Clancy Once Again (Movie Review)

Image result for clancy once again
An actual copyrighted screenshot

Plot Summary

If you thought that Clancy ended where the title character died, you thought wrong (unless this head-scratching sequel is actually a long dream). After they appeared to be on the right track with Reading Kate, husband-and-wife film-making duo Jefferson and Kelly Worthington Moore have create an unnecessary follow-up to a film no one really remembers about characters the audience can’t connect with. In this sequel, Nick Best and Clancy are back to…do things…like get involved in street fighting (see copyrighted photo above) and usurp the rule of law because they feel like it. Beyond that, it’s hard to pinpoint what this movie’s actually about.

Production Quality (1 point)

As a fairly recent production, we should be seeing Moore more from Kelly’s Filmworks than this. While they have a flair for some creative camera angles and establishing shots at times, there are too many dark scenes in this film as well as a lot of silent portions that lack adequate soundtrack support. While video quality is mostly fine, sets, locations, and props are somewhat limited in scope, which doesn’t really hold the attention well. The most glaring problems that negatively affect the entire viewing experience relate to the high amount of long, drawn-out sequences that reflect lazy editing and a desperation to squeeze runtime from the thin amount of movie content. As a whole, while this production isn’t glaringly bad, it’s just not enough coming from a film outfit that’s produced more than five movies, especially since the field has higher production standards these days.

Plot and Storyline Quality (1 point)

The sole point given to this plot is only because of the hilarious exchange between the two main characters about Hallmark cards and Fakebook. Otherwise, there’s nothing to offer here. After the riveting opening sequence about the previous movie’s events, which appears to suggest Clancy Once Again is actually an alternate ending for the first one or some kind of dream sequence epilogue within the former film, this rendition of the uninteresting Clancy story is full of awkwardly useless conversations and complete with a cheesy villain return subplot. As it desperately grasps for content and purpose amidst a confused landscape and forced premise, unrealistic happenings move things along in order to create an unnecessary suspense feel. Full of coincidences and convenient turns, Clancy Once Again advocates for vigilante citizens taking matters into their own hands rather than trying to wait for the authorities. Obviously, there may be a time and place for this type of action, but the reasons behind it in this film are absurd. When all else fails to keep the runtime above ninety minutes, recycled footage from the first film everybody forgot about is right there to extend your viewing experience. In the end, there’s little else to be said except that this is the most unnecessary sequel in the history of unnecessary sequels (and there’s lots of those).

Acting Quality (1 point)

Jefferson Moore’s unusual preoccupation with Christina Fougnie continues in Clancy Once Again, and her acting skills have not improved with age. In this film, she comes off as even more full of herself as her line delivery is shrill and her emotional expressions are off-putting. Other cast members are bland and vanilla with Moore taking on his usual persona, which wouldn’t be all that bad if he actually had lines to work with. Most cast members seem to be phoning in their performances. One standout issue with this section is noticeably bad makeup throughout the whole cast (but most notably on Fougnie). In the end, this rounds out a subpar film lost in a growing sea of Christian movies that’s leaving the old guard behind.

Conclusion

Jefferson and Kelly were on the right track with Reading Kate, but they’ve lost their way again with a useless sequel to a boring film no one cared about in the first place. Where are they headed as movie creators? It’s hard to say, but they certainly won’t accept dissent or any constructive criticism. They do have experience and some production\writing skills to bring to the table, but they will only find true success in a collaborative environment. However, we somehow doubt this will ever happen since they’ve been content to operate on their own all these years. Thus, whatever talent they have will likely continue to go to waste.

Final Rating: 3 out of 10 points

Advertisements

1 Message (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

Becca Norris had it all—money, success, and a boyfriend—until her doctor discovers that she has breast cancer and requires a major operation to save her life.  However, the operation leaves her changed forever, thus causing her boyfriend to become uninterested in her.  His departure sends Becca into a reclusive depression that no one, not even her family, can shake her out of.  Yet when her brother gets interested in internet research, Becca meets a man online who is interested in her as a person and who makes her think twice about shutting herself off from the world.

