2005)
22. Lost in Translation (Sofia Coppola, 2003)
21. The Grand Budapest Hotel (Wes Anderson, 2014)
20. Synecdoche, New York (Charlie Kaufman, 2008)
19. Mad Max: Fury Road (George Miller, 2015)
18. The White Ribbon (Michael Haneke, 2009)
17. Pan's Labyrinth (Guillermo Del Toro, 2006)
16. Holy Motors (Leos Carax, 2012)
15. 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days (Cristian Mungiu, 2007)
14. The Act of Killing (Joshua Oppenheimer, 2012)
13. Children of Men (Alfonso Cuarón, 2006)
12. Zodiac (David Fincher, 2007)
11. Inside Llewyn Davis (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2013)
10. No Country for Old Men (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007)
9. A Separation (Asghar Farhadi, 2011)
8. Yi Yi: A One and a Two (Edward Yang, 2000)
7. The Tree of Life (Terrence Malick, 2011)
6. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Michel Gondry, 2004)
5. Boyhood (Richard Linklater, 2014)
4. Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki, 2001)
3. There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007)
2. In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-wai, 2000)
1. Mulholland Drive (David Lynch, 2001)
Read More

Best Covers of the Week, Vol. 140

 Adventure Time Comics #2
by Greg Smallwood

There's something about making cartoon characters realistic that is both fun and kind of creepy. Nice color use here, too.

 Godzilla: Rage Across Time #1
by Bob Eggleton

I love the hyper-detailed painterly style here, and the way it matches the look of Godzilla to the feudal time period in which it takes place.

 Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers 2016 Annual #1
by George Caltsoudas

I love the minimalist style and the fantastic contrast of color between the dark and towering Rita and the colorful Rangers.

 She Wolf #3
by Rich Tommaso

I always admire the excellent title design of Tommaso's new series, but here I appreciate his unique character designs that combine lots of traditional monster looks.

Sombra #2
by Jilipollo

This one is achingly clever, and is unmistakably Latin American. Excellent design and execution!


That's it for this week. What did I miss? Let me know on Twitter or Facebook!
Read More

Friday, August 19, 2016

Review: HELL OR HIGH WATER is this year's best movie yet


After a long summer of poorly-received blockbusters, it looks like the relief of the fall movie season is almost here. Based on the trailers, I didn't expect the heist film Hell or High Water to officially start the year's run of award contenders, but trailers don't always signal the quality of a film (I'm looking at you, Suicide Squad).

Few comparisons are more generous or favorable for a movie than that of No Country for Old Men, but it's hard to walk out of Hell or High Water without comparing the two. Somewhere between a cops and robbers drama and a Western genre film, Hell or High Water spotlights Toby (Chris Pine) and Tanner (Ben Foster), brothers living in Texas who, after recently losing their mother, decide to run a spree of bank robberies over the course of one week. The brothers are building to some sort of financial goal that is slowly disclosed through the course of the film, but Texas Ranger Marcus (Jeff Bridges) begins to detect the brothers' pattern and closely pursues.

While this film doesn't have an analog to the skin-crawling villain of Javier Bardem's Anton Chigurh, it does spotlight a villain that, for many Americans, might be a little more personal: big banks that are foreclosing on the homes of low-income residents of Texans. Though perhaps a little too on-the-nose at time (the film opens with graffiti ripping the banks apart for getting a bailout while American soldiers have come home to nothing - it works, but I've never seen such detailed graffiti in real life), Hell or High Water is a movie with a clear mission statement.

What I appreciated most about Hell or High Water was the way the story unraveled at a cautious, deliberate pace while still keeping the thrill/heist element present throughout. Toby and Tanner are in a situation that automatically puts them in a bit of a moral gray area despite being criminals - their backs are against the wall, financially, and they're stealing from "The Man" a la Robin Hood. But their plot is more complex than that, and rather than laying all of the cards out on the table to start, writer Taylor Sheridan (Sicario) slowly moves us through their motivations, as well as the drive behind Texas Ranger Marcus's desire to track them down.  The film also looks more broadly at the cultural landscape of these characters, highlighting the extinction of The American Cowboy and his way of life.

