Prolific filmmaker Mark Cousins is back with two films at this year’s Glasgow Film Festival. First up is My Name is Alfred Hitchcock which sees Cousins step into the master of suspense’s shoes and imagine how he would deconstruct his own work, with impressionist Alistair McGowan providing Hitch’s voice for the narration. His second work, The March on Rome, uses Mussolini propaganda film A Noi! as the entry point for an examination of Italian fascism and its far reaching consequences. The following interview focuses solely on My Name is Alfred Hitchcock. AM. For those who are yet to watch the film: when you have such broad taste, why did you choose to make a film about the much-studied Hitchcock? MC. Exactly, I didn’t want to make a film about Hitchcock, because there had been so many books and so many films. But, it was during lockdown, and my producer said, “It’s a hundred years since the first Hitchcock film, would you consider?” As soon as he said that, I had an idea of how to do it. I was sort of cursing myself, because I thought, ‘what if I do it as if he has come from the dead, talking himself?’ That was within seconds, and I thought, ‘Well I’ve never seen that before – him talking through his own work’. I thought maybe I could do something original, you have to always try to do something original! So I said to my producer, “Look, I’ll start watching through his films, in order, from the very first one”. And I took this particular notebook [produces a hefty leather-bound notebook] and I started scribbling, and the scribbles went on and on, and on, and on… And halfway through the first film I thought, ‘Yes, I can do this’. I can look at some themes that are well-known like escape and desire, but I can also look at ones that really interest me like loneliness and particularly fulfilment. We think of Hitchcock as somebody who looks at the disruptive aspects of desire, how desire is a kind of self-sabotage. But also what if he was interested in satisfaction? So I thought, ‘Okay, I’ll do it’. AM. You have done these kind of impersonations before, with Eisenstein, and Welles, how and why do you like to create these pseudo-personalities? How do you get into that headspace, and what do you find fulfilling in doing that? MC. The big thing for me as a filmmaker, most filmmakers who make non-fiction stuff think you shouldn’t use a voiceover, and I love voiceover! I think it is super creative. But if you are using a voiceover, you have to ask, who is speaking? From where? When? And why? The standard is this objective male voice who is delivering information. In none of my films, even though my voice is in a lot of them, in none of them am I the objective male lecturer. There is always something intimate I think, or trying to be lyrical, or poetic there. But what if the person speaking is Hitchcock himself? That interests me. It interests me as a creative person. How do I get inside the head of Hitchcock or Eisenstein? How would they say something? What were their ideas? Once you step into their shoes it becomes electrifying, and sort of – this sounds kind of wanky – but you slightly forget who you are. And you are really trying to think from their point of view. That is such a lot of fun creatively to do. It also can be revealing, cause also when you are speaking in the first person, you are excluding a lot of things as well as including lots of things, and that brings your film alive. AM. So there is you doing the impersonation with the writing, directing and storytelling, and you have also brought in Alistair McGowan to do the impression of Hitchcock. Can you talk about your relationship with him, and how you created the character between the two of you, and at what part of the process he came in at? MC. I wrote the script, and I knew this film would only work if we got a really good actor to do the voice of Hitchcock. I’m friends with Simon Callow, the great actor, and I said to him, “Who could do Hitchcock?” And I thought he would say that he could, but he said that the best ear in the business is Alistair McGowan. Of course I knew his work and was a big fan of his, so we sent the script to his agent and we didn’t hear anything for a long time. And then I got a message on my phone and it was like Hitchcock was speaking to me. It was so precise - not only accurate, there is a difference between an impersonation and acting – I went to meet Alistair and we went into the recording studio the same day, and he really acted. I thought he brought my script to life, all the little funny bits and chuckles to himself. It is a long script at two hours and he hardly stumbled the whole way through, almost no stumbles. Wonderful to watch! Hitchcock was from Leytonstone, near London and he lived in California, and at one point he said, “A little bit more Leytonstone, or a little bit less?” He could dial up one aspect of the voice or dial it down again. Wow! I could do zero of that. It is fascinating to work with people who are naturally gifted at something, and he really is so. With the character I gave him almost no notes. We sat and had a cup of tea beforehand and said that it should feel playful, this is certainly not an academic film, it should feel playful, and he just got a little bit of mirth in his voice that I really enjoyed the whole way through. I was in a room next door listening on my headphones and I was laughing at times which was definitely a good sign. AM. There is a part in the film where you give him a note, where he, as Hitchcock, is going through word choice, was that ad-libbing or? MC. No, that was written into the script. I just wanted to rough it up a little bit there. AM. There are a few injections that felt like that, in the still images of Hitchcock you must play another image over it, is that you walking back and forward in front of the light, hinting that you are there? MC. It isn’t, that is a graphic effect. I said to our graphic designer that I wanted almost no movement but just a slight movement in the eye. So they moved the light a little bit just to seem like it is reflecting in Hitchcock’s eye, but it’s not me. The other thing the graphic designer did, I asked him - most of the photographs are narrower than they are tall, and of course my movie screen is 16:9, a lot of the images are expanded by the graphic designer which is quite nice. When Hitchcock is standing looking over a balcony in the Alps most of the left of the picture is fake, and when he is sitting on the rolls of carpet the left and the right is just added. Little things like that are fun to do, we did some of that