Giving this film it's own vent thread. Even before the film ended folks were already ranking it down there with FOLKLORE, BREAKFAST OF ALIENS, NIAGRAVATION and STAR CRYSTAL on the dishonor list of Marathon films.

The topic of how festival films play at the Marathon has been addressed before. It's a tricky thing, no doubt. All during the year I see films small and large, old and new, classic and cult and I always try to guess the magic formula: "How will this play at the Marathon?"
I won't say that I have a perfect record with my recommendations, but I would never have given the green light to a FOLKLORE or MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH . And, as the leader of the Never-Sleep Android brigade at the Marathon, I can honestly say that MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH would have still stunk at an afternoon matinee in October after having 8 hours of solid sleep, a shower and nice breakfast. 4 am or not, the film simply does not work on any level.
Living in L.A., I go to Festivals, Premieres and preview screenings quite a bit. They are special screenings. Often the attendees are invested in the films either directly or as viewers who are there to support the filmmakers, the festival and to discover "the next big thing". It can distort one's objective view of the movies. The "Sundance effect" is the most well known symbol of this disconnect. Many many films over the years have come out of Sundance with great buzz only to land with a thud once they get released in the "real world", both commercially and critically.
I wasn't there for the MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH Festival showing but I have spoken to a couple who did and they said went over just ok (they can write their views themselves). Jay Seaver's opinion is quoted below. All I can say is that I have had to tell not just business colleagues but good personal friends that their films stink right to their face after a screening. It isn't easy, but I have a strict "no lying" policy. Of course, I couch it in the most gentle terms I can and try to find praise in an aspect or two of the production. If the film isn't finished, I offer constructive criticisms in areas where the film can be improved.

Let the debate begin!!!




Jay Seaver wrote on Feb 18^th, 2013 at 11:00pm:

Motivational Growth - Man, the way the marathon can turn on a movie is amazing.  FWIW, when I saw it on Friday, I basically thought it was uneven, a few good parts with as many poor ones, and Combs's voice performance generally elevating it to a bit above mediocre.  I didn't watch much of this second screening (to be frank, I needed to spend some time in the restroom), and from what I did re-watch, it doesn't seem to repeat very well, but let me tell you - it wasn't in the top half of hatable movies I saw between the festival and marathon at all...

First I heard that "Frau Im Mond" would be DVD,

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/Karen_Tom/Movies/tumblr_mhh9n4WFov1qc67pso1_400_zps2cf321a7.gif


then I heard it would be replaced by "Hands of Orlac"

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/Karen_Tom/Movies/tumblr_mhh9n4WFov1qc67pso2_400_zpscb9ab8c5.gif

and then I heard Orlac would be replaced by "Motivational Growth",

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/Karen_Tom/Movies/tumblr_mhh9n4WFov1qc67pso3_400_zps778a7827.gif

Finally, I got Dave's print quality report on "The Fifth Element"*.

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/Karen_Tom/Movies/tumblr_mhh9n4WFov1qc67pso5_400_zps106fde97.gif


*For those who don't "get" my frequent online sarcasm: Please don't take offense. I'm not really homicidally angry. -RF  ;)

You forgot to mention Demon Lover! The Mold should have remained Festival only. The 4 AM screening certainly is a tough spot and I struggled to stay awake for the film and then decided it was fortunate that I did not see the entire movie. Every time I woke up it looked pretty much the same, except for the coming and going of the beard and the different stages of cleanliness of the apartment. Two in my party of 6 liked it or found it amusing, the others did not. I doubt it will become the cult classic that Garen thinks it will.

during motivational growth i heard a woman yelling in the balcony lobby: "I'M GETTING IN THE CAR AND I'M LEAVING"

i thought it had a good premise. the supporting cast was good. the production was good. i gave it a chance but half way through it just dragged and the ending was bad.

DEMON LOVER was unpopular, but is in nowhere near the (low) class of BREAKFAST OF ALIENS, NIAGRAVATION, FOLKLORE etc etc. It's a legit Foreign Arthouse film by a respected and multi-award winning director (Olivier Assayas), with some fine actors and a sleek production. Granted, it wasn't one of Assayas' better films, but, it ain't no STAR CRYSTAL.

