Z

By MCN Editor editor@moviecitynews.com

New Jersey Filmmaker Offers Kevin Smith $10,000 to Review Film

Chatham, N.J. (October 19, 2011 — Jim Riffel, whose feature film “Black-Eyed Susan” won the Grand Prize at New Jersey’s “Garden State Film Festival,” is making a unique offer to New Jersey native and Hollywood filmmaker Kevin Smith: “If you review my feature film I’ll give you $10,000 to donate to the charity of your choice and I’ll also give you the worldwide rights to the film to sell to any company you want as long as you take the money from that sale and also donate that to the charity of your choice.”

“I think it’s a pretty good deal” said Riffel, “you get $10,000 right off the bat and then, if you sell the film, you’ll be able to get even more cash to a worthwhile charity.” The feature film Riffel is offering to Mr. Smith is a strange and entertaining “midnight movie” type flick called “Night of the Day of the Dawn of the Son of the Bride of the Return of the Revenge of the Terror of the Attack of the Evil, Mutant, Hellbound, Flesh-Eating, Crawling, Alien, Zombified, Subhumanoid, Living Dead – Part 5.” It’s the just finished sequel to the sequel to the sequel to the popular cult film, “Night of the Day of the Dawn…Part 2” and is a parody of the “golden age” of television. It takes a comedic look at what was considered appropriate and enjoyable TV family fare in the 1950s and 1960s and what’s considered appropriate and enjoyable television today. So why did Riffel choose Kevin Smith for this offer? “This film is a comedy and Kevin Smith’s made some great comedies so I’m hoping it might be a good match.”

And does Mr. Riffel think Kevin Smith will take him up on the offer? “You never know with something like this. I guess it’s a long shot, but it would be great if he seriously considered it. Maybe me being from New Jersey and the film being made in New Jersey help a little bit. And “Black-Eyed Susan,” the feature I made that won the Garden State Film Festival, was a low budget black and white film shot on 16mm, like “Clerks”, so, maybe all these things count. Who knows? I’ve seen him in dozens of interviews and he seems like a really down-to-Earth guy. The offer’s out there and I really hope he does it. We’ll see what happens.”

In addition to “Night Of The Day Of The Dawn…Part 5” Mr. Riffel is also donating the rights to four other feature films he directed and three non-fiction screenplays he wrote. You can find more information here.

# # #

Leave a Reply

Quote Unquotesee all »

“The core fear is what can happen to you, personally. Your body. That’s what horror films deal with, precisely. We are a very thin skin wrapped around a pumping heart and guts. At any given moment it can come down to that, be it diseases, or somebody’s assault, or war, or a car wreck. You could be reduced to the simple laws of physics and your body’s vulnerability. The edged weapon is the penultimate weapon to disclose that reality to you.”
~ Wes Craven, 1996, promoting Scream

MAMET
Well, that, to me, is always the trick of dramaturgy; theoretically, perfectly, what one wants to do is put the protagonist and the audience in exactly the same position. The main question in drama, the way I was taught, is always what does the protagonist want. That’s what drama is. It comes down to that. It’s not about theme, it’s not about ideas, it’s not about setting, but what the protagonist wants. What gives rise to the drama, what is the precipitating event, and how, at the end of the play, do we see that event culminated? Do we see the protagonist’s wishes fulfilled or absolutely frustrated? That’s the structure of drama. You break it down into three acts.

INTERVIEWER
Does this explain why your plays have so little exposition?

MAMET
Yes. People only speak to get something. If I say, Let me tell you a few things about myself, already your defenses go up; you go, Look, I wonder what he wants from me, because no one ever speaks except to obtain an objective. That’s the only reason anyone ever opens their mouth, onstage or offstage. They may use a language that seems revealing, but if so, it’s just coincidence, because what they’re trying to do is accomplish an objective… The question is where does the dramatist have to lead you? Answer: the place where he or she thinks the audience needs to be led. But what does the character think? Does the character need to convey that information? If the answer is no, then you’d better cut it out, because you aren’t putting the audience in the same position with the protagonist. You’re saying, in effect, Let’s stop the play. That’s what the narration is doing—stopping the play… It’s action, as Aristotle said. That’s all that it is—exactly what the person does. It’s not what they “think,” because we don’t know what they think. It’s not what they say. It’s what they do, what they’re physically trying to accomplish on the stage. Which is exactly the same way we understand a person’s character in life—not by what they say, but by what they do. Say someone came up to you and said, I’m glad to be your neighbor because I’m a very honest man. That’s my character. I’m honest, I like to do things, I’m forthright, I like to be clear about everything, I like to be concise. Well, you really don’t know anything about that guy’s character. Or the person is onstage, and the playwright has him or her make those same claims in several subtle or not-so-subtle ways, the audience will say, Oh yes, I understand their character now; now I understand that they are a character. But in fact you don’t understand anything. You just understand that they’re jabbering to try to convince you of something.
~ David Mamet

Z Z