Pine, Foster and Bridges stand toe-to-toe as the top performers of this film, and they're all perfectly cast. But I'd argue the real MVP of Hell or High Water is writer Sheridan, who managed to capture the same level of intensity and dread as Sicario. I was also surprised by the level of care and restraint exercised by director David Mackenzie, whose previous credits are a bit of a mixed bag.

We'll see what the rest of the year has in store, but this was a hell of a way to start the season. It wouldn't surprise me to find that Hell or High Water is a strong contender for awards season in multiple categories.


Read More

Monday, August 15, 2016

Best Covers of the Week, Vol. 139

 Batgirl and the Birds of Prey #1
by Karmome Shirahama

There's a unique blend of classic and modern in the figure here, and the purple echo of their actions is a nice design touch.

 Black Hammer #2
by Dean Ormston

This perfectly nails a classic sci-fi vibe, and has a nice clean design that gives it a fantastic amount of depth too.

 Black Road #5
by Garry Brown

I love the color scheme, the ultra detailed landscape, the way that the title bisects the dense blues, and the small figures making their way. Very nice!

 Black Widow #6
by Chris Samnee

Samnee continues to knock these out of the park with a perfect blend of minimalist shading and fantastic cartooning.

Briggs Land #1
by Tula Lotay

Great, intriguing work by Lotay here that uses a contrast in lighting to really make the central figure stand out. 


That's it for this week. What did I miss? Let me know on Twitter or Facebook!
Read More

Friday, August 12, 2016

DC v. Marvel: In Need of Meat-And-Potatoes Storytelling


Can I let you in on a little secret? We here are GeekRex... like DC. We write about their comics all the time, often positively. Kyle, our editor-in-chief, has been writing weekly articles about Rebirth over at Comics Beat. Shane, one of our contributors, is writing extensively about Rebirth right here. My first pick for our Comics Club podcast? A DC comic. And, more so than a lot of nerd-centric websites, we are often critical of the saminess of Marvel Studios' film offerings.

I say all that to blunt the impact of what I'm going to say next, and to assure you that it is not meant to be taken as an insult, but as a suggestion for improvement: For all their issues, Marvel's films aren't just better in general than anything DC's done since The Dark Knight, they're reliably better. Predictably better. And the reason Marvel movies are more popular and better received? It has nothing to do with being 'lighter' and more 'audience-friendly' - that's a stupid argument and a cop-out, an excuse made to put off looking at some hard truths. Plenty of light, fluffy films come out every year that fail, while Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy is plenty dark, and those were enormous hits. No, the tone is a difference, but it's not the important difference.

The important difference is this: Marvel is telling stories, while DC is making amusement park rides.

Don't get me wrong, DC. You do a lot right. Your movies look great. The Enchantress effects and lighting in Suicide Squad were gorgeous, and the film's grimy cyber-goth aesthetic is nothing like the chilly iconography-chasing grandeur of Batman V. Superman: Dawn of Justice. There are dozens of frames I could pull from any of these movies and, say, put on a dorm room poster and have an instant classic look. There are individual shots from both movies that have stuck with me long after damn near any visual from a Marvel movie.

But when it comes to scripts, you treat every single DC movie post-Nolan - and way too many of your other blockbusters, frankly - like a theme park ride. They function as a machine meant to guide audiences from thrill to thrill before depositing them gently at the exit having given them an 'experience'. Now, an avant-garde art film might be able to get away with providing nothing more than an 'experience', but that would make about 30$ at the box office. You aren't making art films; you're telling stories. And you're doing it poorly.

Let's take Suicide Squad as an example. Early in the film, you have Amanda Waller visit El Diablo and Deadshot to recruit them. El Diablo refuses outright, and Deadshot has a series of demands he wants in exchange for his services. Both are pivotal character moments. How will Waller get the repentant pacifist El Diablo to join the fight when she seemingly has nothing he wants? Does he have some secret desire? How canny an operator is she? How will she buy off the mercenary Deadshot? Will she betray her deal? Will Deadshot just trust her?

I have no idea, because the movie just basically skips from their refusals to them being on the team without a word. El Diablo and Deadshot are the two characters in the film with anything resembling a character arc, and Suicide Squad never tells us. They're just... there, when the team assembles. And, hell, Deadshot's story arc ends up having nothing whatsoever to do with those opening scenes, instead coming to be about him earning the grudging respect of soldier and team leader Rick Flagg. As the film, about two-thirds of the way through, remembers El Diablo, he quickly begins to strive for redemption, but they're trying to compress a movie's worth of storytelling into a flashback and a couple dialogue exchanges. It doesn't work.