DEMONLOVER being lumped with those straight to nowhere turds made by folks who never escaped obscurity is ridiculous to say the least. It wasn't a good fit for the Marathon, but, it's hardly an all-time worst film ---- worst fit, maybe........


Dinsdale wrote on Feb 19^th, 2013 at 6:59pm:

You forgot to mention Demon Lover! The Mold should have remained Festival only. The 4 AM screening certainly is a tough spot and I struggled to stay awake for the film and then decided it was fortunate that I did not see the entire movie. Every time I woke up it looked pretty much the same, except for the coming and going of the beard and the different stages of cleanliness of the apartment. Two in my party of 6 liked it or found it amusing, the others did not. I doubt it will become the cult classic that Garen thinks it will.

RE: Motivational Growth
Truly a film with its head in a very dark (anatomical) place.  What were they thinking?
I will say it is an object demonstration of the ability of the cast to stick with what must have been a grueling shooting schedule. 
The premise was worth about 30 minutes, tops.  It usually is unfortunate when a fimmaker is so in love with his/her subject matter/cast/production decisions as to be unable to abandon anything, and the heck with any audience.
:P Clear?

As an editor by trade I have to say the thing that bothered me the most was the lack of any kind of sense of narrative economy.
The script could have been cut down by a third without losing any story content.

The last two posts kind of jive with my thoughts watching this film. It looked almost like a one act play (or short film) drawn out to a ridiculously over-extended 1 hour 45 minutes. It also struck me as a horribly failed attempt at early Cronenberg (the trailer was the tip-off to me).

But, even as a 20 minute short, it wouldn't have worked. The lead character is both repellent and unsympathetic (not that good films aren't made with those characteristics). Worse, the Director maroons the actor alone on screen for a half-hour or more without another human. The mucky mold in the corner hardly opens up the film to any sense of narrative drive. Say what you will of early Cronenberg, you always had a sense of a born filmmaker with a keen sense of intelligence. The same can hardly be said of MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH.

I'm among the people who saw "Motivational Growth" at its premier screening at the festival as well as the Marathon three days later. What the Marathon crowd didn't see was an earnest presentation by director Don "skinny tie" Thacker.

Despite terrible weather and a small turnout, he praised the festival and described us, the audience members, as exactly  the crowd he made the movie for. Promotional ability? The Mold knows Jack!

Was "Mars et Avril" a prettier film or "Space Milkshake" a funnier film?  Were "Found in Time"and "Time Becomes a Woman" more ambitious? Absolutely. Would any of them have proudly posted our DNA logo on their movie poster? Probably not.


http://motivationalgrowth.com/2013/01/23/motivational-growth-world-premiere/

http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t214/Karen_Tom/Movies/MotivationalGrowth_zpsc085724a.gif

Wish the other entries would promote the festival in their advertising. Having said that, I agree with others that Motivational Growth would have been better as a short. As a full length feature it just didn't work.

Jay Seaver wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2013 at 12:55pm:

Almost done recapping the festival on my blog & eFilmCritic, with just Saturday night's stuff left to go... Motivational Growth - First time through, a little shaky but the bits that were good were pretty visible.  I found the flaws more prominent the second time through in 72 hours, but, uh, moving on...

In your full review of MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH, you mention that the film's Director was in the house during the 4am Marathon screening. That's unfortunate.

I honestly don't think more than a handful of Marathoners were aware of his presence. He should have been given an opportunity to defend himself in person - not, that he likely would have persuaded many doubters. We've had other testy Q & A's with filmmakers, but, they are always afforded a fair hearing, and get applause at the end for facing a hostile crowd (even in the case of the despised NIAGRAVATION).

You also mention that at the Festival, the Director said the film was set in 1991. Did anyone pick that up? It plays as much more present day than that. Nit-Pick: Plasma TVs weren't widely commercially available in 1991, so there would be no Plasma TV repair company. Hardly, the film's biggest flaw............