in the Orson Welles film, but I like the graphics to be almost invisible, hardly there at all. AM. One of the most interesting things for me was that you splice in some modern day footage, I’m talking less so about the monuments and the murals – we know why they are there, but the images of the young people that it seems like Hitchcock is talking to, I was wondering what your thought process was in using them? And having them look down the camera? MC. The first thing I want to say about that is that the entire film was made in lockdown so I didn’t shoot those two scenes that you are referring to, the girl in the sort of mustard coloured top and the guy on his phone, unfortunately that was stock footage that I had to buy in. I spent days looking for the right image. I knew I wanted someone to look into camera and challenge Hitchcock in a way. So I couldn’t shoot that cause of lockdown. What I needed there was a sense of the 21st century, Hitchcock died in the 80s, but what if he was here now? How would he update his imagination? I wanted those young people to be square on, and for him to consider what does a young person feel like now? I usually hate those speeded up shots but I used one with the guy on the phone because I wanted Hitchcock to refer to the sense that everyday life has sped up in some ways. So that is what they are there for, the kind of challenge of youth. Hitchcock had a very contemporary imagination I would say. AM. And for those who have seen the film how did you decide where to draw the line? Before the film some people might say, how is he going to get another two hours out of Hitchcock? And by the end they will be saying how is there not another ten hours? MC. It was a little bit longer. What I did for each chapter was I made a lunchbox like this, [he raises a small plastic container crammed full with a series of note laden cards] so this is the ‘fulfilment’ sandwich box. In there are all the little bits that I wanted to talk about fulfilment. I have another box here called ‘outtakes’, and there are probably another forty minutes in there. But I just thought two-hours-forty is far too long and people will hate me. Maybe for the extra or making-of I might do that. I know two hours is a long time and some people will feel that exhausting but I wanted it to be watchable in a single event and to sort of build. I wanted it to feel symphonic in a way, there is one theme and then a different theme, and the music changes - by Donna McKevitt. It is at the outer edge of how long it should be I think. I know some people would think I should take twenty minutes out of it, but I’m only going to make one film about Hitchcock, I’m never going to make another film about him, so give it a bit of welly! AM. Can you give us an insight into the outtakes box? MC. Okay, I’m going to open it up. So I’ve got notes about Frenzy, ‘Far more photographic integrity than Topaz’. Oh yeah, I watched Frenzy after Topaz, Topaz is terrible. Some of the dialogue in Frenzy is terrible, so I’ve got a line here at thirteen-minutes-thirty, someone dies and in the pub they say “good juicy sex murders”. I was going to put that in but I thought that tells us nothing so its not in. ‘Topaz – looks like TV’, so I was going to talk about how he regretted how it looked, but I didn’t want to spend too much time on it cause it is sort of rubbish. So its filled with those marginal points I could have made with more time. AM. You play up subjectivity a lot in this film, is that a reaction to anything or is it how you’ve always liked to work - I saw you get frustrated with the recent David Bowie documentary being called ‘not really a documentary’ because it places less emphasis on facts – why do you put so much emphasis on your own voice do you think? MC. I’ve never believed that documentary has to be a factual medium. Documentary is not one genre, it is a range of genres - you’ve got the observational film, the music film, the campaigning film, the archive film, the propaganda film, the essay film… Some of them use voice and some of them don’t. Documentary uses voice the way a poem uses voice, or the way a musical uses dance, it is one of the creative tools in the box. So I have always been interested in trying to use that creative tool in particular. I am really interested in the sort of tension, the desire you could say, between image and voice. That kind of desire, that spark that jumps between them, that is something that electrifies both for me. Subjectivity is not a word I would personally use because that implies that there are the objective docs which are factual, and there are the ones which are less so, and I definitely don’t split them in that way. I would call my films lyric-prose, it is that tonality that I am interested in. Tickets are available for My Name is Alfred Hitchcock and The March on Rome at Glasgow Film Festival: Glasgow Film Festival | Glasgow Film Theatre

Hot off the heels of a brilliant debut in Berlin, the next stop for director Matt Johnson and his latest work BlackBerry is Glasgow Film Festival. The film chronicles the rise and sharp decline of the titular smartphone brand in hilarious fashion with Jay Baruchel as genius innovator Mike Lazaridis, Glenn Howerton as sketchy businessman Jim Balsillie, and Johnson himself as laid-back techy Doug Fregin. I had a brief chat with the charismatic co-writer-director-star ahead of the film’s festival screenings on Friday 3rd and Saturday 4th of March. AM. The film stars you on one side as this free-spirited tech creative, Glenn Howerton on the other side as this sociopathic business monster, and Jay Baruchel’s character is getting pulled between the two sides, moving from one side to the other. Did you have this construction in your mind as you wrote it? MJ. Oh definitely. What I was really doing was looking at the nature of work and how I myself was kind of three people, especially to my closest friends. I was at once this perfectionist, full-of-himself, “I’m going to change the world” diva, and at the same time I was this child, playful, “let’s just have fun, who cares?, everything’s good”. And then I had this other part of me that was so despotic and cruel, “we are going to get this done, and I don’t care who has to die in order for it to happen”. These three parts of me, in all my earlier work they were happening at the same time, and I thought maybe I can make a movie where all these parts are all different people and we all get to see them fight each other. That to me was really interesting. It was always the plan to have a central perfectionist, a