Dane McCusker is a writer, director and producer who has created award winning short film content over the last 10 years. Recently, he wrote and directed his first feature film – The Big Dog. The feature follows a married stockbroker whose bank account gets drained by a secret dominatrix. Talking with Dane taught me a lot about making an indie feature film and is a fascinating read for up and coming filmmakers. Read on for more.
Writing
Your writing process with the big dog. How long it took, how each day looked, how you write?
“It was interesting with this one because I made it as part of my Master’s project at AFTRS. I brought finished scripts with me because I wanted to use the resources to make a film. When I got there however, I realised none of these scripts would be achievable with the limited resources. So I was searching for something to make and saw the opening of the film on Instagram. Pretty soon after that we went into a COVID lockdown. I would wake up every morning at 9 and just write until I couldn’t work anymore. It took about 3 and a half weeks to get the first draft done. And then it was a year until we shot it and went through about 4 drafts.”
Did you start with a lot of outlining, or do you like to go straight into the script?
“I would write like a 5–6-page treatment essentially just outlining what happens in the story. Then I carded it out on index cards and kept that on my wall and used it as a guide for drafting.”
How do you balance all these different subjects that require a delicate touch?
“With all the focus on male entitlement and toxic masculinity, I had written about that a lot in shorts before and dealt with similar themes that had come from me. When it came to something specific like FINDOM is where I had to research. It is a dark comedy but I wanted to make sure it wasn’t making fun of people who engaged in that fetish. I reached out to women dominatrices to see if they would be open to talking to me and they were really interested in it and making sure it was portrayed accurately.”
I have seen you mention that you like to focus on dysfunctional men and the impact on their relationships, is this something you think you will continue to explore?
“In some iteration it will always be there because it is such a prevalent topic that impacts so many things in life. We will always be dealing with it and therefore I will still be writing about it in some way.”
The Process
When you had those issues of limited crew and actors’ schedules and COVID, what do you rely on to keep you going?
“Once the production train was running it was understanding that everyone had invested so much into this. But when I was writing, it was more about discipline and sticking to a routine. If there are days when you don’t feel inspired, you still should be working.”
I saw you say you love bringing improv onto set for your shorts, was this applied to the film as well? What do you offer the actors for improv?
“I improv around the written scenes. For example, a backstory for a scene or character and then putting that into the written work. The Paige and Shanty scenes we would just improv what the start of that looks like. I essentially use improv to make sure the tone and rhythms feel right.”
Your biggest filmmaking inspirations – directors and films?
“Broad inspiration is Kubrick. I really connect with anyone who delves into the ironies of life. Specifically for the Big Dog we watched Ruben Ostland to see how dysfunction could be funny without doing it in a way that felt super cheap.”
Simple question, but what are some of the biggest jumps between a short and a feature?
“In terms of the practicalities there isn’t that much difference. Keeping the whole narrative in your head is tricky. But the biggest thing I have noticed is that a feature has commercial applications, and you must think about how it is going to play for an audience.”
Advice to younger filmmakers who are stuck in this period where people aren’t paying attention to their shorts, and they have dreams of making a feature?
“Just keep going and be resourceful. There is heaps of different pathways to make it. Be as strategic as possible in getting the most out of very little.”
The Australian film industry seems like it is a moving in a direction where at least some indie low budget films are being made – Birdeater, Talk to Me, Sunflower – where do you want the film industry to continue moving?
“I think there is more grassroots and independent films being made in Australia then I have ever seen. It is hard in this country because there is such a small market for films but hopefully this wave of films shows it is possible.”
What is next for you?
“Jess Murphy and I have a production company called 2CP Pictures and we have two other features in development at the moment. We want to just keep making pictures.”
Jack Clark and Jim Weir are Australian filmmakers who recently created their debut feature film – Birdeater. The film has won awards at festivals around Australia and is now going international. After months waiting to see it, I was finally able to watch it at the Brisbane International Film Festival. Birdeater was one of my most anticipated movies of the year and it did not disappoint. It was a harrowing and hilarious experience that perfectly encapsulated young Australians. Read on for my conversation with Jack Clark and Jim Weir.
FRAZIER: “I have read about how challenging the shooting was with weather, actors changing and funds running out so I wanted to ask how you maintain motivation when all things feel hopeless and over in production?”
JACK: “You really must rely on each other. We had our worst moments when we were in ourselves and not communicating. To establish the tone of a set is such a big part of being a director that is often overlooked. We realised that if we established the tone on set it would spread across everyone. Ultimately, the crew and cast were the biggest support for us. Especially people like Roger Stonehouse (Director of Photography) who were shooting every single day.”
JIM: “For upcoming filmmakers, follow through is important. Doing the entire life cycle of a project is where you really learn. It’s a common trap we saw at film school where when you start a project and it gets tough, they would throw in the towel. Another one is when you have a project that might get made, people will just start thinking of the next thing. Just having the discipline to ride the life cycle of a film.”
FRAZIER: The paranoia game, these men always wearing masks in front of their partners, it all felt like I was watching people I knew. Can you talk about creating these very specific but relatable moments and characters for an Australian audience?
Jack Bannister as Charlie, Mackenzie Fearnley as Louie, Clementine Anderson as Grace, Ben Hunter as Dylan, Shabana Azeez as Irene, Alfie Gledhill as Murph, Harley Wilson as Sam.