L.A. Connection wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2013 at 2:02pm:

In your full review of MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH, you mention that the film's Director was in the house during the 4am Marathon screening. That's unfortunate. I honestly don't think more than a handful of Marathoners were aware of his presence. He should have been given an opportunity to defend himself in person - not, that he likely would have persuaded many doubters. We've had other testy Q & A's with filmmakers, but, they are always afforded a fair hearing, and get applause at the end for facing a hostile crowd (even in the case of the despised NIAGRAVATION). You also mention that at the Festival, the Director said the film was set in 1991. Did anyone pick that up? It plays as much more present day than that. Nit-Pick: Plasma TVs weren't widely commercially available in 1991, so there would be no Plasma TV repair company. Hardly, the film's biggest flaw............

(1)  I think he introduced himself and mentioned his movie would be showing later when he hosted the Alien Mating Cry contest.  Honestly, I don't know that a Q&A or "defense" would have been a great idea; I mean, Garen's attempt to do so went over so well, right?

(2) I think he said 1991; it may have been another time in the early 1990s.  It fits; there's not really anything newer than that around, the things on TV have an 80s/90s look, the music/animation is from that era's video games, and people talk about "faxing" orders in.  It's just not made explicit, so a lot of it comes off as stretched quirk rather than period detail.

I also think the guy was trying to sell plasmas, rather than repair them.  In a better movie, there could have something about rushing headlong into the future or being bound to the past in that, but I don't think this one had that kind of grip on its message.

in the "movies as bad as motivational growth" list we need to add that time travel movie from a few years back. it was based on the butterfly effect by ray bradbury. it featured time waves and mutated gibbons. what was it called. one of the stupidest scenes of all time was in it. the heroine turned into a fish and she was floating in her fully furnished 3rd floor apartment with a bunch of apparatus that could not be operated by a fish.

The movie you speak of is SOUND OF THUNDER (SF/33) aka "Sound of BLUNDER".

It is truly bad, and worse, it makes shambles out of a Ray Bradbury tale. The special effects are unbelievably amateurish for an $80M budget film. In the first scene with the dinosaurs I swear I thought it was all supposed to be a computer simulation game. I was appalled when it turns out the filmmakers were trying to pass them off as real dinos!!

But, there are a few caveats as far as putting it on an all-time worst marathon list:

1. It was made by some real filmmakers who have done better like Peter Hyams (2010, OUTLAND) and has Ben Kingsley chewing up the scenery like there is no tomorrow.

2. More importantly for such a list, BLUNDER was actually booked for the expressed purpose of having Marathoners make fun of. It failed miserably in that regard (as did BATTLEFIELD EARTH). Audiences just have a hard time mocking mega-budget turkeys. BLUNDER was not booked as a "good" new movie. It simply isn't the same as having fun with REPTILICUS or PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE, small earnest indies that have a cheezy charm. Plus, both BLUNDER & BATTLEFIELD were too recent to have aged into moldy frommage.....






kirok wrote on Feb 24^th, 2013 at 10:31am:

in the "movies as bad as motivational growth" list we need to add that time travel movie from a few years back. it was based on the butterfly effect by ray bradbury. it featured time waves and mutated gibbons. what was it called. one of the stupidest scenes of all time was in it. the heroine turned into a fish and she was floating in her fully furnished 3rd floor apartment with a bunch of apparatus that could not be operated by a fish.

L.A. Connection wrote on Feb 25^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

The movie you speak of is SOUND OF THUNDER..... 1. It was made by some real filmmakers who have done better like Peter Hyams (2010, OUTLAND)