 

Production Quality (1.5 points)

1 Message falls into the typical mold of a Kelly’s Filmworks production.  With good video quality and overly artistic camera shots, this film is classic Jefferson Moore.  Audio quality is fine, but the soundtrack is a bit off.  There is basically only one set in this film, but the props are good.  Though this production tends to improve as it goes on, there is little to no justification for it being two and a half hours long.  There is a serious lack of editing in this movie that will cause many audiences to give up by the first hour.  In the end, this is an average production that needs some more fleshing out and cutting down in order to make it more professional.

Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)

As previously mentioned, it is mind-boggling that this film is two and a half hours long when there is certainly not enough interesting content to sustain this runtime.  The first hour or so of the film is incredibly boring and melodramatic as it confusingly conceals parts of the story for the second hour.  The first half includes a fixation on breast cancer and ‘genie-ologies’, as well as weird attempts at humor.  A majority of the ‘dialogue’ is people verbatim typing and reading stuff on the computer over and over again, which is incredibly boring and does nothing to build the characters, even though there are few of them.  Time is also wasted and filled with activities of daily living, including the characters lying around and sulking, which further stunts character development.  However, if you have the time and stamina, the story comes down to an interesting point if you can slog through two hours of useless content.  Basically, this film needs a serious redo, because as it is, nobody is going to give a care.

Acting Quality (1 point)

With such a small cast, most errors stand out, unfortunately.  Though there is some good to be found here, there is also a lot of bad, including some very boring and dry emotions, ridiculously over the top attempts to be dramatic, and very measure line delivery.  Unfortunately, Kelly’s Filmworks films seem to consistently struggle in this department.

Conclusion

With a movie this long, there should have been plenty of positive things to say.  However, rather than making this a deep character exploration plot, time is filled with fluff and fake drama that ruins the good idea that is behind this plot.  We can appreciate the work of Jefferson and Kelly Moore, but they often get too lost in the artistry of film making.  They would do well to collaborate with different story writers so they can more effectively create films.  We believe that they mean well—they just need to take that next step.

 

Final Rating: 3 out of 10 points

 

Clancy [2009] (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

Nick Best is a down on his luck veteran of the military who has chosen to live on the streets due to his drinking habits and his emotional issues.  But he is given a so-called second chance when the corrupt mayor of the city he hangs around tells the chief of police to offer a substantial amount of money to Nick for him to keep, Clancy, a runaway abused girl for a week so that the mayor, who is losing his reelection campaign, can have a media field day.  Skeptical of this elaborate scheme, Nick decides to take the girl under his wing to protect her, but he soon finds that she is changing his outlook on life.

 

Production Quality (.5 point)

Why do Kelly’s Filmworks productions always look so drab?  It’s like they were all filmed in cloudy weather.  Though the video quality of Clancy is fine, the camera work is atrocious, including very tight shots and shaky camera work that looks like it was literally filmed in an alley with a camcorder.  Thus, the lighting is very inconsistent and there are constant loud outside sounds.  There is no soundtrack to speak of—just background silence.  Sets and locations are very cheap—no thought was given to making them look interesting.  Finally, there is absolutely no editing as all content is included—and we mean all content.  Every Jefferson Moore silent staring scene is here.  In short, the continual creation of Kelly’s Filmworks productions is baffling to us.  They obviously aren’t spending much money on these, but what is the real point if it’s going to look this bad?

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

Clancy includes perhaps the most trumped up scheme possible.  Who really believes that a corrupt mayor (aka the most cheesy villain available besides Goliath from Timothy Chey’s David and Goliath) would pay off a random homeless guy to keep an abused girl ‘safe’ for a week in order to boost reelection chances?  In what universe would that work?  Most importantly, why do we need a movie about this?  Why do we need to be forced to see long sequences of characters (mostly Jefferson Moore) wandering around and staring into the distance?  There is no way this is going to hold anyone’s attention, especially when the dialogue is extremely void and lackadaisical.  The story is based on far too many coincidences to keep it going and there is so little content here that we can hardly believe the runtime lasted as long as it did.  All we can say is that we were glad when it was over.