quiet young man with integrity be put in between these opposing forces of “don’t sell out, you’re our friend, work is meant to be fun” and “work is meant to give you power, give in to the dark side, you are a genius and you can do anything you want, and you deserve to have credit”. And they’re wrong, both of these philosophies are wrong if you go all the way down. But to see a character wrestle with them, it was very much what my life was like in my twenties. AM. Did you have Jay, Glenn, and yourself in the roles as you were writing it? MJ. Not at all. The only reason I am in the movie is because Jay Baruchel said, “I’ll only do this if you play the other guy”. It was his idea that I’d play Doug. We always wanted to cast Glenn, it’s perfect for him, but in Canada you have trouble casting Americans in our movies because of the way our tax system works. It was very hard to convince our partners that we should cast an American. So it was only at the last minute that we got permission to cast Glenn, only a few weeks before shooting. AM. I’m glad it worked out cause the three of you are perfect in those roles. MJ. Oh my god, it’s a miracle! AM. Why do you think your particular creative filmic style - this comedy, mockumentary style - works so well in this scenario, this tech, big business world? MJ. I think that the home video language of - film everything, having the camera be intelligent, what the cameraman looks at is important, it seems as though it fits. We were thinking of Pennebaker, we were stealing a lot from The War Room, we were stealing a lot from era documentaries that were all shot on VHS or Beta. It seemed as though the people who were into home video were techy engineer nerds. There was a shared space there, between people who are always filming themselves at work and technologists. When [co-writer Matthew] Miller and I were doing a lot of investigation into what BlackBerry was really like in the nineties, most of the engineers that we talked to had hundreds of photographs that they had taken documenting everything that they did. There seemed be a natural engineering curiosity, an interest in self-reflexively capturing everything that you do. And so the aesthetic seemed to match perfectly, the idea that someone would be walking around with a VHS camera, that shooting style, it made sense. In the opening credits you see that home video footage of the staff hanging out, and in the transition between the nineties and the two-thousands we watch again this home video footage of the guys partying, happy to be in this new space. It’s very much by design. AM. It's often said that with comedy that there are two working styles, there is the spontaneous, off-the-cuff, improvisational comedy, and there is the relentlessly rehearsed fine-tuned comedy. Does your work fit into either of those camps or somewhere in between? MJ. I think it is pretty obvious that most of this movie is unrehearsed. We did literally zero rehearsals. Oftentimes me and the other guys would be figuring out our dialogue as we sat down. And that was by design. When you cast actors of the calibre of Glenn and Jay, they are comedians, they understand comedy and they understand beats. The whole idea is that we would sit down and have this stuff happen for the very first time. And because I am the writer and an actor in the movie it gives us more or less full permission to say or do whatever we want because there isn’t anyone to tell us no. There is nothing I find more repulsive as an audience member than watching somebody onscreen say something that a writer thought was funny that they’re trying to make funny, where I can clearly see the whole thing, like “oh these guys think they’re so funny because they worked this out so well”. It’s personal taste, I know there are lots of great comedies that have been made that way but I find it repulsive, I’m sickened by this. When I first saw a stand-up comedian I was young, and I thought, “oh this guy is a genius, I can’t believe this, how is he just coming up with all this, this is the funniest person I have seen in my life!”. And then - I can’t remember who it was, probably Jim Carrey or Robin Williams - I saw a home video of them doing an act and it was the same jokes. I was like “What the hell is this? He is just repeating this?”. So from an early age, anything rehearsed or planned just ate. I like it when things feel like they just happened. AM. So, if you are doing it like that, without rehearsals, just going into a scene, how do you film a scene? How many cameras? How are you blocking it? MJ. Just two. I would shoot with more but one of the problems when you are shooting movies this style is that you actually run out of physical space to put cameras. It’s a challenge most people wouldn’t think about but one of the largest cinematographical challenges of this film was not having the space to put these cameras. They are at some points five feet long, they are bigger than people! Some of the spaces we shot in were tiny cramped offices, cause it is all shot on location, the whole movie was shot in real places. You don’t have the space to put these things, the cameras are huge! And the lenses are so long that the minimum focus is like four feet anyway. So you need the cameras to be so far away and to cross-shoot, to get a third camera in there, forget it. AM. How many takes do you do then? MJ. Very, very few. Normally we shoot the entire scene beginning to end. We have time to shoot four or five takes total. AM. So there is a scene early on in the film where Jim Balsillie pitches the BlackBerry as this machine where you always be reachable, always be working, and then we watch a good chunk of the film where Mike Lazaridis is developing it and we feel this excitement, this energy, and as an audience we eat it up, this innovation, even though it is taking us to this corporate hellscape. Why do you think we do that? MJ. It's horrible. It’s funny that in beginning this film, I didn’t realise it at the time, but I was making this story of the people who invented the future. And these guys thought it was a good idea to make work constantly accessible. If you look at Mike and Jim they are extremely A-type and all the meaning in their life comes from work, it’s where they get all their meaning. So for them, the idea of constantly being connected to that meaning is good, and for some people I think it is good. Speaking for myself, my life is my work, I prefer always working. I like the idea that I am always working, but I know that is not the way that everyone sees the world. I think the fascination as an audience when you are watching it is because you are in tune with the characters and it will meet their goals. And because it will meet their goals you think, “yeah, that is good”. It is the same with a war movie, you don’t want to go out and kill people, you wind up feeling and becoming the characters. So for them, the future where there are smartphones everywhere and they can always work is great because that is all that they are. But as soon as the movie ends and you divorce yourself from that you realise, “Oh, they created a future that worked for them, and it didn’t work for the rest of us. Now we’re living in their world and it sucks. Because I would like to have a life away from my phone.” I think that might be what audiences are feeling, but it is not for me to say. BlackBerry is screening at Glasgow Film Festival March 3rd and 4th. https://glasgowfilm.org/glasgow-film-festival/shows/blackberry-nc-15