     Tony, my dear, there are times when I think youve been out in the LA sun for too long!
     "Peter Hyams?????"  "Done Better?!?!?!?!?"   :o :o :o :o  Are you off your meds?
     Peter Hyams is an awful director.  The closest thing he ever made to a good movie is Running Scared (which has a worn, pedestrian plot, but which is saved from being as bad as the rest of Hyams's work by the gleeful ad-libbing of Billy Crystal & Gregory Hines [which is, in itself, a barely-disguised re-working of the patter between James Caan & Alan Arkin in Freebie and the Bean -- and theres a movie that has fallen into oblivion!]).
     You might be able to make a case for Capricorn One, but it would be difficult, because it starts out strong, & then, like the majority of Hyams's movies, falls apart the further it goes on.
     And those are it!  2010 is so unbelievably awful (especially considering what came before it) that it makes my teeth ache.  Outland is so ridiculously bad that Harlan Ellison -- certainly no stranger to defending bad movies -- tore it to smithereens in his film reviewing F&SF column.  And I ran them both, in 70mm.
     Then theres the rest of Hyams's glittering oeuvre.  Have you forgotten Timecop?  Just try to make a case defending that turd of a movie!  End of Days?  The Relic?  The Narrow Margin re-make?  Sudden Death?  Stay Tuned?  A fine cinematic career is this!
     Sound of Thunder keeps exactly in line with the crumminess of everything that guy has made before.  "Done better," indeed!
      Next thing I know, youll be defending Motivational Growth!   ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Running Scared and Capricorn One aren't bad. Star Chamber is B movie fun. And, the Marathon crowd liked Outland and had a decent time with Timecop, though it's an admitted time-waster. If you can put 2001 out of your thoughts, 2010 is decent mainstream sequel. It was hardly hooted off the Marathon screen - NONE of the three were booed off the screen like MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH or STAR CRYSTAL.

Sure, I'm grading on a curve, but, the point is that you can't compare Peter Hyams to the directors of the straight to oblivion folks who made Folklore, Niagravation etc. The relevant comparison is Hyams to the Director of FOLKLORE -not Stanley Kubrick. YOU might not like them but Hyams' films at the Marathon haven't gone over too badly with the exception of BLUNDER (and it was booked EXPRESSLY FOR that purpose)

Oy. This is a polarizing film, isn't it? It certainly made for the most, erm, unique viewing experience this year.

Sonya From The Balcony and I hadn't heard that HANDS OF ORLOC was off the schedule. We got back to our seats as MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH started, and thought we were getting a short before the feature. We were both really looking forward to watching Conrad Veidt do his thing, so it was a big, big disappointment forty-five minutes in when we realized that nope, this was no short and we had been watching forty-five minutes of nothing for, um, nothing. That's not the film's fault, though. Everything else? Well, yeah.

I liked the overall concept, though, with the shut-in who's gone so crazy he talks first to an invisible audience about his daily routine and then to his sentient bathroom mold, while every now and then he envisions things as a video game. And then when his last connection to sanity breaks down, so does he. Okay. That's a decent idea, there's some torpor and insanity to play with, and then there's the process of finding one's way out of the rut. That development is something that the film's title seemed like it wanted to imply along with the whole mold joke. I've had at least one year of existence between jobs where I pretty much stayed in my apartment and went out of my mind; I could sympathize with the guy whose apartment becomes his entire world. I'm pretty sure this film was therapy for at least one person involved in the creative process.

Couldn't sympathize with the rest of it, though. The problem was that it tried too damn hard to be weird, edgy and unconventional for the sake of being weird, edgy and unconventional, and that never gets anyone anywhere. Not even Seth MacFarlane. Secondary characters came in, spoke in crazy mad ciphers, licked television sets, and then left through either the door or gruesome means. Were we supposed to care about them? Apparently not, and boy howdy that makes for compelling film. I love sitting in a theater for two hours watching characters I couldn't care less about. Were we supposed to view everything through the crazy shut-in's perspective? Perhaps, but dark voyages into a tortured psyche have been done much, much better and without someone who looks like Zach Galifianakis in tighty whities.

And then there was the problem of the film continuing. And continuing. And continuing. Audible groans from the audience every time a new title card popped up. It felt like a student project, and not a good one at that, one of those projects written in an echo chamber where every crazy idea you get seems like a great one, and you're gonna do it just cause you CAN, man.