Acting Quality (0 points)

Recycling the same old cast members from Kelly’s Filmworks (they weren’t that good in the first place), Clancy is much like the others from this company.  Makeup is bad, costuming is laughable.  The only emotions present are either deadpan or over the top.  The line delivery is beyond lazy.  One would think these cast members would get better with experience.

Conclusion

Jefferson Moore and company are experts at thinking up the most mundane movie ideas and then following through with them.  How have they made so many feature length films?  One thing you can say for them is that they save money—in all the wrong ways.  These movies are definitely easy and cheap to make, but why do we need them?  They are utterly pointless and contribute nothing.  Maybe they won’t make as many in the future.  But wait…there’s a sequel to this film????

 

Final Rating: .5 out of 10 points

 

The Perfect Gift {The Perfect Christmas} [2009] (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

Maxine is a spoiled girl who doesn’t like the fact that everyone always does something else on her birthday, which happens to be on Christmas Day.  Her mother is overworked and barely has time for her, so she takes Maxine help her struggling pastor neighbor at church.  At the church, Maxine meets a mysterious but kind drifter who is helping the pastor fix things up for Christmas.  As Maxine spends more time around him, she begins to change and have a new perspective in life.  As people continue to attack Christmas, she becomes a strong defender of the day, even though it’s also her birthday.

 

Production Quality (0 points)

It’s clear that not much care was given to this production.  The video quality is quite poor and many camera shorts are very tight.  Also, outside scenes are glaring and loud.  Audio quality is equally poor, including a Christmas soundtrack that is blaringly loud in some parts.  A lot of props look very cheap to the point that cast members can barely use them.  Sets and locations are nothing wowing.  As for editing, there are too many wasted uncut scenes.  Yet there are also abrupt and awkward transitions between some scenes.  Basically, this is an amateur effort that did not pay off.

Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)

The entire premise of The Perfect Gift is the typical ‘war on Christmas’ mantra, including tons of asides about characters being ‘persecuted’ for saying ‘Merry Christmas’ and such.  The giant strawman is made of the so-called ‘anti-Christmas agenda’, including terms like ‘winter tree’ and ‘winter gala’. Besides these juvenile false conflicts, nothing else really happens in this plot.  It’s very boring and does not hold the attention.  Many occurrences are unrealistic and all the characters are quite childish.  Odd and offbeat dialogue peppers the movie and makes it an unintentional comedy.  Perhaps the most perplexing part of this film is the fact that the Jesus character—who is also the creator of the film—has an impassioned speech at the end that actually raises several good points regarding the alleged conflict between atheists and Christmas.  Yet Jefferson Moore, the creator, does not seem to actually believe what he is saying, since he inserted so much red meat into the movie about people being anti-Christmas.  Overall, The Perfect Gift is both low quality and confusing, an odd combination indeed.

Acting Quality (0 points)

Unfortunately, the story does not get any better here.  The few cast members that there are come off as either very obnoxious or totally dead inside.  Line delivery is awkward and emotions are childish.  The makeup work is amateurish.  Basically, there is not much good to say about this film.

Conclusion

Jefferson Moore seems to have a good heart and some slightly interesting ideas.  He can probably be credited with writing the original plots that have characters encountering Jesus in everyday circumstances.  But with such low production and acting quality, The Perfect Gift will have very little of the impact that it’s intended to have.  Fixing these two areas would be a good start to improving this film.  It really seems like Moore needed some help with this film and it’s a shame to see some of his ideas go to waste.  Perhaps there will be better things in store for the future.

 

Final Rating: .5 point out of 10 points