Friday, November 05, 2004

SALMON GENT AND THE CASE OF THE JELLY SPINE It's been a while since I got hate-mail so I was quite excited to see the following in my inbox under the header About you: "Mike you are a smug fat dick wipe who I wouldn't piss on if on fire." The last batch of silliness like this I got came from the States but the term dick wipe sounded very British. The sender hadn't signed it so I was left with their preferred mail handle Gent Salmon which at first led me to believe I was being hounded by the fisheries commission or perhaps some obscure superhero from the 1930's who used to run around with Doc Savage. I replied in the usual way: "Cheers. Glad my message isn't lost on everyone. You forgot to add 'hairy' to the list." I honestly don't understand what people think is going to happen after they have called me a name. Am I supposed to pack up and run off crying? Is there some kind of interweb teacher or schoolyard prefect I should report this to while clutching my packed lunch and biting my trembling lip? It just makes me want to get t shirts printed up with the website address and the slogan SMUG FAT DICK WIPE across the front. Maybe PISS HERE IN CASE OF FIRE written on the back. Anyhow, a little while later I get a reply from the mysterious GENT SALMON this time under the heading More about you: "You are also staggeringly unkind." My unkindness made someone stagger? I asked for clarification but getting none I dug around a bit and searched for the actual email address of the person who was sending this. sgys05930@blueyonder.co.uk That led me to the production company Cargo Film Ltd who reside at 82 Wake Road, Netheredge, Sheffield S7 1HG (Tel: +44 (0)114 255 6169). Now I know Sheffield isn't the best place to find yourself in and to be fair if I lived there I'd probably want some attention too but I felt there was something more to this... Do you remember the review I wrote for a film called Jelly Dolly? You can read it here but the gist was that I didn't really like it: I was just praying for the thing to end quickly. We need to create a hospice facility for films like this where nurses can watch the final reels and then break the news to the directors. It really was a bad film. Not in the Michael Jackson circa 1990 sense of the word 'bad' but in the Michael Jackson with his finger inside your children sense of the word. Not a pretty sight. So it turns out that the production company who are calling me names is the same production company responsible for Jelly Dolly. The films director is Susannah Gent: One of the poor souls working on her next film, The Leaving Party, is Tom Salmon. It's (I'm guessing here and please correct me if I'm wrong) their shared email that kicked off this whole entry. Maybe they took it in turns typing the email. Maybe they were googling themselves and found my review was right under their official website. That's gotta smart. Then again the review has it's own comments space so maybe that would have been the place to enter into discussion about the review. Or maybe just adding a name to the emails that they sent would help. Or maybe entering into a real conversation rather than dropping insults and running away would have helped too. Maybe the director was actually serious when she asked the audience not to say anything if they didn't like her movie. If nothing else it reveals the true vision and integrity of these brave British film makers. I just hope that anyone wanting to work with them in the future doesn't stumble across this post while googling for them, their production company or their films. We wouldn't want anyone to think they weren't professional. Mike is blogging to: fireworks

6 Comments:

Blogger Sizemore said...

Gent Salmon to me via email (again unsigned)11:15am

I'm in favour of the plurality of ideas.
You thought it was a terrible film. This will amaze you but quite a number of people who've seen it actually really like it...!
Given how you felt I'm surprised you spent 90 mins of your time watching it and however long writing about it. At least it had an impact on you.
Or perhaps you should just get a life.

11/06/2004 11:53:00 am  
Blogger Sizemore said...

My reply to Gent Salmon via email 11:44am

Hey I'm at least putting a name to my comments and I still stand by them.

The film was lousy and that is indeed my opinion. I'm not amazed thatquite a number of people like it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and it would be a dull place if we all thought the same way.

Of course it had an impact on me or I wouldn't have bothered writing about it. It was a negative one and that is just as valid a position as all the people who walked out of the screening with a positive one.

I spent 90 minutes watching it because that is how long the film was. I don't walk out half way through because then what would I base my opinion on?

I should get a life? Because I didn't like the film and told people so? If I had enjoyed the movie then I'd have a life? I am not the one lowering myself to anonymous name calling over the Internet.

If you are so proud of the movie then there are numerous ways to talk to me about it but you opted for the easiest and stupidest means at your disposal.

Keep trying to bait me if you like but all I'll keep doing is throwing this stuff back up on my website for people to have a laugh at.

All the best

Mike

11/06/2004 11:57:00 am  
Blogger Unknown said...

Mr Atherton, I must comment on yr recent CINEMATIC ENDEAVOUR, the one you tend to GLOSS OVER in these pages... I can see why you wouldn't want anyone to associate you with "BUSH Vs GHIDRAH FUCK FRENZY BACKYARD NAPALM ANAL BLITZKRIEG VOL III", because, well, quite frankly, it's SHIT.

There were NO schoolgirls covered in LOBSTER EGGS.

This really is TOO MUCH.

DICKWIPE.

11/07/2004 08:31:00 am  
Blogger Sizemore said...

VC - I can now reveal that B vs G: FFBNAB III will soon be released as an unrated DVD that will indeed feature schoolgirls, lobster eggs and even the much talked about spiderwalk U-boat sequence. There will also be a commentary track featuring a conversation between myself and Sarah Michelle Gellar.

It's still not very good though.

11/07/2004 11:54:00 am  
Blogger Sizemore said...

Gent Salmon to me via email (again unsigned) 1:44pm

Your review seemed vindictive and wholly unnecessary. You didn't need to write it. For this reason I use the word unkind. Had Jelly Dolly been made with a lot of public money or been aggressively advertised I might
have felt it was fairer game but it's a tiny, undistributed film which has had about half a dozen screenings - it could do without that.
I've actually had some positive feedback as a result of your review so maybe no publicity is bad publicity. It a shame the review is neither well written, insightful or even funny but then if you were any good at what you do you wouldn't be doing it the way you are. I'm a lot less concerned about your venom than I was but I still wouldn't piss on you if you were on fire.

11/08/2004 03:24:00 pm  
Blogger Sizemore said...

My reply to Gent Salmon via email 3:19 pm

I still don't know exactly who I am discussing this with. Is this Susannah Gent or Tom Salmon or both?

The review was necessary. Jelly Dolly was entered into a Film Festival and it was my job to provide coverage of the films that I saw. I opted to see Jelly Dolly on the strength of the blurb on the Raindance website. The film sounded interesting. After seeing it my opinion was that the film was a bad one and I wrote my review accordingly. Jelly Dolly was perhaps the worst film I saw at the festival.

I have seen a lot of films from all over the world and made on a multitude of different budgets and it doesn't really matter whether a film cost a couple of quid or was a multi million dollar blockbuster. If I think that a film is lousy then I will say so.

Jelly Dolly was entered into a festival right alongside other films that didn't seem to necessitate the need to ask for special consideration because they were small.

I am not surprised that some people read my review and disagreed. I am happy that they took the time to get in touch with you and tell you so. Maybe you should concentrate on that positive feedback rather than
getting caught up in this kind of pointless correspondence.

Learning to take a bad review is almost as important as remembering to keep the sound boom from being reflected in your shots. At the moment it looks like you need to learn how to do both.

Mike

11/08/2004 03:27:00 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home