JACK: “It was all about bringing an audience to the bucks night. Irene and Grace come to the party which is something that girls aren’t usually present for. We felt like that was enough for the characters to panic and reveal their paranoias and insecurities. The paranoia game just plays into all this.”
JIM: “Something we used as a rule of thumb is start with an archetype where the audience will instantly form an opinion of them. Then, add dramatic contradiction that opens them up to being more interesting. Like Dylan, he is this party animal and antagonist that is desperate to have a good time but also is deeply lonely and sad.”
FRAZIER: What did the writing process look like for both of you?
Clayton D Moss and Jim Weir
JACK: “We are both writers since film school. It has taken a while to build up a regularity with writing. They always said it at film school that you need to write everyday, and it felt very daunting but slowly it did become a regularity. It is a lot of shit ideas I feed Jim that sometimes work and are exciting. We were always writing. We were writing on the day; we were writing narration on the last day in case we needed it. It is just a constant thing. Then you get the actors on board and if they are good, they will have their own opinions.”
JIM: “Actors will see something in their character that is there but is usually a small part of the character that they latch onto. Most of my day-to-day job is being available for conversation and being able to talk through ideas and try to work out what we are trying to say. I will just sift through 1000 ideas Jack throws at me and I will just say what is good”.
FRAZIER: So the core focus is just on chipping away everyday together at it?
JACK: “It is definitely hard. I remember I used to get nice notebooks. A big change for me was getting really shit notebooks because then they aren’t precious about what is on the page. I also like the process of writing it because you are already editing it from physical to digital.”
FRAZIER: “So you don’t do the first draft by hand? It is just writing all your ideas down first and then bringing it onto the electronic document.”
JACK: “If my writing was more legible, I would trust myself. But honestly I would just focus on not being too precious.”
FRAZIER: “I won’t ask you again about Wake in Fright but I did hear you both talk about the Celebration, Nashville and Mishima, but more specifically this period of watching just the weirdest films you could in AFTRS. How important do you think this period was and its effect on you as filmmakers?”
Clementine Anderson and Jack Bannister
JACK: “A lot of the movies we watched in film school were probably above my paygrade. I probably latched onto a cool dolly. It’s more the process of realising how many different and unique perspectives are out there. It is realising that if you want to make something that is cutting you have to overwhelm yourself with content. There are still so many areas I haven’t even scratched yet.”
JIM: “It is crucial. Slowly building up that film literacy is important because when you are stuck you will have a catalogue of great movies in your brain. An example would be we have seen so many movies with a character having a quiet moment reflecting in a bathroom mirror. We had the idea that in this bathroom there is no mirror because it denies the girls a moment of reflection.”
JACK: “You will come to a scene and shooting its coverage and straight away you will think “I know how to shoot this scene.” You have to forcibly stop yourself and realise you have taken that movement or shot from something else. You just have to be aware that you have taken it from something else.”
JIM: “Something we are quite conscious of is having as many references as we can outside of the genre and especially not taking references from recent films that are doing the same thing. That is when you have work that feels derivative. You have to go further back. People say Birdeater feels original but that is because so much of it is stolen from films people haven’t seen.”
FRAZIER: “Yeah I remember you saying Jim that if you just watch enough films you will shoot in the way you watch.”
JACK: “It is tough as well and a question people in film school need to ask themselves. If you want to make narrative content, do you like movies and do you watch them.”
FRAZIER: “I know Jim you have said that the best advice is to just keep making shorts and eventually they will look like what you watch, but I was wondering if you both had any specific advice on the ability to keep the film dream alive when it doesn’t feel like anyone cares and what your making isn’t receiving attention?”
Shabana Azeez and Mackenzie Fearnley
JACK: “It comes down to a method thing. There will be a day when it looks like what you want to make or maybe even better. But then another questions arises which is do I really care about this? Now that you can do it is it something you truly want to say. When you are young you can focus on learning how to make films but then be aware that the harder challenge is what to do with that.”
JIM: “From a more practical perspective it is easy to get caught up in the trap of the filmmaking success being where you get your joy in life. I think the challenge is what can I do to be happy in my life as a struggling filmmaker. If you aren’t happy struggling, you won’t be happy successful. Getting good reception to a movie, everyone is surprised by how little that does for you on self-perception and how happy you are in life.”
JACK: “There was a big trap in film school where people thought their third-year film was going to be “it” and the best thing they have made. But it should just be a process where you are looking ahead.”
FRAZIER: “There has been this recent shift in the last 5 years with Australian films and the direction they are moving. I was just wondering your perspective on where it’s going and where you want the film scene to move and explore?”
JIM: “I am feeling very optimistic. I have met a lot of aspiring filmmakers and directors who have such interesting things to say. There is a trend of filmmakers playing with different genres which is something I definitely want to see continue.”
JACK: “I want to see something we didn’t do and that is more stuff in cities. Maybe it is a self-defence thing, but we push our movies away where there is nobody else. I saw films shot in Sydney and I was so excited to see films shot here. A good Sydney drama would be nice and I will be happy. But I am very excited because there are so many young filmmakers coming up.
Spider-man Into the Spider-verse was one of the best films of 2018 and perhaps the best superhero film of all time. It was a smash hit that balanced comedy, action and drama in a way animation has never done before. Now 5 years later we are finally getting one of the most anticipated sequels of the decade. But does it live up to the hype of the previous film or does it fall flat to recreate the same magic?
