The 'New' Film Threat By Mike White. Here’s my long-awaited review of the new Film Threat Magazine. Why the long wait? I saw the new Film Threat at See Hear in New York City on November second but didn’t get my subscription copy until December 20th...

Here’s my long-awaited review of the new Film Threat Magazine. Why the long wait? I saw the new Film Threat at See Hear in New York City on November second but didn’t get my subscription copy until December 20th. Hello? Aren’t subscribers supposed to get theirs first? I guess I’m lucky to have gotten it at all, though, since the new issue is nowhere to be found in Metro Detroit except Thomas Video. Other stores still stock the Mulholland Falls ish.

The Cover: Chloe Sevingny has a big head, doesn’t she? I always knew that she kind of looked strange but I never could put my finger on it until I compared the size of her noggin with Steve Buscemi’s. I don’t think it’s a perspective thing, either.

The Content: A few words to describe the new Film Threat—Thin, Nice Layout, and Blow-job. Gore was fellatiating Richard Linklater more than interviewing him. I swear he must have gone back and re-written his questions—either that or he talks like Kevin Smith writes. I realized that Gore liked the taste of another man’s penis when I read his editorial and his praise of a certain Quentin Tarantino for starting a new genre—that of the "independent film." He’s a "visionary" when he used to be an "asshole." And, you’re right if you think—"Let’s start some shit" is remarkably similar to "Let’s stir some shit up" which, I believe, was the phrase of choice that Chris used when he described our two-man "war on Hollywood." (see CdC #1)

Gore fell into that trap that I hate the most with his Linklater interview—Ye Olde Movieline tactic of "Me and this star went out to lunch. Everyone was looking at us funny because we stood out so much. We’re cool. This famous person complimented my outfit. This is what the famous person had for lunch—this is what I had for lunch. This is what the waitress did when she saw that I was sitting with this famous person. This famous person’s famousness didn’t faze me at all. Aren’t I cool? This is what we did after the interview." Argh!!! I hate the half-interview/half-self-indulgent restaurant review thing!

Speaking of Movieline—that Tinseltown'd filler was just as bad as that final page feature that Movieline always runs. Pure Crap.

Why was Gore so concerned with pointing out his proof-reading skills ("The upper-case "U" is not a misprint" on page 6 and "Yes, the title of the film is set in the lowercase, meaning you did not just discover a typo" on page 54)? Too bad he didn’t proof the photo captions. That is NOT Daniel Baldwin on page 27 (who wasn’t really a barfly in Trees Lounge anyway) but Anthony LaPaglia!

Ellen Sawyer went to great lengths to point out that Bound is not just a lesbian film but then went on to focus mainly on nothing other than the lesbianism! And, boy, was I glad to see David E. Williams (see CdC #6 for a letter from that lil' spitfire) back to his old tricks of writing about semi-pornographic stuff. Sure, I'd like to see Michelle Handleman’s films but it’s just so typical of him—just about all of the last few Film Threat Video Guides featured big articles on fetish-type films—but, hey, it sells, right? Pretty bad layout on that page, though, using the same photo twice and just flipping it and adding a filter to it.

Speaking of FTVG—I wonder when I'll get a refund of my subscription since I hear it’s out-of-business. And, for that matter, I wonder when I'll get the free video that Gore promised me and that was supposed to come with my subscription to FTVG—it’s only been four years!

I kind of liked that letter from Tim Mandos but he didn’t have a lot of balls. He kept prefacing stuff with an over-abundance of praise. You can still be critical without ranting (this article, unfortunately, is not evidence of that fact!) and without having to sound like a simpering dork.

The feature on The Devil Takes a Holiday failed miserably, making it sound like a real piece of shit movie with a horribly whiny director (when am I gonna get a day off?) and they shouldn’t have included that cheesy picture of the guy in the devil make-up.

For such a thin magazine, there sure was a lot of filler! The pictures in the Releases section were all pretty big, the majority of the Popcorn section was dumb (footage fetishes? Huh? Yeah, I "get" the name but...), a lot of the movies in the Releases section have already came and went (even to a nothing town like Detroit—Swingers, Curdled, Palookaville, Paradise Lost, Ed's Next Move, Secrets & Lies, Romeo + Juliet—what the hell is that doing there?). I know it was supposed to have come out a few months ago—but these movies were old news even then!

Okay, enough picking on Gore! Wait, one more thing—I love his editorial and the "I went back to the thing I love" bit—is this because you got canned at your last job and your publisher abandoned your three or four mags or because you’re just a sweetheart? Oh, Christian, you’re so fuckin' noble! The second Film Threat? It’s more extremist in that it features even more mainstream crap (Everyone Says I Love You, Shine, The People Vs. Larry Flynt, etc.) but contrast it with stuff I’m sure I'll never see (Seed, Mouth to Mouth, etc.). "America’s Number One Independent Movie Magazine" should figure out that Beavis & Butthead Do America, while a valuable cinematic jewel, had heavy market saturation and wide distribution—not very "indie."

Plus, it seems that FT is back to their old tricks of running a "teaser" article in one issue, only to belabor the point in the next—case and point here being Crash and the two redundant articles in the first and second issues of the revamped FT.

Come on, Chris, though Cashiers du Cinemart might be an "amateur fanzine put together by a bitter hack...poorly executed and a waste of time..." and though "the writing is weak and uninformed..." (in your words) it’s still a viable publication! Don’t try to tell me that with all of the dough people sent in for "lifetime subscriptions" at a hundred bucks a pop and with your innumerable contacts, you can’t even manage to put out a single ish! Or, have you finally alienated everyone as so many of your old Detroit cronies have predicted?

Oh, and if anyone wants my collection of Film Threat back issues, I'll sell them all, including Film Threat Video Guide, for $1,200—a lot less than Gore’s asking! I'll even throw in the "ultra-rare" issues that I bought for $2.50 last summer through Film Threat Video Guide that have since been marked up one thousand percent!

Back to Issue 8