By Chris Olson In a recent interview I did with Saudi filmmaker Raed Alsemari, we chatted about the importance of casting. This was essential for his short film "Dunya's Day" in which a socialite has her big celebration ruined when her hired help decides to abandon her. Faced with throwing the party herself, with the help of a few friends, things go from bad to worse as she realises the extent of her predicament. It was so important to get Dunya cast right, she needed to be portrayed as not just a spoilt character, but also someone we would root for. Watch my filmmaker interview in full with Raed Alsemari below: I am always fascinated by new filmmakers that achieve this level of quality in their short films. To win a prize at Sundance is incredible and to do that using a cast and crew who are relatively fresh is even more so. I would mark Alsemari out as one to watch but I feel the Sundance film festival has done that for us already. Let me know what you think of the interview in the comments on YouTube, I always like to hear what people would have asked the filmmaker and whether you like their answers. Be sure to subscribe to the UK Film Review channel whilst you are there, so you get notified first when we upload new filmmaker interviews like this one with Raed. We are also reposting these filmmaker interviews on our regular Film Podcast. Be sure to subscribe wherever you get your podcasts from or use the SoundCloud player at the bottom of this page to listen now!

By Chris Olson I was thrilled to be contacted recently by a PR company representing the Saudi Arabian film Sattar. Not only that, two of the stars - Ibrahim Al Hajjaj and Ibraheem Alkhairallah - we available to have a chat about their movie that seems to be playing a big game. Couple this with the film's premise about a man looking to achieve his childhood dream of becoming a pro wrestler, and I was indeed in heaven. Watch my filmmaker interview below: During the interview, it was great to learn more about the films that are popular in Saudi as well as why Sattar came to be. As a lover of comedy films and of wrestling movies (Fighting With My Family being a great example), Sattar seemed like a terrific entryway into this world. The film itself is full of laughs but also pathos. The central character Saad has a lot of personal issues and it is the outlet of wrestling and the new friends he makes along the way that make it a really endearing journey. When we recorded the filmmaker interview, Sattar was just on the cusp of becoming the 5th highest grossing Saudi film of all time! Which is an amazing feat and I feel truly honoured to have been involved with it's UK release. The film is due to play at a selection of Odeon cinemas, so if you can find a screening near you, I would really recommend it. #ChrisOlson #FilmmakerInterview

★★★★★ Directed by: #ChelseaBrynLockie Starring: #CaitlinSimpson, #MischaDaniGoodman Short Film Review by: Alexandra James Unbridaled is a hilarious, girl power fuelled short film that follows two best friends, Maxie, and Catherine, who are also stepsisters. The premise is simple: a bride and bridesmaid, stuck in the middle of a forest, hungover, disorientated and no idea how to get home…oh, did I mention this is on the day of the wedding! This piece draws inspiration from the fantastic Hangover franchise and influenced by the eccentric wit from Bridesmaids, both films are great comedy golds. This film focuses on a typical social ritual that many people experience and that is the hen and bachelorette party. However, although many of us expect copious amounts of alcohol, a kebab at the end of the night and hangover that completely wipes you out. Unbridaled takes the idea of a hangover to the extreme and an out-of-control bachelorette becomes the source of nightmares for bride Catherine. It is up to maid of honour Maxie to get things back on track, but will their sisterhood remain intact by the end of this adventure? Opening with the two girls stranded in the middle of a forest was immediately captivating for our audience. Unaware of the previous night’s antics, we can slowly piece together the movements of the two sisters and soon discover that drugs are the source of this chaotic mayhem. Catherine is determined to make it to her wedding, but Maxie seems to have other ideas and attempts to sabotage the day as she feels she is losing her sister. Unbridaled, although wacky, does in fact highlight themes of sisterhood, friendship, and balancing this with relationships with new partners. This combination of drama and comedy was a big strength to this film and the performances from Simpson and Goodman was a great dynamic and perfectly created this Ying and Yang duo and emphasised both the confrontational side and heartening attributes which come with a sister relationship. Director Chelsea Bryn Lockie kept this film light-hearted and extremely entertaining. There were certainly some mad moments interspersed throughout, such as the girls accidentally coming across a nudist colony…an everyday occurrence, I’m sure! However, it was amusing and made me laugh with its cliché members out and about, playing badminton. The most awkward game known to man and possibly the worst sport which can make you look the most unattractive especially when naked. Not sure what it is about nudist colonies that seem to attract badminton enthusiasts, but it did make for a hysterical watch. This was a marvellously enjoyable film with two strong female leads that had the perfect chemistry to create a fabulous, feel-good film. You’ll laugh, cringe, and see a few wobbly bits along the way what more could you want from a film.