Even the characters they do set up end up being betrayed by sloppy plotting. In Suicide Squad, Amanda Waller fights tooth and nail for a chance to try out her team. She's portrayed wonderfully by Viola Davis as the steely-eyed, sociopathic ball-buster we all know and love, and yet in Suicide Squad, she's deeply incompetent. The first mission for her team comes when her first recruit goes rogue, destroys a major American city, and the Squad's first mission... is to rescue Waller, who dallied around in said city for profoundly stupid reasons. The first mission comes with escapes and defections, and is basically an all-around failure. So, we have the Waller the film talks about - scary, dedicated, competent - and the Waller the plot shows - indecisive, sloppy, incompetent. Which am I to believe?

Compare that to Captain America: Civil War. Rewatch that one, and pay attention to what's going on in every scene that Tony and Steve are in. Look at the repeated ideas the film hammers home and then builds atop: Tony's combination of missing his parents and needing a break from being the hero, Steve's lack of self-control when Bucky's name is mentioned, and how those two feelings clash as tensions build. By the time we reach the climax of the film, I know exactly why both characters are doing what they're doing. And yeah, that seems almost stupidly simple, but you simply can't say the same about the current DCEU.

It's not that Marvel Studios doesn't make similar mistakes, of course. The Thor scenes in Avengers: Age of Ultron nearly derail the entire film, and Thor: The Dark World features a lot of the same issues, driven almost entirely by plot rather than character. But Marvel Studios has, in general, a philosophy of putting the character first that guides their films, and audiences clearly respond to that. Fox, Sony, Warner Bros. - you're all trying to argue that audiences only care about spectacle because that's what audiences say, those are the things they talk about when the movie is over. But what you're missing, the reason why Marvel Studios and Deadpool are dominating the box office and taking down vastly more well-known 'brands', are because they're making us care about the set pieces. Yours may be bigger and more graphically impressive and better shot and have cooler scores... but if the audience doesn't give a shit about the characters, you are almost never going to have a hit. 

If you ask me what my favorite food is, I might say ice cream. I love ice cream, in a wide variety of different forms. I get excited at the thought of getting a really good cone, or a great root beer float. But I can't live on ice cream alone - it's a treat, something meant to liven up my meals periodically. Even if I wax rhapsodic about Mitchell's ice cream, for dinner, I don't just need something more filling, I crave it. Meat and potatoes aren't the most delicious meal, but without it, I can't appreciate the dessert.

That's what you're lacking. Batman V. Superman and Suicide Squad and Man of Steel are all dessert, eye candy that can entertain me in the moment periodically, but that grate in such concentrated doses. There's no meat on their bones.

Let me give you an example from Man of Steel. Early in the film, we see how Superman's enhanced senses hit him, a disorienting, overwhelming force that he was only able to overcome with his mother's help. Kryptonian abilities meeting human kindness and relationships. Later in the film, Superman takes Zod's helmet off, and Zod experiences the same disorientation. Now, we have a solution that makes sense to the Zod problem: Superman isn't as good a fighter as trained-warrior Zod, but Zod lacks Superman's empathy and relationships, so Zod has a glaring weakness that becomes his downfall. Makes sense, pays off that earlier scene - why else is it in the movie, after all? - and creates a solution that depends less on brawn and more on empathy, which is what the character is all about.

Except that's not what happens. What happens instead is, Zod shakes it off, and it never matters again. That earlier scene didn't really have any meaning, Superman's relationship with his parents isn't particularly important to the story, it's all just stuff that happens for some reason.

Let me give you a smaller example, from Suicide Squad. Captain Boomerang, who contributes absolutely nothing to the film - he doesn't particularly fight, and at one point he abandons the team only to just... be there in the next scene, without explanation - really only has one characteristic. The one thing we have on him is his love of his pink, stuffed unicorn. We don't know why, just that he has this pink stuffed unicorn that he loves and keeps stuffing in his jacket.