And of course, when you can do whatever you want because you can, that means WACKY CRAZY RANDOM DEATHS! Sonya FTB wanted to leave the theater after the first Wacky TV Repairman Guy licked the screen and had his face melted off. I insisted on staying if only because, after sitting around for absolutely nothing, I wanted the satisfaction of the film ending. I wanted proof. If I didn't get that proof, we may still be in the Somerville lobby yet, waiting for the damn thing to end.

But then the Wacky Grocery Delivery Chick got randomly offed because HEY IT'S CRAZY AND DARK AND EDGY, and that's when we both knew we'd had enough. That's it, time to drop the mic and get the hell out.

We hung out in the lobby with other refugees. Stories were told of DEMONLOVER, of BREAKFAST OF ALIENS, of the legendary Cinema 1 reaction to THEY CAME FROM WITHIN. Perhaps MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH wasn't that bad in context, but lord, it wasn't good. A later escapee asked "Did you leave before or after the delivery girl was dismembered?" Suddenly we realized we were lucky to get out when we did. Reading the summary later also confirmed it; there was no way in hell I could have derived any satisfaction from that ending.

I hated the film and I hated what potential it squandered in the name of edginess, but at the same time I realize this is the stuff that Marathons are made of. For every 'Thon film you revisit with love, every wonderful new discovery, every piece that affirms your faith in science-fiction (ASTERNAUTS became surprisingly touching at the end, and I liked it) there's a bad film. A real stinkburger. One you'll tell newbies about. You think TRANSFORMERS 6 is bad, Marathonner From The Future? Man, you didn't sit through MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH. Let me tell you about it. You're not going to believe it.

1.  Some famous (British?) party giver from the 1930s once said that to every party one must invite a certain mix of guests - and one of them should always be a person that everyone else at the party hates. 
2.  At each film showing, some of the viewers' pleasure derives from the opportunity to be judgmental (certainly true for me, anyway).
3.  "Motivational Growth" was both.
:)

I wasn't there for M. G.  But which marathon was "Demon Lover" and which version was it?

sas wrote on Feb 27^th, 2013 at 12:38am:

I wasn't there for M. G.  But which marathon was "Demon Lover" and which version was it?

Filmography link is at the top of the page: http://sf.theboard.net/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1319772249/0#0

DEMONLOVER showed at SF/29 - the year at Dedham. It was the R-Rated theatrical cut. Still, a bit raw for some Marathoners. Worse, it's a European Arthouse film which most folks weren't expecting or wanting..........

[ftp][/ftp]The choice to run "Motivational Growth" took the place of "The Hands of Orlac". Many of us, particularly those who had seen "Motivatonal Growth" the friday before the Marathon, were let down. We wondered what we had missed. Wonder no more!


Hands of Orlac (1924)
http://archive.org/details/TheHandsOfOrlac1924

First, I'd recommend getting the Kino restoration (which is the copy we were going to show and is the best copy out there  - http://www.kinolorber.com/video.php?id=897

Second, weren't you able to glean all kinds of new details & insights into MOTIVATIONAL GROWTH the 2nd time around? Maybe, the Mold...uh...grows on you on repeated viewings......


R_F_Fineman wrote on Mar 7^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

[ftp][/ftp]The choice to run "Motivational Growth" took the place of "The Hands of Orlac". Many of us, particularly those who had seen "Motivatonal Growth" the friday before the Marathon, were let down. We wondered what we had missed. Wonder no more! Hands of Orlac (1924) http://archive.org/details/TheHandsOfOrlac1924

Just saw a posting on the Boston Sci-Fi facebook page that Motivtional Growth won best picture at the Rocky Horror Picture Show Film Festival. Okaaaay.

It's actually the LITTLE ROCK Horror Picture Show. Doesn't look too big. Here was the "competition" for what it's worth:

http://www.littlerockfilmfestival.org/2013/03/19/passes-on-sale-now-for-little-rock-horror-picture-show/


Lile wrote on Mar 25^th, 2013 at 9:05am:

Just saw a posting on the Boston Sci-Fi facebook page that Motivtional Growth won best picture at the Rocky Horror Picture Show Film Festival. Okaaaay.