You cannot talk about this film without first diving into the animation. It is the most creative and clever use of this medium I have ever seen. Every character has their own style and each world truly feels separate from the others. In particular Gwen Stacy’s world. The way the animations move and flow, based on the dialogue, is incredible. I am so glad they took 5 years to put this film out because every single frame truly feels like a hand drawn painting.
What I loved about the first movie was the dynamic between Miles, his Uncle Aaron, and his father. It had some heartfelt moments that I was hoping would be kept in the sequel. Across the Spider-verse has an even stronger focus on family. Miles, Gwen, Peter B Parker and Miguel O Hara are all driven by their family. But what really made me love this film was the moments between Miles and his parents. Each scene felt personal and touching in a way I wasn’t expecting. I never got tired of these scenes and honestly preferred them over the action set pieces.
Across the Spider-verse has some of the best voice acting in animation. It doesn’t feel like any of these actors were cast for their fame, but instead because of their talent as voice actors. The returning cast is equally as captivating while the new characters almost steal the show. Daniel Kaluuya as Spider-Punk and Jason Schwartzman as the Spot are so charming and charismatic that I want to see them in their own films. They both have a strong character development over the movie that completely surprised me.
One core problem with every Sony movie ever made is the marketing. Once again, Sony showed basically every sequence from this film to the point where I knew where the movie was going. Now I didn’t even watch most of the trailers and still felt I knew way too much going in (I won’t be watching any trailer for the final part).
Most superhero films coming out have some pretty bland action set pieces. It’s usually two people with the same skill set doing karate or shooting lasers at each other. Lord and Miller knew this and knew they needed to subvert it. Every action scene in this film is incredible. The fast-paced animation and chaotic nature feels refreshing and engaging in a way a live action film simply couldn’t do.
Minor Spoilers
Across the Spider-verse is part one of two parts. Now if you didn’t know this, I think the ending might be a little frustrating. At first, I didn’t love the conclusion as it felt unsatisfying and I didn’t have any closure for this film. However, as I have thought about it more and more, I started to love the idea of keeping the audience hooked for a final movie. It feels like a big event now and makes me even more hyped for the final film.
Should you see Spider-man: Across the Spider-verse?
Spider-man: Across the Spider-verse is one of the best animated films I have ever seen. Even if you have no interest in superhero films it is at its core an excellent family film. It moves at a brilliant pace that wastes no time and keeps you engaged from start to finish. The writing is funny, heartfelt, and never feels forced or tiring. Go and see this film in cinemas, it is truly a cinematic event.
The first Guardians of the Galaxy movie came out almost 10 years ago. It was an instant hit and loved by Marvel fans and normies alike. However, I don’t think this film gets the praise it deserves. GOTG changed superhero and action blockbusters forever. Due to its critical and commercial success, studios were suddenly willing to take more risks on weirder properties. On top of this, countless other franchises took heavy inspiration from Gunn’s comedic tone, colours and soundtrack. Thereby, the question becomes does Gunn’s style still hold up or has it been ruined by the onslaught of MCU films?
James Gunn has written perhaps the best script the MCU has ever seen. It is a touching and heartbreaking story that has very powerful themes behind it. The film focuses on compassion for all living things but comes from a place that’s feels earnest and genuine. At no point in Guardians 3 did I feel I was being beaten over the head with exposition or characters trying to tell me what the film was about.
What is perhaps even more challenging is balancing these themes alongside humour. Unlike most MCU movies, Guardians of the Galaxy 3’s jokes never feel draining or quippy. Instead, it uses the characters personalities to create humour. I love this decision to hold back on the jokes because when they were in the film they felt that much more effective and punchy. In my cinema at least, no line ever missed the mark and was always met with laughs.
As you have seen from the trailers, Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3 is a story about Rocket Raccoon. We dive into his creation with flashbacks throughout the movie. These scenes were a constant gut punch that always touched the right heart strings. It transformed this pretty two-dimensional character into one of the most layered and complex heroes in the MCU. All of this was accomplished through amazing voice acting by Bradley Cooper and some astonishing VFX work.
While diving into the backstory of Rocket, Gunn still manages to balance the rest of the Guardians. Chris Pratt made me care for StarLord once again. He has an excellent arc that wraps up his previous mistakes while showing why he is the leader of this group. Zoe Saldana displays how different this Gamora is through her rage and morality. I also loved how Gunn doesn’t try to transform her back to her old self but sticks with this version of Gamora.
But for me Dave Bautista as Drax and Pom Klementieff as Mantis stole the show. They are such talented comedic actors that make every scene they’re in 10x better. This duo just have a brilliant chemistry that I would watch in movies that aren’t linked to the MCU. I do think there could have been more time contributed to Groot as he deals with some heavy emotions. He is a core character who never really got as much of an arc as I would have liked (I know it’s probably cause of how expensive he is).
On the other side of our heroes is the villain. It goes without saying that superhero films have a track record for weak villains but in GOTG 3 it is the complete opposite. Chukwudi Iwuji plays the High Evolutionary and delivers a stellar performance. He is an awful and delusional man who you truly despise. I think Gunn understood that too many MCU movies have villains who have good intentions and thereby wanted to go the complete opposite direction. The High Evolutionary maybe a simple villain with basic ambitions but he is a man you will truly hate.