By Chris Olson Film critics Ian and Toby from The Fantom Zone recently got together for another film podcast episode, this time discussing the latest developments in The DCU. For fans of comic book films and superheroes, this is a particularly great episode. Regular listeners of The Fantom Zone will know what to expect when Ian and Toby get into it and in this special episode, they talk about James Gunn, Peter Safran, and lots more. Let us know what you thought about this film podcast episode from The Fantom Zone in the comments on our Soundcloud channel! And remember to subscribe to the UK Film Review Podcast wherever you listen to great podcasts. During the episode, we learn about upcoming DCU films such as Superman: Legacy. This is a really exciting development in the DC Universe. Find out why this means so much to film critic Ian Lunny by listening to the episode in full and then drop him a comment if you are excited about this film release too. If you can't get enough of our film podcasts...great news! We have a number of incredible shows with new episodes coming out weekly, whether that's more superheroes and comic books films, LGBTQ+ cinema, new releases and more. You can find UK Film Review on all the usual platforms @UKFilmReview If you would like us to review your film, click the button at the top that says GET REVIEWED.

★★★ Directed by: #CraigFoggo Starring: #MatthewSpurgeon, #FraserProvan, #GraemeCampbell, #AJHarris, #EoinGrant, #BaileyPenman Short Film Review by: Alexandra James Craig Fosso’s Abandon Fear 2 keeps the action alive within the franchise with a new addition to the collection. The post-apocalyptic world in which brothers Janus and Jackie now live in, test the strengths of those that enter their path in an attempt to abolish fear and build upon the force within their troops. However, their seems to be sibling rivalry between the two characters and it is this conflict which begins to separate the group entirely. Will this feud tear them apart forever or will they find a way to reconcile and join as one force. The cinematography to this piece was interesting, it was the darkness of the picture which reflected the narrative perfectly. There was that feel of coldness and a foreboding atmosphere to this short which sets the audience up for future horrors and a grisly storyline. The location was great and gave the director a lot to work with in terms of diverse camera angles and helping to feed into this post-apocalyptic world with the desolate areas and barns converted into safe spaces for the soldiers to rest. This was a perfect place to film and allows the audience to really immerse themselves within the action as if fighting for survival themselves! The two young boys within this piece should be commended on their acting style they certainly heightened the gravity of the situation. When young children are thrown into the midst of war, your mind instantly compares this with your own family dynamic. The fear and worry would be haunting and can portray this piece in a whole new light. There were times where the audience needed to see a bit more upset from the two boys, perhaps when reflecting on their family home and having to travel around alone. However, this does come with more experience and can be easily rectified in other projects, in order to display the emotion and pain that the characters would be feeling at this crucial time. Abandon Fear 2 is a great action filled film that focuses on pride, determination and breaking down barriers whether this be physically pushing our bodies to the limit, or mentally becoming stronger and suppressing any and all fear that can hold a person back. Craig Foggo has great vision, and with future projects, it is clear that he will cement his own style within much of his filmmaking and go on to develop great work filled with action and adventure much like Abandon Fear 2 and Mask No Fear.

★★★★ Directed by: #DanielGlennBarbour Starring: #AlessandroDeMarco, #IdaDiTerlizzi Short Film Review by: Alexandra James Amici Di Familiga begins with two siblings brought together under tragic circumstances, a funeral for a member of the family. However, instead of sadness and reminiscing good memories with their uncle, this death brings forth feelings of relief and a joyful reaction for sister Marina. Secrets begin to creep out as brother Francesco begins to question his sister as he notices a man inappropriately touching Marina at the funeral. This short film focuses on family ties and the theme of protection amongst family members. There is this hidden responsibility that is automatically bestowed upon older siblings to protect and shield their younger siblings from any form of harm. Unfortunately, Marina’s childhood left her without this protection from her older brother and she was forced to endure unspeakable acts and stand alone. The film opens with a black and white tone, this is a great way to highlight the hidden secrets that are yet to be revealed. Everything appears shady and buried deep within protagonist Marina, she is reluctant to fully divulge to her brother her truth and the horrors she has had to face alone. This is until Francesco hits a nerve and persistently questions how she knows this man that was inappropriate towards her. At this point, the film changes into colour which is a clever move as the audience are thrown into the midst of the sibling’s argument and Marina begins to expose everything that has haunted her. The transition from black and white to colour reflects the truth finally coming to light and the realisation for Francesco that his sister has endured tremendous suffering and by him turning a blind eye, this only made things worse for her and meant that she lost her childhood entirely. Both Francesco and Marina were well rounded characters, each carrying with them some form of burden on their backs, for Francesco it was survivor’s guilt. Unable to turn back time but filled with regret for not looking out for his younger sister. Marina is a character filled with revenge in place of sadness. Throughout her life she has managed to channel her hurt into anger and direct it towards the men that have taken away her childhood, virginity, and innocence. She is powerful in many respects but also hollow in others, she has lost the ability to feel pain and that can be dangerous as there is no stopping her rage. The acting was full of passion and fuelled by anger, Alessandro De Marco and Ida Di Terlizzi who play the two siblings were a perfect match for these characters. Both actors worked well in reacting to each other’s pain and reflected this torn family dynamic seamlessly. Amici Di Familiga portrays the demise of a family relationship. This is an emotional piece that emphasises the importance of looking out for those close to you and the consequences of bottling up secrets which can eventually tear you apart.

