4.5/10
239
14 user 11 critic

Methodic (2007)

Not Rated | | Action, Drama, Horror | 20 October 2007 (USA)
Methodic tells the story of a boy who becomes demonically possessed by an ominous presence known as "The Dollman". Forced to obey his dark half, the boy ultimately murders his parents on ... See full summary »

Director:

Writers:

(screenplay), (screenplay) | 1 more credit »
Reviews
2 wins. See more awards »
Edit

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Niki Rubin ...
Lana Matthews (as Niki Notarile)
...
...
Melissa Matthews-Gellar
...
...
Nicholas Matthews
...
Chief Sperranza
Daniel Werzinger ...
Dr. Pell (as Dan Werzinger)
Christine Allanach ...
Dr. Meadows
...
Simon Gellar (as Andy Roth)
Renee Schiefer ...
Jeanette
...
Stevie
...
Nurse Zoe
...
Nurse Kasey Sellers
Britt Hodges ...
Dr. Britt Harmon
Tawnya Manion ...
Terra
Edit

Storyline

Methodic tells the story of a boy who becomes demonically possessed by an ominous presence known as "The Dollman". Forced to obey his dark half, the boy ultimately murders his parents on his birthday and is sentenced to a life under a microscope at the state mental hospital. But evil cannot be contained so easily. Instead, "The Dollman" simply bides his time, dwelling within the boy- waiting for the day when he will become powerful enough to completely take over his human host. And when that day comes, god help us all. Written by Chris Notarile

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis

Taglines:

"The World's 1st BASHER Movie!"


Certificate:

Not Rated | See all certifications »

Parents Guide:

 »
Edit

Details

Official Sites:

|

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

20 October 2007 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

The Dollman  »

Edit

Box Office

Budget:

$500,000 (estimated)
See more on IMDbPro »

Company Credits

Production Co:

 »
Show more on  »

Technical Specs

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

For her fall in the climax of the film, Niki Rubin refused to have a stunt double. She rehearsed the fall twice then did two takes of it. See more »

Quotes

Colin McDermott: ...so after I managed to somehow soak up all of the fucking water in the kitchen and in the empty space under the sink I put three or four fans in the dining room to try and dry up the carpet and air the place out. It smelled like Goddamn sewage which I kept thinking was probably loaded with all of the shit that my neighbors had to flush down the toilet every time someone called the cops on them for playing their music too loud at 2 AM every fucking Thursday morning. So anyway what, I dunno... ...
[...]
See more »

Connections

References The Terminator (1984) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Give 'em a break....
1 April 2011 | by See all my reviews

I think this movie begs the question, "Should points be given for effort?" The verdict's still out.

But let's start with the good -- Understanding that this script started as a treatment for a Halloween remake, I'll forgive the similarities and say that the script and dialog is actually pretty well executed. Sure there are a few issues with line delivery in spots, but the script as a separate entity isn't horrible.

Second, the music was all completely on cue and built the scenes nicely. It wasn't overused and it never detracted from any of the scenes.

Third, I mean -- talk about indie, talk about zero budget. This is what it looks like, folks. A film like "Ink" (which is certainly a class well above this), was made for $250,000. There's a huge difference between zero and $250,000.

Where this movie really misses the mark are with issues related to budget but also some missteps by the director.

Without using any real camera lenses the framing had a lot of issues. This would have been an easy solve for a few hundred bucks by slapping a 35mm adapter on whatever consumer HD cam he used for the project. I'm assuming it was in the realm of an HV20 or some lesser model. Had this been shot on any kind of DSLR or something with an adapter, some of the framing issues would have been solved. I saw attempts by the director to set up interesting shots, but when you're using a jitty camcorder with no lenses, it's nearly impossible unless you're manufacturing a DOF by having objects or talent always in the foreground, which isn't possible throughout an entire film.

Lighting was another huge issue, and being that lighting can be solved using foam board and halogen work lights, I'm going to have to stick it to the director on this one. There are some basics of lighting that need to be studied before this guy's next feature (or fan) film.

"Crossing the line" -- that's what it's called when you move your talent from one side of the screen to the other mid-scene. This happened too many times. It's a rookie mistake and it's utterly confusing to the audience when it happens. So, to the director: If your actor is on the right side of the frame in a scene, that actor must stay on the right side of the frame throughout. If you want to move between two mid-range shots but don't want to cut from one mid-range shot to the next, then do a quick wide shot and then come back to your second shot.

Next is color correction. This, of course, can still be linked to budget. But something as cheap as Magic Bullet Mojo ($99) would have given your scenes a more cohesive blending and would have given your camcorder footage a more filmic appearance.

Location colors. This is probably the easiest thing to slip by the indie filmmaker. While you're probably going to have to use friends and family's locations to shoot your film, you CANNOT allow white walls to be in your film. Obviously the hospital is a different animal and most of that will have a blue tint when your color correction is done anyway (assuming you go the Blockbuster route), but when you're indoors you have to paint those walls. If it's a friend's house, paint the walls and then re-paint them white again if that's what they need. Go watch Amelie with the sound off. Watch the frames. Aim there.

Last...I know it sucks and I know the director knows it...but sound was a big issue. Not sure what kind of mic was used. At times it sounded like the mic was on-camera which is just the worst thing I can possible imagine for a narrative piece.

I can see how much work and effort was put into this film. There was some decent acting, a workable script, good pacing and at times some real effort went into framing certain scenes. But having lackluster audio, an amateurish understanding of talent placement in a scene (as it pertains to audience clarity) and a camcorder with no added glass for DOF, the director left us with a highschool-level product performed and written by adults.

I want this director to get better because he has passion for all levels of filmmaking. I gave the movie 5 stars for potential.

So, to the no-budget director of this film: 1) Pick yourself up a DSLR or HFS100 w/ JAG35pro or better (Panny and Sony just came out with 5K cams that are game changers) 2) Get some Sanken COS11D lavs and an NTG3 with an Edirol44 or Fostex FR2LE w/ Y XLR splitter cable 3) Grab a PRO AM 250 crane/jib 4) Magic Bullet Looks (or Mojo) And if you can, try to find someone who wouldn't mind training as your sound guy/girl. You're gonna need one.

But kudos on your first effort. Your gal was completely solid in the lead role.

Good luck!


7 of 7 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?
Review this title | See all 14 user reviews »

Contribute to This Page

Paul Scheer on Why There Are No Bad Movies

Paul Scheer discusses The Disaster Artist and his love of awesomely bad movies. Plus, we dive into the origins of midnight movies and explore how The Room became a cult classic.

Watch now