Guardians of the Galaxy 3 is the most unique MCU movie I have ever seen. Amongst what I have said earlier, I think that there are two core reasons for this. Firstly, the designs. Every single movie Gunn makes gets weirder and grosser, but GOTG 3 is at the top of that list. The costumes, set designs and VFX all lead to this disgusting world that feels so refreshing amongst the MCU. Now at times, the VFX don’t hold up but it never took me out of the movie.
The second reason this film feels so unique is the violence and action. Guardians of the Galaxy 3 utilises gore and horror in a way even Raimi didn’t do. Some scenes were so brutal it had people in the audience looking in the opposite direction. But Gunn always brings us back to that fun and playful action he is famous for. In particular, there is a one take action scene unlike anything I have ever seen. It is easily one of the best marvel fight sequences and a brilliant achievement by Gunn and the crew.
While the Guardians movies are famous for their comedy, action and characters there is something perhaps that tops even this – the music. Those first two movies use music in a way that filmmakers have been copying ever since. But truthfully, this films music did not live up to the hype. While I love a lot of the songs in GOTG 3, it did not have the same tone and impact as the other movies. It honestly just felt like a few songs Gunn loves instead of a soundtrack that match the characters.
James Gunn has finished this trilogy off with the best film in the series and perhaps the best Marvel movie yet. It balances different themes, genres and styles but never feels like it loses its focus. Guardians of the Galaxy 3 is a three-hour movie that feels like 2 and is perfect for the cinemas. It’s ending made me realise how much I will miss these characters and value James Gunn as a filmmaker. His movies just get better and better and if I am Marvel I am shaking in my boots for the future of DC.
Air is a 2023 Drama written by Alex Convery and directed by Ben Affleck. It is set in the 1980s as Sonny Vaccaro and Nike attempt to pursue Michael Jordan for a shoe deal to change sports culture forever. Now I love basketball, but when I saw the trailer for this film it didn’t seem that interesting. Nevertheless, reviews started popping up saying this film was incredible. So as usual, I trekked out to the cinemas on Easter with a bag of snacks and a drink in my hand to see Air two days after its release.
Air has a solid script that kept me entertained throughout the entire film. But truthfully, I think it kind of stops there. The film is fun and light but just doesn’t have the same impact as other sport films like Moneyball. It wants to have these deeper themes of systemic change and the process but never feels truly there. I think it comes down to the goal of its core characters. Unlike Billy Beane’s drive to change baseball in Moneyball, Air’s core characters simply want to make more sales for their company. Essentially, Air just doesn’t have the same stakes and weight as other sport dramas.
FILE PHOTO: Chris Messina, Marlon Wayans, Ben Affleck, Viola Davis, Matt Damon, Julius Tennon, Jason Bateman, and Chris Tucker attend the world premiere of “AIR” at Regency Village Theatre in Los Angeles, California, U.S., March 27, 2023. REUTERS/Lauren Justice
What carries this film is the cast. Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, Chris Tucker and Jason Bateman are extremely entertaining to watch on screen. Their banter, wit and charisma is what makes this film fly by. But as I said before, these characters simply lack any real development. I am sure it was a purposeful decision to not explore these men in too much detail but I really believe it negatively impacts this film. Even our main character – Sonny Vaccaro – feels very two dimensional and bland. Except for a small story by Jason Bateman, none of them have any moments that feel heartfelt and earnest.
An artistic choice of Ben Affleck was to not have Michael Jordan’s face or voice in Air at all. Now I get what they were going for when you have Voila Davis in the film. She is an incredible actor who gives a tough and steely performance but this decision felt very weird. Every time Michael was in a scene it completely took me out of the moment as they awkwardly cut around his face. I get the story isn’t about him, but I think a different choice would have been much more natural.
Incredible performance by Chris Messina.
Should you see Air?
Air is an enjoyable film that will keep you entertained from start to finish. It has great performances by some big names that carry the film over the line. However, it is lacking that extra layer of meaning that a truly exceptional sport film requires. I would see this film in cinemas if you are looking for something fun and simple to watch.
The John Wick series is one of the biggest and best action franchises in Hollywood. I loved the first film and thought the sequels were solid follow ups that built on the world and expanded the lore. The fourth John Wick film is one of the most hyped movies of the year. Critics and audiences are loving it, and this is reflected in the box office. Nevertheless, I went into this film worried it would just repeat the previous Wick movies. So, did this movie use its 2hr 50min run time successfully or was it a recycle of its predecessors?
I think everyone going into John Wick 4 has an expectation when it comes to the action. The one takes, close combat and headshots are all staples of this franchise. Forget all that because John Wick 4 completely reinvents the wheel. The locations, camera angles and stunts are phenomenal and some of the best action of the last 10 years. This film builds up each sequence perfectly and even when you think it’s done, they level it up. I just have so much respect for the stunt coordinators and stunt doubles who keep improving on every film.
Now with every action movie, there comes the scenes in between the set pieces that can sometimes just be fillers. With John Wick 4, it wasn’t awful, but I did find myself getting a little bored. Characters seem to repeat what’s at stake and constantly saying poetic or “badass” lines just to sound cool. When the run time is almost 3 hours, I think a lot of the scenes could just be cut down by a few minutes. Honestly, I would have loved if the first 20mintues were all exposition and character building and then the next 2 hours were straight non-stop action (maybe that’s just me).