★★★ Directed by: #WilliamEmmett Starring: #AustinPickles, #FreddieMcDonnell, #MariaMetheringham Short Film Review by: Alexandra James Homecoming is a short student film written by William Emmett and Benjamin Badby. This story follows a family, a mother and son coming home after being dismissed from school early for bad behaviour. However, both are unaware of the person lurking upstairs, creeping around their home looking for goods to snatch. As the story evolves, the audience learn that this burglar’s forced entry is for a different reason entirely and the narrative soon takes a swift turn and a sharp tug at our heart strings. Actor Austin Pickles play’s character Scott, the audience’s initial impression is that he is a burglar as he begins to skulk around upstairs of the house and searches through draws, taking in long scans of the room. However, Scott does not look like your typical criminal so to speak, its clear that he is very young and lost in some form. He possesses an innocent appearance and is practically crying out for help. Although our natural reaction would be to call the police and have an instant hatred towards burglars invading our private space, with Scott, it was obvious that he did not have a malicious side to him and instead looked as though he was in a desperate situation. The family dynamic seemed fraught and had underlying tension between Archie and his mother Karen. Their family appeared broken, and we soon discover that Scott is the missing link. This was the climactic twist which turned the narrative completely, unsure of how this family dynamic ended up in this way, but we can see that there is a real need for reconciliation. It would be great to see how the destruction of this family came into being and even have the story evolve into a feature length film, there is great potential to this piece and a lot of room for character development. There were times when the dynamics between the characters seemed too distant in parts and the acting slightly awkward. However, there is more to be discovered within this conflict and more to divulge from each character. Director William Emmett does have the foundations to build and develop an interesting story with this short film. The grey colouring to the piece echoes this broken family home and the heavy struggle hanging over them. The acting is an aspect of this piece which does need to be improved slightly so that we can see the characters evolve. However, this is a fascinating short film that is filled with emotional themes which many audience members can relate to.

★★★ Directed by: #CraigFoggo Starring: #MatthewSpurgeon, #FraserProvan, #DanielKhawar, #SophieHamilton, #MatthewHolden Short Film Review by: Alexandra James Mask No Fear is a short film and prequel to the Abandon Fear franchise. This film is set within a warzone and shows a young character named Janus, and the military lifestyle he has adopted from his father’s influence. There is a deep-rooted sadness within Janus which is hidden under this façade of courageousness and masculine energy. Janus is a character who’s had to overcome fear within his life and put aside his own feelings for the good of others. With the passing of his father, Janus has had take care of his brother and ultimately leave his childhood behind, grow up fast and become an adult. This action filled short, is packed with both physical and mental pain for our protagonists. It would be great to uncover all the hidden emotions within this short and for this to be developed into a feature length film. Actor Matthew Spurgeon who portrays Janus is quite fitting to the role. His performance was compelling and natural, however, not all the performances within this short were entirely persuasive. This is undoubtedly the case for Janus’ father, the conversations between him and his sons were extremely forced and distant. Many of the male characters within this short film needed to supress any form of warm emotion to convey this masculine persona. However, you can still add anger, sincerity, or passion to dialogue to express the seriousness of a situation, this tended to be lacking and so was difficult to picture him as a father who was close to his children. If the child didn’t have the name ‘Janus’ written on his t-shirt, I would have found it hard to recognise them as a father and son connection. Within the action genre, there is often this exhilaration and intensity, so it is important to have this reflected within the acting style and not just within the ambience of the film. The location scouted was perfect, the gloominess to the scenery and vast spaces where you can see rolling hills spread across the background gave this piece that isolated feel. This strengthened the characters need to fend for themselves and that all they have is each other. Not only that, but the military huts were a great find and threw the audience in the heart of the action. Location and scenery can really enhance a film and allows for some beautiful cinematic shots so this was a great aspect within this short. Mask No Fear followed a non-linear approach to the narration, which is excellent and set this short film apart. However, it needs to be clear when using this approach that the story flows well and that the audience can understand where they are in the characters journey. There were some occasions where this was not clear, it was only as the story developed you could understand previous scenes and the direction of the narration.

