Escape from Tomorrow Review

I've said in other reviews, such as Atlantis: The Lost Empire, that the production of some movies are far more interesting than the resulting movie itself. That is certainly the case with Escape from Tomorrow (2013). It was filmed at both Walt Disney World and Disneyland without permission from The Walt Disney Company. That alone was a major draw for audiences of this independent film. It ended up being a weird movie that made less sense as the movie progressed.

Jim White (Roy Abramsohn) is an unsatisfied middle-aged man, on vacation to Disney World with his wife, Emily (Elena Schuber), and his two small children, Sara (Katelynn Rodriguez) and Eliot (Jack Dalton). Already distracted and dissatisfied, he receives the news that he's been fired from his job, which pushes him over the brink. Something inside Jim snaps. He is impatient and then bitter toward his wife and kids, develops a pathetic sexual obsession with two beautiful French teenage girls (Danielle Safady and Annet Mahendru), and hallucinates sinister visions on harmless rides. The park environment soon turns to something more sinister as Jim discovers its secrets. Jim must protect his adventurous kids, placate his suspicious wife, and defend himself against the “Happiest Place on Earth”.

Guerrilla filmmaking is a form of independent filmmaking characterized by quickly shooting scenes in real locations without any warning, and without obtaining permission from the owner of the locations. This is usually done because they don't have the budget to get permits. Larger studios tend to avoid this tactic because of the risk of being sued or having their reputation damaged due to negative PR exposure. 28 Days Later did some Guerrilla filmmaking in a few scenes. Escape from Tomorrow is the most ambitious piece of Guerrilla filmmaking I've ever seen. Disney has a reputation for being very protective of its intellectual property, and having a movie filmed on their turf right under their noses is major snub to the mega corporation.

A lot of it was filmed on location in the Disney Parks in Florida, and on a few actual rides. The cast and crew had to be very careful to avoid detection from Disney's park security. They kept their scripts on their iPhones and were shooting on hand-held cameras similar to those used by park visitors. This is the ultimate guerrilla art. It lashes out against the placid, sexless, clean-scrubbed version of happiness peddled by Disney, not because it thinks sanitized diversions have no place in American life, but because the Disney vision is so blandly oppressive. Escape from Tomorrow isn't intending to defame Disney or drag its name though the mud, but rather parody or satirize its squeaky clean image.

The whole movie is shot in black and white. If you've ever been to, or seen Disneyland, you'll know how very cheerful and garish the color scheme is. The lack of color coupled with the camera work gave the parks a very eerie feel, which was further impacted by sinister faces superimposed over jovial smiles of the characters on the "It's a Small World" ride. None of the park's music was actually used in the film. A score was composed to imitate the reparative saccharine tunes heard on some of the rides as it might sound once a fed up park guest starts to tune it out and it becomes a jovial buzz in the background. This vision of the Disney Parks is fascinating and foreboding.

The story in Escape from Tomorrow didn't make much sense. The connection between scenes isn't always clear, but since Jim is gradually losing his marbles, the disconnectedness fits in a way. The themes and mood of the film are too narrow to support the length of the story. It's fine that we never leave Jim's perspective, and that the whole story is shaped (or deformed) by his mix of despair, lust, and resentment. Many great movies have stayed anchored to one character's point-of-view. The problem here is that Jim's psyche isn't interesting enough to wallow in for 90 minutes. The supporting characters offer no relief from the monotony of his distress; they aren't written to suggest that there's more to them than what Jim sees. The teenage girls never seem like anything more than dirty-old-man fantasies, Lolitas skipping, laughing, and teasing him. Emily is rarely more than a suffering spouse or a griping shrew.  Similar to the mental breakdown in Dark Water, we don't quite get a full picture of the story which complements the confusion and uncertainty Jim is experiencing. And yet, the ending comes completely out of nowwhere, makes very little sense, and only raises more questions when it should be resolving questions for the conclusion. The story had a lot of potential, but ended up falling far short of what it could be, especially given the pains that were taken to film it.

Escape from Tomorrow is the ultimate guerrilla art. It took some bold moves in filming, and shows us a skewed version of Disney that is steeped in science fiction and paranoia. The story isn't interesting enough to justify the length of the movie, and the characters are mostly uninspiring. The camera work is impressive, and the filming locations are highly impressive given the risks taken. After the movie's initial success at Sundance, Disney became aware of it. The director, Randy Moore, took meticulous care to avoid overt copyright infringement . Even with a shot of a Mickey Mouse character interacting with park guests, Disney hasn't taken legal action yet and seems to have chosen to ignore Escape from Tomorrow. As it is an independent film it is not rated, but some of Jim's fantasies include topless women; for that it would probably get an R rating. This isn't something to watch with youngsters present even with all the Disney motifs. I truly have no desire to see this ever again, but I do appreciate it as a piece of cinematic art that challenged the way films are made.

