You know, as a reviewer, I tend to write my reviews as much for the viewer as for the film maker, pointing out both the good and bad about a film so that the viewer can make an informed viewing decision and the film maker will know what I think he did right and wrong with the film so that he or she will know what they did right with the film, and also what they need to work on in their next one. My opinion is not the be all and end all of critique, but I do hope that over the course of my years as a reviewer, I've helped many film makers to become better at their craft by suggesting areas they should focus on improving. That brings us to this film...This synopsis is taken directly from the film's website, and you'll know why in a minute:
Synopsis: The Age of Rigel is a post-apocalyptic story set seventy years past the end of civilization. The remnants of mankind struggle to retain power in this desolate world. Within this world, we follow Holden and Cormac as they struggle to find their mother.
Now, the reason I had to take that synopsis from the website is because I didn't know what the hell was going on in this film. I'm sorry to say that this film is one of a very few that I've ever come across where I just can't think of anything good to say about it. This film was a train wreck from start to finish, and here's why...
First off, this film's story was utterly confusing and practically non-existent. Probably 98% of the film was comprised of two guys running through the same bits of secluded area and over the same bridge somewhere in the woods of Michigan, or sitting in a desolate ruin of a house, which on the interior shots was nothing more than the actors sitting in a dark room with black paper over the walls. That and some doofy mutant guy is about all we get for 70 mind numbing minutes.
This was director Derek Young's first feature film, and it should be his last for a while. Why? Because after what I've seen here, it's obvious he's not ready for features yet. I know that sounds harsh, but it's a simple fact.
Here's my suggestion to Derek about how he can be a better film maker, and I hope he takes this to heart and in the spirit it's intended.
First, come up with a good solid script. I mean really solid. Don't try to make it feature length either. Write a good script for a short and find some quality actors to perform in it. Try the theater program at the local college. You should be able to recruit some good actors from there. Then, make a short film and keep the editing snappy and tight so that the story moves along at just the right pace. Get yourself a good director of photography who can work with you on setting up great shots, and also get some good sound recording equipment and assign someone knowledgeable to be your audio person. Also, if you need help with lighting, find someone who's good at that as well and add them to the crew.
When the film is completed, show it to people who AREN'T your friends and ask them what they liked and didn't like about it. Take the valid points and either re-write and re-shoot certain parts of your film, or make editing adjustments and try again until both you and your audience are happy with the result. Naturally this process is much easier with shorts than it would be with a feature, which is why shorts are a great way to build experience before you jump into features.
Again, I hate sounding harsh as much as I hate giving bad reviews, but I'm really trying to help here, and like I said, I hope my suggestions are taken in the spirit in which they're intended. There is a process of gaining experience that's required before taking that big leap into making features. Honestly, this film didn't have enough of a story to even make a good, tight short out of it, and having to sit through 70 minutes of it was just, as I said earlier...mind numbing.
If you'd like to find out more about this film, you can check out the film's website at http://theageofrigel.com.