★★ Directed by: #SawyerIque Starring: #SillySammy Short Film Review by: Alexandra James This short animation follows Sammy, a piece of bread no less whose day becomes ruined by the evil witch and her robot disciples. It is up to Sammy to outsmart her and put an end to her evil ways. Sammy embarks on an adventure and the audience are taken along on his journey as he fights against evil with his cunningness and skills. The admiration I have for those working within animation is extremely high, its certainly a skill which one should build and improve upon in every way, especially if you have a passion and a knack for creating quirky characters and developing a story. The Silly Sammy Adventure is colourful, vibrant and Sammy himself is a loveable character that can be enjoyed by many children. There are a few improvements that can be made to the storyline which would help to keep the audience engaged throughout. The narrative felt rushed, and so it was difficult to digest who the characters were, their motive and understand the feud between the two. It meant that it was a struggle to grasp what was playing out on screen in such a short space of time. To get the most out of this short animation, it would have been great to slow the pace down so that the audience and children can really invest in the character Sammy and can cheer him on until the end. The evil witch could have looked more menacing and different in appearance to the robots to give her that high ultimate power and to have a diverse collection of characters so that the audience can invest in the story and this vibrant world. This kind of variety really is what elevates an animation, it’s the details that will make a huge difference to this piece as well as a focus on the character development to send the film into another league entirely. Nevertheless, the talent is evident within The Silly Sammy Adventure but can always be developed further, there is room to tweak certain aspects. However, Sawyer Ique has created an animation which is light, entertaining, and has a lot of potential to be established further and can perhaps create spin off characters from this piece. There are a range of ways in which this can be expanded, and it will be exciting to see how Sawyer Ique’s imagination explores these endless possibilities.

One of the best films of FrightFest ‘22, The Harbinger, is out now on VOD in the UK. To celebrate the release of his fourth feature film, I spoke to writer-director-editor-composer Andy Mitton about his chilling pandemic-set horror. SYNOPSIS: Despite the protests of her frail father and concerned brother, Monique (Gabby Beans) travels to New York City during a Covid lockdown to help out an ailing friend (Emily Davis). Little did she know the recurring nightmares her friend suffers from are contagious. Now she must escape the demonic dream architect known as The Harbinger who threatens to erase her from all existence. How was it taking such a daring, direct look at the pandemic? As writer-director-editor-composer it must have been a long process for you, looking at it like that? Yeah, all told it was a long process. It was a scary process. It was a leap of faith, and an uncertain one. But faith was very much in the horror community, that I’m a part of - as a fan first. It’s a good arena to look at hard things. I think it gives a bit of space between you and the truth. It felt like I’m not quite ready for a straight drama about it, but with horror there isn’t anything you can’t explore. I think we did it with hopefully enough grace, a bit of insight, and catharsis, so people could have an experience that felt valuable to them. And people who didn’t want that experience, who just wanted the rollercoaster, that would be there for them too. With the pandemic as the setting did you have to think about the audience more than normal, for instance not leaving leeway for conspiracy theorists etc. considering the creative abstraction of it? Yes, I think in terms of those sensitivities, or political sensitivities. Everything was getting political at that time. I had them in mind, making sure I was bringing humanity to all sides, all characters. Also there was an opposite element, where I had to think about them a little less. Because you had the idea that you weren’t writing for a particular region, because globally we shared this experience. We don’t share a lot of experiences as a planet. Usually, we think of settings as regional, but whether I took this film to Colorado or Finland there was a shared connection that you don’t usually get. What’s the reception been like for the film? It’s been great. I was braced for backlash. I thought it would be more polarising than it has been. There are people who just want their escapism from that particular situation and I get that. But festivals and critically the overwhelmingly positive response has been tremendous to experience, and gratifying for the whole team. It was our hope, we took that leap of faith and landed on the other side safely. It feels good. How quickly did you establish the big questions you wanted to ask in the film? For instance, one of the main ones that the film discusses is ‘what happened to vulnerable people during the pandemic?’ In coming up with the mythology of how The Harbinger would work as a sort of demon that looks for our vulnerabilities, it felt like the right way to go. That time during the pandemic was, for me, largely about discovering how much of our identity is dependent on these relationships, on our friendships, on the people we couldn’t reach or help during that time. So we were all in different versions of it, some people were alone, some people were with people they didn’t feel safe with. It felt like that was what was at stake, that is the danger, higher stakes than life or death. About each other and why we are here. Across all of your films you play with this idea of being forgotten, you play it up big in this one, but in We Go On you have characters tethering themselves to each other as ghosts, and in YellowBrickRoad, the characters are walking this path that has been walked before, keeping people alive in that sense, what is it that interests you about that idea? I guess whatever it is that comes out of me is part of the mystery of people’s muses and interests, part of it is who I am. I guess, especially in the horror space, when you are making stories you are thinking of the highest possible stakes. And when you think of the highest stakes being life and death, death seems like the ultimate high stake. But when you consider being forgotten, the impact you leave on the world, on each other, you can find higher stakes than life and death. That’s always going to be attractive. Do you think because you ended with the idea of being forgotten, do you think you will move on to explore other ideas or do you think there is more to explore? Yeah, I do. I have made four movies that represent my existing body of work, but in between all of that I have written these other scripts. There are other things that I have been holding onto that I just haven’t had the resources to make. I think people would be very surprised at the tonal and thematic distinctions from what I have been doing. I have a really