The world that Chad Stahelski (Director) and Jonathan Stela (DOP) have created is beautiful. Every shot has this specific style and feel that accentuates the gothic underworld of John Wick. Even though the lighting is over the top and exaggerated it feels natural for these characters. It’s so refreshing to see blockbusters that are doing engaging things with the shooting that isn’t just a grey scale colour grade (MCU).
For the first 30minutes of John Wick 4, I was thrown off by the actors. What I mean by that is that they are all giving such exaggerated performances that it surprised me. Eventually, I settled into them because I realised this was all on purpose. Keanu Reeves, Donnie Yen and Lawrence Fishburn are trying to be over the top because they know that it fits the genre. In addition, Bill Skarsgard and Scott Adkins were amazing in this film. They perfectly embodied these sinister characters and were extremely entertaining to watch on screen.
Shamier Anderson as Tracker in John Wick: Chapter 4. Photo Credit: Murray Close
SPOILERS
The ending of John Wick 4 felt a little unsatisfying. It felt like the whole film was building to something big and surprising, but nothing ever really changed. The duel between Donnie Yen and Keanu Reeves was not entertaining and a disappointing way to wrap up the film. I would have loved if it was an actual fight sequence between Bill Skarsgard and Keanu Reeves. Personally, it would have been a massive twist if he was this incredible fighter who was actually on the same level as Wick.
SHOULD YOU SEE THIS FILM?
Absolutely. John Wick 4 will be remembered as one of the best action movies of all time and is definitely worth seeing on the biggest screen possible. While it drags in parts, the action is truly incredible and the film looks beautiful.
After seeing Scream 5 I was completely sucked back into this franchise. While the film wasn’t anything new, it was still an excellent sequel and a very entertaining movie. For the first time in maybe forever, I was excited for a Scream film. It had a great cast, good directors and most importantly a new premise. But Scream 6 surprised me in multiple ways I didn’t except – some for the best and some for the worst.
What I love about this franchise is simply how entertaining they are and Scream 6 is no exception. From the beginning to the end of this film, I was glued to the screen because there was never really a slump. It was such a fun and enjoyable ride that reminded me why I love these films so much.
A big push for this film was how aggressive and dangerous the new Ghost Face would be (something that really interested me). Now there is one scene early on where they do feel more threatening – the killer is killing randoms, twisting knifes deeper and using new weapons. But the rest of the film, it essentially reverts to the same old ghost face. I would have loved to see this continue, with a ghost face that’s even more unhinged (maybe torturing victims or fucking with them more).
Building on from this, I think the horror in Scream 6 is perhaps some of the worst it’s ever been. There was never any point that felt like it was really trying to be scary. Maybe it was intentional because the directors wanted to move in a more action focused genre, but I never felt tense like in previous Scream movies.
Something I didn’t expect from Scream 6 was to love the core cast as much as I did. In number 5, I found a lot of them annoying and over the top but in this film, they feel a lot more dialled back. Just like Drew Barrymore, Samara Weaving stole the opening of this film and I instantly wanted to see more of her. I also loved Melissa Barrera because she felt more dangerous than the killer and had this refreshing intensity to her. Finally, Mason Gooding really stood out with a natural charisma that makes me want to see him in everything.
I think an underlying issue with this franchise is they feel each one must repeat some core tropes – the group stuck in a room being killed, someone breaking down the rules of horror movies, the killer being revealed at the end blah blah blah, its boring and repetitive. None of this needs to happen for this franchise to be successful and loved. What was engaging to me about this movie was the new direction they allude to but which they didn’t follow through with. So thereby I present to you, the
THE FORTY-FOUR CLOVERS SCREAM FILM
As soon as I finished the film I was very excited to write about how I would have made it (no offense intended). The best scenes from Scream 6 were when the protagonists were out in the streets of New York. Now I understand that the budget wasn’t huge, and they wouldn’t be able to afford it but hear me out…
Imagine this film but completely set in one night on Halloween. You have Melissa Barrera starting off with a huge group of friends as they slowly get taken out. Like Die Hard, she gets more and more injured but because its Halloween no one takes notice. Having the ghost face masks everywhere is an amazing psychological horror element that wasn’t utilised enough in this film.
Melissa Barrera (“Sam Carpenter”) stars in Paramount Pictures and Spyglass Media Group’s “Scream VI.”
Melissa has this physicality to her of a true action star that should be explored. Imagine Escape from New York or the Purge 2 but a Scream Edition. It could have been an excellent action / horror film that completely revamped this franchise. You don’t even need to have one singular killer but instead have a group of Richie loyalists all out for revenge against Melissa (like the Batman).
SPOILERS
I feel bad for the writers because trying to pick a killer who the audience doesn’t immediately suspect is near impossible. Nevertheless, this one felt particularly bad. It’s basically the most obvious guess you could have because they just did Scream 2 again. In my head, I was sure it was Mathew Lillard but that’s probably because I just wanted it to be (I pray they are saving him for the next one). While there were certainly some great twists, I don’t think the ending was as satisfying as previous films.
The Future of Scream
In Scream 5 and 6 they allude to Melissa Barrera being some sort of serial killer. In Scream 7, I know they will probably tap into this a little more, but I think the whole film should be about her having this violent streak. They can’t just do the same thing again or this franchise will fall off. Maybe a film about her taking on the mantle and killing anyone who is associated with the killers would be refreshing. While she is doing this, someone is chasing her down and trying to kill her (Mathew Lillard). I just think there is so much more potential for this franchise that isn’t being explored.
