AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Mandeep Tyson The acting in this movie is really good.

Matho The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Rich Brauer Even though our films are small, we compete with mainstream filmmaking, without the resources, so we make films that Hollywood won't. That's the independent spirit. When we offer sneak preview of our new films, we run the risk of the audience thinking that it is the final cut. We listen to the audience react (or not) and make changes as we feel are consistent with the temperament of the film. Having said that, anyone who saw the unreleased sneak preview version of Deadrise, then titled FITFUL, really needs to see the final released product. There are no dogs anymore, and the ending has been changed from a "Oh, you got me" to a "DAM!". The dream sequences have new meaning, and our main character Paula, has a considerably bigger surprise waiting for her at the end of the film. Additional final tweaks also included enhanced music and sound. It is safe to say that the entire context of this non-traditional suspense thriller has been nicely modified prior to its final worldwide release as DEADRISE.

noahsdad-31-285608 Full disclosure: The producer/director of Deadrise film is a friend.My wife and I saw the premiere of this film (then titled "Fitful") at the State Theater in Traverse City, Michigan. The cut at that time was much longer, with the puppy scene still intact, and a very different ending than the DVD version. It's my understanding the DVD release has a much stronger resolution.At the premiere, we left the theater impressed with the acting and cinematography, but somewhat confused by the story. The multiple layers of dreams left us wondering which scenes were actual experiences, and which were the result of spicy food. Some were obvious, others less so. The lack of visual or other clues to create a dream-state distinction make sorting it all out a bit challenging. Larry Joe Campbell's role as the creepy caretaker of a retired Car Ferry is exemplary. Who knew that such a comic genius could pull off a lovable but darkly mad character like Vigs? At one point, Larry asks a question about Renee's daughter which literally caused the entire theater to simultaneously gasp. Renee O'Connor's tip-toeing and peering around corners gets a bit repetitive, but her emotional expression is near flawless. The real star of the show is the ship itself, which is not a Hollywood set piece. It's an actual old steam ship that resides at a dock on the Great Lakes. The contrast of the ship's cavernous spaces, varnished wood paneled cabins, spooky companionways filled with shapeless shadows, and cramped mechanical compartments slick with oil and other dark liquids, combine to create a rich feeling of imprisonment and isolation. If you're seeking out the next big indie masterpiece, you probably should look elsewhere. If you simply want a clever story, beautifully filmed and sure to inspire conversation after the credits, give Deadrise a shot.

Solomon Terra I give it 7 out of 10 not because it was that appealing to me, but because I think it set out trying to be "something", and whatever that "something" is, it did a fairly good job. For my own taste preferences, I'd rate it at maybe a 4 or a 5.It's about a woman called to do a report on an old ship to see if it qualifies for "historical site" status. Once there, a piano falls on her car & she can't leave. She meets creepy caretaker Vigs who's clearly at least mildly retarded (in the technical sense of the term, not the derogatory one). Through a chain of events with unexpected details but easily predictable results, she's forced to stay the night on the ship. She's awakened to some strange noises and then her nightmare begins. She keeps experiencing the strangest encounters with Vigs and an occasional 2nd dude (Semperton, who appears in all of 2 scenes), suddenly finding herself waking up just as the scene reaches a climax. From this point on, you won't know if she's really waking up this time, or if it's another dream sequence beginning.Revealing more than that would be spoiler territory. There are icky scares, startle scares, gotcha' scares and a few others, many involving repeated loops, funky-tasting "sausage" and blood-sucking parasitic eels.It's very difficult to grasp what is -really- happening, here. When it ended, I felt no sense of completion. If you're very attentive to detail and quick of wit, you might be able to get it the first time. But I had to do a second viewing (in parts, that is - skimming through the movie to see if I could find scenes to explain the questions I have). After that, I did finally manage to work out what happened, and can tell you that everything you need to know to put all the pieces together for yourself happens within the first 10-15 minutes. Everything after that seems to flow from the various elements of those first few scenes.I recommend it if you like puzzlers, though it is very slow-paced. It's not "non-stop thrills & chills" by any stretch, but it is non-stop "creepy and ominous". It's also quite likely that you won't quite grasp the full details of events on a first viewing either, which if that's the case, you can probably get all your questions answered by watching just the first few scenes again - everything up to her drive on the way to the ship. If you pay attention to those scenes carefully enough, I think you'll be able to put it all together.That's not for everyone, though - that's more than just watching a movie, that's also solving it.About the only thing I would've really changed (other than perhaps making the opening few clues a bit more noticeable) would be Paula's confusion with the repeating dream sequences. But then again, it was pretty much like a real dream tends to unfold - you wake up and think you're in the real world, only to wake up again. I do this over and over again sometimes, and sometimes, I'll believe I've awakened "for real" every single time, and not be too bothered by the repeated awakenings. So that aspect of it - it would've seemed more logical if that "bothered" her in some way, but yet it technically is more realistic that it didn't.So like I said, not for everyone but engaging for more thoughtful, speculative movie watchers.

dadoffourcs I got to see a preview screening of this the other night, as it was filmed locally. The packed audience consisted of many people involved with the production, such as caterers, support crew, and parents of the extras. The movie looked mostly finished, though some sound and editing issues could be cleared up.O'Conner plays Paula, a woman who works for a preservation society, reviewing and researching old buildings and landmarks to determine if they should be named as National Historic sites. Campbell is Vigs, the caretaker of an old ship that has been nominated for such status. Through a series of plot twists, Paula must spend a night on the ship alone with Vigs. Or are they alone?What follows is a series of Paula's bad dreams. We are left to wonder whether she is dreaming or is what's happening reality. We see her waking up startled from a dream at least a dozen times - and after the first few times, where you feel cheated by the feeling of "it was just a dream," the series of dreams get stranger and stranger. The big problem - some of the dreams just go on too long, with labored shots of Paula sloooowly waking down the hallways of the empty ship, peeking in staterooms, and doing the same things over and over. A few of the dreams give some creepy jump-style "gotcha" scares, but most of the tension has no payoff. I saw the ending coming a mile away, and it was not the ending I wanted.O'Connor isn't very noteworthy as Paula (I kept wanting to call her Gabby!), but Larry Joe Campbell's character of Vigs is the one reason to watch the film. His creepy / crazy mannerisms brought consistent laughs from the crowd, and I wish there was some payoff to his character. Unfortunately, there isn't. When he's on screen the film is watchable.Also - the puppy! Not too spoil too much, but an early scene involving a puppy is just wrong, and though it is explained (sort of) later, it puts an air of unbelievability to the rest of the proceedings. As cute as the puppy was, I'd encourage the director to cut it from the film altogether.