Guerrilla filmmaking has potential to capture some very interesting locations. What do you think an interesting location for a guerrilla filmmaking movie would be? I think something filmed at a variety of different Wal-Marts might be intriguing. Comment below and tell me what you think!

28 Days Later Movie Review

Danny Boyle is responsible for some great and critically acclaimed films which include 127 Hours (2010) and Slumdog Millionaire (2008). Once, while discussing zombies with friends, I was shamed for not having seen Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later (2002). Apparently you can’t discuss zombies with any kind of authority without having seen it. I managed to see it recently; now I can talk about zombies.

British animal liberation activists break into a laboratory in Cambridge to free some chimpanzees being used for medical research. A scientist begs them not to free the chimps because they are infected with a virus that causes rage. He is ignored and the chimps escape. Twenty-eight days later, a young man named Jim (Cillian Murphy) awakens from a coma, alone, and in an abandoned hospital. He wanders out to find London completely empty. Jim draws the attention of some zombie-like humans who begin chasing after him. He’s rescued by Selena (Naomie Harris) and Mark (Noah Huntley) who explain about the rage virus and how it has decimated the country in a matter of days. They meet up with man named Frank (Brendan Gleeson) and his daughter Hannah (Megan Burns) who are following a radio broadcast promising a cure for the virus. When they reach the source of the radio, they find some corrupt renegade military personnel, lead by Major Henry West (The Doctor Christopher Eccleston). The military platoon quickly proves as much a threat as the rage-zombies.

Zombies have become such a common theme in movies, literature, comic books, and video games that I’m starting to wonder why people in zombie movies don’t seem to know what zombies are when they see them. I know several real people who have zombie survival strategies planned out, yet no one in movies or video games ever seems to have heard of zombies.

I don’t recall hearing the word “zombie” in 28 Days Later. I think that’s a good thing; actually calling them “zombies” would have weakened the movie and made it seem cliché. The infected weren’t your average zombies. They weren’t shambling, decomposing corpses; they were awake, alert, and filled with uncontrollable rage. The rage virus had more of a psychological effect than a physiological one. This seemed like a modern metaphor for social rage (road rage, air rage, etc). Rather than having a virus that kills victims and turns them into monsters, the virus amplifies something negative that is already in each and every person to levels beyond their control. Having the existing negative qualities deteriorate us into monsters is much more disquieting, I think.

Good science fiction makes commentary on contemporary issues in a unique, metaphorical way. The drive behind classic zombie movies revolved around fear of nuclear power and its possible ramifications. I think the rage-virus is more applicable to this generation; society seems much more frightened of disease than of nuclear power. Just think of the real world reactions to anthrax bioterrorism, the bird flu, swine flu, mad cow disease, and foot-and-mouth disease. Does a viral outbreak really terrify us these days more than a nuclear holocaust?

I could go on about the social commentary derived from this excellent film, but how does it stand as a zombie movie? Pretty darn well. Even if you just want to watch a movie about a few people struggling to survive a zombie apocalypse, 28 Days Later is a good movie to watch. It’s got a fairly small cast which gives the movie ample amount of time to develop the characters into people we care about. We even see them spiral downward from a civilized state into a survivalist mentality that doesn’t differentiate them much from the rage-zombies they are trying to avoid, even without becoming infected. And there is plenty of blood splattering gore to appease fans of zombies and the horror genre.

Parts of 28 Days Later are so obviously cheap that it is sometimes distracting. A lot of the sets were claustrophobically small; there even was a scene filmed with a Canon XL1 digital camcorder that anyone could get on Amazon.com. However, in spite of its low production budget, the movie is so well executed that you can’t help but get drawn into it. You become aware of how cheap the movie is only fleetingly, and then get sucked back into the film right away.

This movie is really great; Zombie mayhem, some excellent actors portraying good characters, social allegory, suspense, and fun, unabashed violence. I wouldn’t recommend this to younger audiences; the imagery gets pretty intense. I cringed watching it and occasionally had to hide under my zombie-proof blanket. 28 Days Later was a fun zombie flick to watch and was highly satisfying. I’m looking for a copy on Blu-Ray for my shelf.

There are lots of types of zombies in movies and video games. What’s your favorite kind and where are they from? Comment below; let’s talk zombies!