Josh Allan is a Brisbane based writer and director. Recently, he released a short film called 2:32AM which has won multiple awards and screened at countless festivals. It is truly an incredible short-film about human connection and finding your place in the world. As soon as I saw it, I knew I had to grab an interview with Josh. Read on for our conversation about his short film, movies and his future.
On 2:32Am
What is 2:32Am about?
“It’s a short film about two lonely strangers learning to find that deeper connection that they’re both missing. Titus is this sort of rough around the edges, charismatic character that has an internal conflict he needs to address. Whereas Caleb is more of that reclusive Uni student who hasn’t made close friends.”
What was your process writing this short film?
Josh Allan on set of 2:32Am
“I find writing challenging. My process is kind of all over the place. It starts with messy feelings or ideas that I will start to write into a script. I have also learnt to integrate feedback a lot. My main process is trusting my intuition while also reaching out for help.”
What were the biggest challenges of creating an indie film and how you overcame them?
“I found that on set we had a limited time to shoot. It was difficult trying to work to a schedule while trying to preserve the quality. What I am always learning is to trust yourself, the material and the people around you. Trust amid the stress is key.”
How do you run your set?
“To me a lot of problems that you need to solve during production start in pre-production. I like to have in depth discussions before I get on set. Most of the tension on set comes from a lack of creative alignment. If someone is stressed or angry I just try and see it from their perspective.”
How you battle lack of motivation?
“The thing that helps me is if I am stuck on one project, I jump onto another temporarily. I am a filmmaker and I also do music, so I swap between them.”
Cast and Crew of 2:32AM
Talking Film
What filmmakers inspire you
“Richard Linklater. I find the way he wrote stuff – from a very personal / semi-autobiographical place – very interesting. Rather than having an overt plot, conversation becomes the plot. In interviews for the Before Trilogy, he was saying the connection is cinematic enough.”
“Steven Spielberg and George Lucas. While they don’t influence my style, they inspired me to make films.”
Can you list four of your favourite movies?
Josh on set
“Manchester by the Sea I really like because my Dad and I connect through it. Short Term 12 I could watch that movie forever. One that has stuck with me and ignited something within was Whiplash. It showed me that a story based in the real world can be more anxiety inducing than a horror. Also, Kramer vs Kramer I clicked with it because my parents got divorced when I was that age.”
The Future
What’s next for you?
“I am one of the producers of an up-and-coming indie film studio. We have been making some micro short films and we have a drama/ thrill coming out called Sparring. It’s like a Whiplash style psychological thriller about a military guy being interrogated by a dictatorial figure.”
2:32AM
Where do you want Australian movies to move?
“Truthfully, I am not that wired into the Australian film industry and the trends. For me, I don’t feel much pressure to try and represent the whole country. It’s fine for filmmakers to make something that doesn’t have to be distinctively Australian. Also, I think filmmakers worry too much about what the market wants and appealing to a demographic.”
For as long as I can remember, Science Fiction has been one of my favourite genres as a filmmaker and storyteller. Consistent rewatches of films like Star Wars, Alien and Blade Runner have never failed to transport me to galactic worlds and alien stars I couldn’t imagine on my own.
So I’ll admit, before the announcement that Denis Villeneuve would direct a film adaptation of Frank Herbert’s 1965 Sci-Fi Epic, Dune, I had no prior knowledge of the source material or legacy that the Dune saga had paved through pop culture during its history.
However, after viewing Villeneuve’s film adaptation of Frank Herbert’s classic, I found myself tumbling down the Dune rabbit hole.
Upon researching and studying every book, short story, and journal penned by the late author, it became clear to me that the lasting legacy of the Dune saga has greatly influenced the modern genre of Science Fiction as we know it today, both through page and screen. Leaving behind an eternal legacy that transcends culture, language, and influence.
Gurney Halleck (Josh Brolin), Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) and Sir Duke Leto Atreides (Oscar Isaac)
In this retrospective and analytical article, I wish to unpack what truly makes Dune so influential for both storytellers and audiences alike. By reviewing and scrutinising the written work of Frank Herbert’s Dune Saga, as well as the film adaptation directed by Denis Villeneuve (2021, 2023), only then can the full franchise’s impact be fully realized.
By the end of this paper, my goal is to truly showcase just how important and influential the Dune franchise has had on both filmmakers and storytellers alike.
Hopefully, this article will inspire others to delve deep into the Dune mythology itself and learn more about this universe before Villeneuve’s Dune Part 2 is released later this year.
Editor’s Note: I am only taking Dune books penned by Frank Herbert into consideration when discussing the cultural impact of the Dune Series. Any Dune books penned after Frank’s death, (1986), will not be taken into consideration.
Frank Herbert’s Dune Saga:
Dune’s First Publication Cover (1965).
“I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.”
Paul Atreides
Before Dune’s first publication in 1965, Science Fiction literature was often depicted in short, self-contained, single-print narratives. Novels akin to George Orwell’s 1984 (1948), and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) were seen as the pinnacle of Science Fiction literature. However, there had been little to no attempt in novel writing to create a wide-spreading Sci-Fi universe with its own living ecosystem, society and, politics which evolves and adapts with its characters over time and with each subsequent novel.