wild comic high school voodoo doll story, a satirical high-rise story, a slasher… These themes are nowhere to be found in these scripts. I think it’s a result partly of what has been made. And I’m sure my interest in that topic will keep bleeding out into things. But I’m really excited to explore other things, other flavours. At FrightFest you mentioned briefly in a Q&A that you took everything fairly linearly in your roles from writer to director to editor, but composer kind of “hung over the top of it”, can you explain a bit further on that? Yeah, I think that’s the main role there that is not dangerous to keep thinking about the whole time. If you are still a writer while you’re directing, or still a director while you’re editing, then you’re in trouble. This happened with The Witch in the Window too, coming to set with a theme in mind that I can share with my lead actors, my cinematographer… it introduces a flavour and a sort of tempo that can get into the design and the performance. I think there is a value in that. So I like to come in with a few things, even if that changes at the end of the day. I think of everything as music – the directing, and the writing, certainly the editing is music. That is just the way I am wired, so that way it becomes a through line in the process in a really fun way. You have also described your films as having an “off-rhythm”, can you describe what you mean by that? What makes your films different in that sense? In my experience as a horror fan, as someone who loves the mainstream horror as much as the indie world, the big tentpole stuff like The Conjuring films for instance, they set a certain bar, a certain rhythm, that we have become familiar with. We have antennas as horror fans - when someone is walking down a hallway in a story, there is an antenna inside of us and because of those rhythms we think we know when the jump is going to happen. Everyone is going to try and subvert that expectation. I think because that exists in the mainstream we can really play off of that. I tend to, if I have faith in these moments and in the tension of the story, then I start pulling out the score and pulling out the low bass-y drone that is cueing us when to be scared. So we are without our usual cues and that makes us susceptible to new rhythms, new ways to be startled, that feel more true to the jaggedness of real life. Everything has a tempo - it’s the tempo of a character walking down a hall, or the tempo of what the camera is seeing. With the camera design, I am a little less attracted than a lot of horror filmmakers to seeing things that the character can’t see, or seeing around the corner, or jumping to the POV of the bad guy – which I never do. I’m always going to want our experience firmly rooted in the character’s, and not give these little teases, to see around the corner. I think that lets us do different things with that space. When you were making the film did you create any rules for yourself in order to keep the audience on their toes in relation to the film’s manipulation of dream logic? I noticed in one scene you had this trick where you used mirrors to play with the filmic logic, any rules that you had to craft scenes in specific ways? Yeah, we had some rules, a sort of language between the creative team, particularly with Ludo Isidori, my cinematographer, and Xiyu Lin, my production designer. We talked a lot about the levels of dreams and what was important to the story was that we would be very hardwired to Monique’s experience. If she doesn’t know that she is dreaming then we should have no way of knowing. So we should have no reason to direct our shots differently. We just stayed very true, and used her character as an anchor. Any time we had a question of what sort of trickery we could earn, the answer was always in: “well what’s Monique experiencing?” And when she knows she is in a dream, we all know we’re in a dream - then things change, things can tumble, or in the really bad place, we talked about ‘dream level three’, when we go to the really bad place things can lock up, and heighten, become symmetrical, sort of Kubrickian for lack of a better word. So we had fun with those rules and languages and let them guide the way. When it came to putting such naturalistic conversations in the film - there are things that I think I literally might have said during it – did you think there was a risk in doing that? It is quite daring. I guess I never, maybe I should have done, but I think it came out of me naturally. The architecture of the story felt true and it fit with our actors. Our actors in this case were all theatre actors who were on the ground in New York who would have normally been on stage. Actors who are particularly adept at naturalism and finding those human rhythms. We were all really quickly locked into a sort of chemistry and a common language when it came to what was being said and how it was being said. I think we all just grew more confident as we went. Was it all tightly scripted then or did you allow room for some improvisation? It depended on the scene. It was mostly pretty tightly scripted but because of the naturalism, there had to be some margins to extend, or interrupt, or feel the flow - dirty it up a little bit. If we were in a really loose scene, like the scene early on where the family are telling a story about a runaway sausage cart and there is a lot of talking over each other and laughing, a scene like that I would loosen the reins and let them go. You have said that you tried to keep the film fairly apolitical but the pandemic itself has been made political, can you talk about the challenges of that? I can speak to the approach in terms of the politics. I think it is a delicate balance. We have one character in the film – a neighbour who is not masking, who represents the other side of the coin than I personally stand on. It’s not a throwaway, it’s not super important to the story, it’s a grace note but it is someone who we tried to treat with humanity. I had a lot of angry feelings during that time about people who were in the way of common sense, in the way of science, and in the way of our ability to keep each other safe. I was not afraid to express those feelings. Horror has always been more political than people give it credit for. Seeing as the film does take the pandemic as a big focus, and it is probably quite hard for a lot of people to look at that, is there anything to do with it that you yourself have engaged with art-wise? On the opposite side of the spectrum of horror, I saw what happened with Host and how an advantage was found in the situation there. But otherwise, I haven’t engaged with anything that reminds me of it. I think horror has always been there for us in the hard moments to let us process things. But my own experience of this was pretty pure, it was just processing my own feelings and hoping that enough people out there were having similar feelings and it would resonate. Not everyone wants to look at it, but what is gratifying is when you see people who didn’t want to look at it but they are glad afterwards that they did. The Harbinger is available now on Digital Platforms. A FrightFest Presents and Signature Entertainment release.