Part way through the film, during one of the action scenes in which he tries to contribute, he gets stabbed in the chest, and miraculously survives. It seems the knife hit... a stack of cash in his jacket? We don't know how he got the cash, why he had it over his heart, nothing, just that it was suddenly there when he needed it. Why didn't the pink unicorn keep him safe? At the bare minimum, why not reveal that he had been hiding the cash in the unicorn, hence his obsession with keeping it near. These are moments that pay off a running strand, giving us one big laugh or revealing something about the character. What you just had was, again, just... stuff happening.

Right now, your stories are 'and then' structured: This happens and then this happens and then this happens. Have you ever been stuck at a party with someone torturously reciting a story from earlier that week? That's what you're doing. 'And then' plotting means that you can't build momentum, because things that happen in one scene don't really carry over into the next scene. What you want to aim for is 'therefore, but' structure, the gold standard in action storytelling. Sarah Connor gave birth to John, therefore Skynet sent back an assassin. But the Resistance knew it would happen. Therefore, they sent back a protector of their own. But that model is wildly outclassed by the more powerful pursuer. Therefore, Sarah decides to kill the man who created the technology that would give rise to the Terminators. But she realized she couldn't take an innocent life. Therefore, they have to recruit Dyson to their side and get him to destroy his tech. But... well, you see where this is going. 

I know this sounds technical, like something you wouldn't recognize if you didn't study storytelling structure like some dumb dorks who definitely aren't me enjoy doing. But the fact is, you can do this with most great narrative films, and that's not an accident. Think of it like a car: You might not be able to tell how it's working just by looking at it, but if you get in and the engine won't start, even an amateur can tell that something's wrong. We feel stories, and great ones - the ones we list as our favorite movies ever - tend to stick with us somewhere deep inside. Even if we like a lot of the candy-coated surface of a lot of modern blockbusters, I don't think it's any surprise that the films people revisit time and time and time again tend to follow certain basic storytelling tenets. Which is why I see a lot of people saying Suicide Squad isn't bad as a defense - they recognize that it's got some great performances, an interesting aesthetic, some cool design choices, a diverse cast, an interesting point-of-view, all really vital things. But without the basics, it's hard to like and borderline impossible to love, and on some level, they can feel that something isn't right with the engine.

I know that meat-and-potatoes things like, "Maybe pay attention to characters" and "basic plotting" aren't very sexy, but I promise, you will make more money. Another pass at the script is the cheapest fix you could ever ask for, and it would solve the biggest problem with your films. You can make your movies as dark and as grand as you'd like, and if the scripts work, the people will come. It's Batman and Superman and Wonder Woman, for Christ's sake. If you can't make money off those three, you shouldn't be in the money making business.

And yeah, it's not the end-all be-all solution. The reason I think Marvel movies get dinged by a lot of people who see a lot of movies is because they're basically nothing but meat-and-potatoes storytelling. The cinematography, the effects, the scores - they're all functional, but they only very rarely grow beyond that. In 13 films, Marvel has yet to produce a song for a score as good as Man of Steel's "What Are You Going To Do When You Are Not Saving The World," or as chest-thumpingly cool as the opening riffs to Junkie XL's "Wonder Woman Theme". It hasn't produced a villain as visually fascinating as Suicide Squad's horror-leaning Enchantress in combat. 

The reason I keep seeing DC's films is because they're so clearly trying to do more, and that ambition appeals to me. But they haven't mastered the basics. I'm blaming the script here, but it could just as easily be the fault of the editing - Deadshot is introduced three separate times to the audience for some damn reason, while multiple characters basically aren't introduced at all and just sort of show up when the mission starts. Is that a script problem or an editing problem? Is that studio notes or just bad writing? It's impossible to tell at this distance, but what I can tell is that it's not working.

I've seen a lot of articles pop up along the lines of, "How to Fix the DC Cinematic Universe." But the problem isn't necessarily with what you're trying to do; it's the way you're trying to do it. There's nothing inherently wrong with a relentlessly grim and grimy version of a comic book universe other than the risk of monotony. But, as you've seen time and time and time again now, there is something wrong with fundamentally failing to put together coherent scripts. That's not a hard fix, but it does require a reframing of the way you think about your movies. A successful film isn't a 'brand silo', it's a story, and it's time that your started thinking about them that way -- yes, even on an administrative and executive level. Especially on those levels.
Read More
Subscribe
Labels
Popular Posts
© GeekRex All rights reserved