However, with the publication of Frank Herbert’s Dune in 1965, this apparent gap in the sci-fi market had seemingly become filled. The original Dune novel is an extremely dense and rich, space soap opera, filled to the brim with warring houses, self-fulfilling prophecies, prophets, space witchcraft and, giant alien sand worms, all set on the desert planet of Arrakis, the most important planet in the Dune universe.
Paul Arteides / Muad’ Dib (Protagonist of Dune)
Pulling influence from both Middle-Eastern and Islamic settings, culture and ideology, the Dune saga primarily follows the journey of hero, Paul Arteides who gallantly defends the ownership of the desert planet, Arrakis against the archenemy Baron Harkonnen.
Dune (1965), follows Paul as he grows from a young man bestowed with great potential. Along his journey of self-discovery, Paul will learn what he was truly born to be, why his destiny lies in the Arrakis sands and, how to finally defeat the Baron Harkonnen.
Along Paul’s heroic journey, he will also be prophesied by the Bene GesseritSisterhood (Future Seeing Space Witches) to become The Kwisatz Haderach (The Chosen One). Paul is unknowingly sent down a path that will alter and change the course of the Dune universe for centuries.
Dune tells a story about what it truly means to become a messiah and why it’s so hard to be a leader.
Baron Harkonnen (Antagonist of the first Dune book)
Widely considered to be the book that propelled the Sci-Fi genre into the mainstream, the original Dune publication along with its subsequent sequels, (Dune Messiah, Children of Dune,God Emperor of Dune, Heretics of Dune and, Chapterhouse Dune), were all revered by both critics and audiences alike, providing a successful blueprint on how to create a compelling and fascinating Sci-Fi story.
The Kwisatz Haderach (The Chosen One and Paul’s destiny)
Frank Herbet’s writing influence can also be seen in many books and films that subsequently came out after the Dune saga conclude, films such as Star Wars (George Lucas), 2001: A Space Odyssey (Stanley Kubrick) and, Contact (Robert Zemeckis) all share similar elements that call back to Frank Herbert’s original work.
However, despite the Dune saga’s ability to captivate its audience and its capability to provide the groundwork on how to craft a compelling Sci-Fi story for the next generation of filmmakers and storytellers. Dune itself wasn’t as lucky when it came to the transition from book to film.
Dennis Villeneuve’s 2021 Dune:
“The willow submits to the wind and prospers until one day it is many willows—a wall against the wind. This is the willow’s purpose.”
Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohaim
Prior to Denis Villeneuve’s Dune adaptation, there had been several attempts within Hollywood to convert Brian Herbert’s magnum opus to the silver screen, all of which produced less than stellar results.
Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) & Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohaim (Charlotte Rampling)
“A longstanding dream of mine is to adapt Dune, but it’s a long process to get the rights, and I don’t think I will succeed”. – Denis Villenuve (2016)
Films like David Lynch’s Dune (1984), John Harrison’s Dune miniseries (2000) and, Alejandro Jodorowsky cancelled Dune project all failed to properly adapt and live up to the ingenuity of the original Dune book saga. This consistent inability to adapt Dune to the big screen caused many within the film industry to believe that Dune was unfilmable and too difficult to adapt.
Sir Duke Leto Atreides (Oscar Isaac) & Duncan Idaho (Jason Mamoa)
Enter Denis Villeneuve, coming off the critically acclaimed Blade Runner 2049 (2017), Denis Villeneuve proved he could handle large Sci-Fi projects that rely heavily on subtext and layered storytelling. Plus with Villeneuve eager to adapt Dune himself, it made perfect sense for Warner Brothers to put Denis Villeneuve at the helm.
Thus, after entering production in 2018 and having its release date pushed back several times due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Dune: Part 1 was released to the public on October 22nd, 2021 to widespread acclaim. Renowned for Villeneuve’s direction, its cinematography/visuals and its adaption of Frank Herbert’s original vision for the Dune universe.
Lady Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson) & Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet)
To ensure that this adaptation of Dune’s narrative flowed smoother than previous attempts, Denis Villeneuve and co-writers, Jon Spaihts and Eric Roth, opted to split the book’s story into two parts, allowing for the 155-minute story to breathe and delve deeper into the political and messiah themes that form the story backbone of Dune’s narrative.
Paul Atreides learning about Arrakis, the Fremen, and its Spice Harvesting.
This film covers the first half of Paul’s story, showcasing his struggles with the concept of leadership, his fears about becoming the Kwitsatz Haderach and the transition from a boy to a leader. This setup of Paul’s character, however, feels natural and fluent thanks to Timothée Chalamet’s stellar performance and Villenuve’s direction.
Director Dennis Villenuve, Timothée Chalamet and, DOP Greg Fraser on the Caladan Set.
Dune: Part 1 also marks Denis Villeneuve’s first collaboration with Australian Cinematographer, Greig Fraser. Notable for his work on both The Batman (2022) and Rogue One (2016), Greig Fraser’s expertise with a camera is on full display in this feature. Each frame of Dune: Part 1 feels like a painted portrait, with character, composition and craftsmanship oozing from each shot.
House Ateries arrival on Planet Arrakis.
From the harsh yellows and oranges that radiate off the Arrakis sand dunes, to the calm blues and greens of planet Caladan. Both colour and set design play vital roles in Fraser’s cinematography, these elements are used to properly cement the audience into the Dune universe and establish just how different this world is from our own.
Planet CaladanPlanet Arrakis
Greg Fraser would go on to win Best Cinematography at the Academy Awards for his work on Dune. Dune would also sweep the Oscars in the technical department, winning Best Visual Effects, Production Design, Costume Design and, Makeup / Hairstyling—a true testament to Dune’s production team.
