Sammyville

This is the kind of small film that grows on you, even after watching it, it sticks in your mind. At first I wasn't sure where it was going, but as it wrapped up all the different subplots came together. It is surprisingly dark, but there is not really much violence. It is strongest in what seems like a real place (which supposedly it is), and the story is engrossing. Nice camera work. The lead actor is saved by the lead actress who does a better job. The old man who plays Sammy is the best.

I'm shocked by the high number from the popular voting. This movie was painfully bad, slow and boring. The acting, direction and editing were atrocious. Bottom line is that it didn't make a heck of a lot of sense either. That coupled with the painful slowness, made it a bad choice for late night entertainment. Pass on this one, even for $.79.

First of all, if you've never been to Elgin, Oregon, then this movie was not for you. (If you liked it anyway, cool!) Not being familiar with the area or the characters, you probably had no way to connect with anything in the movie. Secondly, I think Chris may have written Sammyville for us, the locals who know the actual Sammy and the actors that played most of the parts. It's not a bad movie, it's just not On The Waterfront. I enjoyed seeing the actors that I've known my whole life, from their work on the stages of Union County, and as friends. I also loved the scenery of Elgin and Hot Lake. And PS- I'm going to buy it and have it autographed by Lyle, Kevin, Chris and Alice!

OK, let's be fair here: this movie is nicely filmed, and decently acted. What it doesn't have is a strong sense of direction.

There are exceptions: at one point, the sheriff is sitting in the town cafe talking to the owner, and a strange feeling came over me: the scene worked. The dialog was believable, the actors disappeared into their parts and the character interaction was convincing. Not an important scene, but the only one that didn't have us questioning some part of what we were seeing.

The rest of it varies. Sometimes it's something in the direction, sometimes the dialog, occasionally the acting -- but often just the writing itself. A social worker travels out to some hick town on her own expense, unprepared for even a simple 'no' to her questions? OK, well, she did make a promise, so I guess this hard cut to a small boy is the movie showing us that she's justified in -- what, it's not the boy she's looking for? But just a way to segue to two men talking? Who do so standing around awkwardly, like they can't figure out what to do with their hands?

Hands have a tough time in most of this movie; we get many two-shots where two people walk around with arms dangling nervelessly. More than once, we get Chase just standing, semi-posed, while we wait for the director to shout 'cut'. You may find yourself counting up how many outfits her character brought on this investigation.

The real fault though, is that the movie doesn't seem to know how to be what it is. The pacing, shots and events feel like a horror movie without the horror. But it's not a horror (at least, not a well-made one). As a romance, it lacks chemistry or even logic. As a social commentary, it doesn't know what to say or how. So what does that leave? A travelogue? A journey into a heart of darkness? No and no. Not quite anything.

And there never was a good reason for the local guy to help the social worker on her frankly illegal quest. By the time she's standing *really close* to him in a deserted building which he *just happens to know* still has running hot water for its tubs, even though he's been away for years -- Like everything else in this movie, it felt less like plot and more like 'here's what the script says; try to make it work'.

I wasn't sure what to expect when I sat in front of my TV with a DVD of Sammyville. I'd heard a couple of different things. Lyle is great. Poor acting, yadda, yadda, yadda.

My thought after watching it was the same way I felt after watching Lost Voyage(the one with Judd Nelson) and Cabin By The Lake(repeat Judd Nelson). It's a B movie. Maybe even a C movie but definitely a solid B. It's got your token action, attractive starlet, young rugged hero, a big bad, you name it, it was there.

Haven't seen the movie in a couple of years and I might screw up some points. If so, feel free to cut me down like the dork I am.

My biggest problem with it was the dialogue. Didn't flow very well. The story didn't interest me, even though I can't remember it now and would drown quickly in an argument to the contrary, I remember that being something that stuck in my craw. I remember it being about some boy disappearing and then we're in Sammyville and the starlett is in Hot Lakes Hotel in a bath tub in the middle of big room where a bath tub didn't belong. It was weird.

It's strong points were the fact that is was obviously playing to it's demographics, young males 18-35 who watched way to much deep space nine. (Said starlet's big show).

This was truly an indie film and my thought is if you are producing something that is indie, you're taking a big risk. A good way, and not a bad way mind you, is to go formulaic because that stuff sells. It will get picked up. Where Sammyville falls is they seem to try to be original within the formula and it doesn't work. A worthy gamble, it just doesn't work. The story doesn't have great enough risk and circumstances for the characters to pull us in, because it is a B movie and the originality to support the presence of artistic merit is not backed with enough poignant risk and need for us to care.

I thought it was shot pretty well. I did love the look of hot lakes in that bath tub scene and sound was solid. Things that usually affect the outcome of an indie. Scripting and Directing is where I think the energy needed to be a little more prevalent.