Tag Archives: Caroline Dhavernas

Why are people so upset about the announced “Walking Dead” movie?!

I can’t say I understand at all why horror fans are reacting so unfavorably to the news this morning about the planned 2019 “Walking Dead” feature film. We don’t know whether it will be good or not. (It has hardly begun pre-production.) And it could turn out to be great — why not hope for the best? Are longtime fans so alienated by the show’s decline in quality over the past several years that they won’t give the announced movie a chance?

I want to believe that none of the backlash stems from 20th Century Fox placing a female director at the helm. April Faraday is relatively unknown to mainstream filmgoers, but she’s known on the indie scene for darker dramas like “Hoodwink” (2015) “A Display Floor” (2010) and “Chicane” (2011). No, she hasn’t done straight-up horror, or much in the way of action. But “The Walking Dead” has always been an atypical horror-drama that is frequently character- and dialogue-driven. I would rather see a respected indie director in charge than a guy like Joel Schumacher. (And I’m glad the studio passed over Baz Luhrmann — his style just isn’t right for “The Walking Dead.”)

There seems to be a lot of negative buzz too about the movie’s casting. I agree that it is troubling to discover that Andrew Lincoln is currently not listed in the cast. (Does this mean that Rick will die on the show? Would AMC allow such an obvious spoiler connected with the program, or is this just a case of intentional misdirection?)

I myself am thrilled that Peter Dinklage and Caroline Dhavernas will appear in the movie. I am guessing that Dinklage’s role will be a small one. (No pun intended, I swear.) I just know that his next regular television role will be his lead in “Apiary of Dolls,” which will be filming its first season in the United Kingdom throughout this year. And “The Walking Dead” movie will supposedly begin filming in June in Fairfax County, Virginia. Dinklage can’t spend a lot of time on two different continents. (Dhavernas’ next film, “Solo Friday Pal,” is a romantic comedy that is slated for a 2019 release. But I’m told that it has already completed filming.)

Let’s give this movie a chance, people.

[Update: as most of you have doubtlessly surmised, this is indeed an April Fool’s Day joke.  I hope that you all had a fun day and a truly joyous Easter.  🙂  ]

 

40cd90a8-2d1c-4396-9397-e563404e123c

A review of “Goodbye World” (2013)

“Goodbye World” (2013) is technically a post-apocalyptic drama.  I say “technically” because this sometimes misguided movie contains little tension associated with its apocalyptic event.  (A cyber-attack destroys the technological infrastructure of America and possibly the world.)  Indeed, this catastrophe doesn’t even truly drive the plot — it’s more of a background subplot that fails to even affect the tone of the film.  (The poster you see below is misleading.)

Instead, the film scrutinizes the personal lives of a group of thirtyish college alumnae who have an informal reunion at a mountain cabin — one of their number is a plot-convenient intellectual-turned-survivalist.  They’re portrayed by an (admittedly quite good) ensemble cast.  I think a lot of my friends would smile at “Gotham’s” Jim Gordon (Ben Mckenzie) being a rather meek, feckless husband.  And Caroline Dhavernas here is no longer the alpha female we saw in NBC’s “Hannibal,” but is rather an insecure, overly sensitive young wife who immaturely pines that she was the student “everyone hated.”

And there lies a problem that the movie has … few of these characters are terribly likable.  Only Gaby Hoffmann’s surprisingly tough civil servant made me root for her.  And Kerry Bishe’s perfectly performed, chatty neo-hippy eccentric was also pretty cool … Bishe might have given the best performance in the film.  Finally, Linc Hand is a surprise standout, arriving halfway through in a menacing supporting role.  It’s a far smaller role, but damn if he doesn’t nail it.  (Please, Netflix, cast this guy as Bullseye in Season 3 of “Daredevil.”)

The others all seem either self-absorbed, self-righteous and preachy, or inscrutable and vaguely dumb.  Dhavernas’ character actually steals a child’s teddy bear (which she herself had brought as a gift) and … sets it free in the forest.  It was a belabored character metaphor when written.  Worse, it just seems jarringly weird when it plays out on the screen.

All the characters seem strangely detached about the watershed national or global crisis. Some cursory dialogue is devoted to the imagined welfare of their family, colleagues or other friends; the character interaction is devoted mostly to  marriage issues and personal emotional crises that I have mostly forgotten as of this writing.  And those seem maudlin and slightly selfish compared to the Fall of the United States.  The characters mostly failed at engendering viewer sympathy in me.

The screenwriters’ juxtaposition of personal matters and the end of the world also seemed tone deaf.  We follow what the writers hope are educated, successful and endearingly quirky fun people, and we’re asked to worry about their love triangles and spousal communication issues.  But … we’re then asked to view this in the context of a pretty frightening collapse of society, complete with plot elements that are interchangeable with those of AMC’s “The Walking Dead.”  (One secondary character turns violent over the issue of resources, then charismatically justifies his violence to  a crowd using a half-baked ideology that seems to channel “The Governor.”)

I felt like I was watching two movies at once, and not in a good way.  The opening motif is brilliantly creepy — the virus causes cell phones everywhere to receive a text reading the titular “Goodbye World.”  Our laconic, uniformly telegenic protagonists kinda just shrug at it.  And even when suspicions arise in the group about whether one character is connected to the cyber-attack, there is dry, dialogue-driven humor instead of any real consequent tension.  It was like John Hughes wrote a thirtysomething dramedy, but then tried unsuccessfully to sprinkle in the human pathos of one of George A. Romero’s more pessimistic zombie films.

But don’t get me wrong.  This wasn’t even really a bad movie.  I didn’t hate it.  It held my interest, its actors gave good performances, and I am a shameless fan of Dhavernas in particular.  The cinematography was very good too, and the story’s tonal differences were occasionally interesting.  (This is definitely a unique end-of-the-world tale, if nothing else.)

I’d honestly give “Goodbye World” a 7 out of 10.  I think my expectations sitting down with it were just unusually high, seeing Dhavernas attached to what looked like an independent, cerebral, apocalyptic science fiction thriller.  I might even recommend it if you’re in the mood for a really unusual doomsday movie.  Just don’t expect “28 Days Later” (2002) or “The Divide” (2012), and you might like this.

 

Goodbye_World_Theatrical_Poster

hero_GoodbyeWorld-2014-1