Paul sees his future after accidentally coming in contact with the spice.
The Sardaukar (The Emperor’s Guard)
Overall, Dune: Part 1 serves as the beginning of something special. Not only does it stand as a technical masterpiece that balances both Denis Villeneuve’s dense storytelling and Greg Fraser’s gorgeous cinematography. Dune: Part 1 also finally breaks the long-standing notion that Frank Herbert’s work is impossible to transition from page to screen successfully.
Dune: Part 1 firmly pulls Frank Herbert’s classic Sci-Fi story into the 21st century and finally gives filmatic justice to what many consider to be the original Sci-Fi Epic.
Dune’s Legacy on Storytelling and Filmmaking:
The Hero’s Journey, a story guideline on how main characters should grow throughout their story.
“Dreams make good stories, but everything important happens when we’re awake”
Duncan Idaho
Ever since Dune’s first publication in 1965, Frank Herbert’s work has seemingly influenced many stories that subsequently released after the Dune saga had concluded.
Sci-Fi films such as George Lucas’s ‘Star Wars’ (1977), Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979) & Blade Runner (1982) and, the Wachowski’s Matrix (1999), all seemingly take inspiration and elements from the Dune universe and rework them to become each director own.
Arrakis (Paul Atreides’s New Homeworld) Tatooine (Luke Skywalker’s Homeworld)
Luke Skywalker and Paul Atreides share similar Sci-Fi heroic journeys, being destined to bring stability to a galaxy needing saving from an evil dictator (Star Wars’ Empire and Dune’s House Harkonnen).
Heroes like Neo from ‘The Matrix’ and Case from the ‘Neuromancer’ series also follow this Sci-Fi heroes journey that was popularised by Frank Herbert’s Dune publication in 1965. Characters that are pulled out of their normal lives to explore their world and better the universe they live in.
Conclusion
“Before The Matrix, before Star Wars, before Ender’s Game and Neuromancer, there was Dune – the great science fiction novel ever written.”
First Paragraph of Dune’s 50th anniversary blurb.
Frank Herbert’s Dune Saga has done so much to popularise and solidify Science Fiction as a staple in the cultural zeitgeist. Dune proved to both creatives and critics that Sci-Fi stories can be compelling and engaging while also having stakes that are bigger and more complex than ever thought before 1965.
And while Dune for the longest time failed to receive the recognition it deserved for its major influence on modern Sci-Fi. Dune’s recent film resurgence and success, led by Denis Villeneuve, has helped revitalise the series and helped Frank Herbert’s original work finally receive the praise it has long deserved.
Dune is Science Fiction’s original epic and still stands as one of the genre’s best even 50 years after its inception.
I am pretty sure I am in the majority when I say I didn’t give a shit about the first Avatar, and I especially didn’t give a shit when they announced the new one. It’s not a hot take but this franchise never pulled me in or made me care. Nevertheless, I knew I had to see it. For the visual effects alone, I knew it would still be an entertaining and thrilling watch. But after seeing it in a packed-out cinema yesterday, I can safely say I was surprised…
James Cameron made an excellent decision going into this film that completely saved it for me – Avatar 2 isn’t about Jake Sully or Neytiri. Instead, it is about the kids. One of the worst parts about that first movie is how boring the protagonists are. They have no charisma and charm and have a super predictable arc. In this movie, we explore the relationships between the children and the reef clan. These characters are engaging and for once I care about these blue people on the screen. It truly saved the franchise and made me excited to see them grow up.
As the lights went dark and the film started rolling, I quickly settled into the world of pandora once again. Avatar 2 starts at a breakneck speed that I loved. It gets the audience up to date and doesn’t waste any time. What’s even better is that the film keeps this pacing. It bounces between action set pieces in a thrilling first hour. Then, we go into the Water Clan. Now I enjoyed the dynamics between the families and a lot of the underwater scenes, but it just goes on for about 15 minutes too long. In particular, the Tulkun set peices. I get it’s pivotal for the themes and arcs but some of it could be cut out.
You can’t talk about Avatar 2 without going into the Visual Effects. They are obviously incredible. I think they especially shine in the action scenes in the final act. The way the fire and water bounce of each other is astonishing. I also love the style of this film. Each shot has this super exaggerated lighting that is refreshing amongst a slate of grey action films. The colours pop and bounce and the Navi were never not convincing as real beings.
While all of these elements worked for Avatar, it still had some fundamental flaws. The main weakness (which has been said plenty) is that the story is predictable. It has no twists or turns and went the exact way I expected. Although it didn’t ruin the movie for me, this needs to change if they want to keep this franchise exciting.
Another core issue I had with Avatar 2 was the performances. Everyone kind of blended in together for me and didn’t stand out. It’s not that they were terrible it’s just a movie this big should have better performances. I truly believe it’s because James Cameron is so focused on the VFX and action that he doesn’t give his attention to the actors. Even Kate Winslet felt underutilised with her range. I know how talented these actors are and I would love to see them really attempt something bigger in the following movies.
SHOULD YOU SEE AVATAR: THE WAY OF WATER?
Absolutely. Avatar 2 is a movie that must be seen in cinema for the Visual Effects alone. While the story is predictable, it is still a thrilling and entertaining ride that has incredible action set pieces.
