Mr. What (Movie Review)

Plot Summary

Mattiesko Wuopio, AKA Mr. What, served a twenty-two year prison term for something he did not do.  Now that he is out, he is having trouble finding someone who will trust him due to his record.  However, a past friend decides to give him a shot by offering him a cheap rental and some job leads.  Mr. What also befriends a local boy and a dog, who help him carry on even when things get tough.

 

Production Quality (1 point)

Much like its predecessor Sidewalk Singer, Mr. What is an okay production due to good video and camera work.  Audio quality is also fine, even though the soundtrack is quite generic.  Moreover, sets, locations, and props are relatively limited, much like in Sidewalk Singer.  Also, much like many movies of this caliber, the editing is poor and leaves too many lagging scenes and boring sequences in the runtime.  But then again, there really isn’t much to work with here.  Basically, this is another drab film from this team.

Plot and Storyline Quality (0 points)

It is very hard to differentiate the storylines of Sidewalk Singer and Mr. What because they are virtually the same idea.  This idea is a boring one at that.  Once again, in Mr. What, there are very few characters in this tale, yet they are still not deep enough for us to get to know them.  This is due to very flat dialogue and a famine of real plot content.  Much like its predecessor, Mr. What really just needed to be a short film if the creators wanted to test their movie making skills.  This is not the sort of story that is going to make a real difference in the field.

Acting Quality (1 point)

With basically the same cast as Sidewalk Singer, Mr. What is still uninspiring.  While there is some potential here and it seems like the cast members mean well, there is no follow-through.  They need more coaching and development to avoid being so matter of fact, overly-practiced, and unsure.  But perhaps they will improve in the future.

Conclusion

So you want to make a nice, simple film: great!  Does it have to be released to the public?  Does it have to be a full length?  These questions really need to asked.  Sure, you want to recoup your production costs, but is your movie dynamic enough to at least build your resume and attract future investors?  We need films that will change the Christian entertainment industry and the entire industry as a whole, not another cute little Christian movie.

 

Final Rating: 2 out of 10 points

 

Advertisement

For the Glory [2012] (Movie Review)

Your guess is as good as ours

Plot Summary

Kurt Kuykendall is a highly gifted basketball player who has it all, including a possible Olympic future.  But his home life is a wreck, which leads to tragedy and his being cut from the basketball team.  He feels like his life is over, but all is not lost, because God opens up a new door for him—playing soccer—that he would have never thought was possible.  The only question is, will Kurt seek God or remain bitter about the past?

 

Production Quality (1 point)

While some measures were taken to make this production good, too many corners were cut here.  Video quality and audio quality are on par, though the soundtrack is pedestrian, but there is too much shaky camera work, especially in the sports sequences.  Speaking of the sports sequences, they are too repetitive and redundant, including some unnecessarily recycled footage.  Thus, there are too many sports montages, which reflects poor editing and a general lack of content, even though this film is supposed to be an epic about a real person’s life.  Sets and locations are also fairly limited.  Therefore, though this production looks good on the surface, it does not do enough to warrant more than one point.

Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)

This is an interesting true story to depict in movie form, but it overall lacks focus and causes too much confusion for the audience.  For the Glory commits the amateur epic mistakes of creating too many time jumps and referring to off screen content too often.  Besides the constant sports montages, there are too many head-scratching sequences and random occurrences that do nothing to help us get to know these characters at all.  Time is not spent wisely, thus making it hard to be able to relate to the struggles of these characters.  Dialogue also meanders and is generally hard to follow, which creates cheesy and empty characters.  In short, while For the Glory highlights some true-to-life issues, it does so in a very lazy fashion that will unfortunately have no real impact.

Acting Quality (1 point)

Unfortunately, cases that include Jason Burkey and Richard Swingle that have no connection to the Erwin Brothers do not fair well.  They are their usual awkward selves, as are other cast members.  Emotions are over the top and forced and line delivery is sometimes hesitant.  This cast would have benefited from coaching.

Conclusion

In the grand scheme of things, films like For the Glory are very easily forgettable and fall into the massive heap of Christian movies that just blow over your head after you’ve watched them.  There is nothing particularly good or bad to remember about this category of films—you just watch them and then you’re done and never watch them again.  What we need is greatness in Christian film, not more failed attempts like this one.  Perhaps movies like this one can serve as reminders of how film makers can improve in the future.

 

Final Rating: 2.5 out of 10 points