Everything's Eventual Movie Review
Everything's Eventual Movie Review
Everything's Eventual, directed by J.P. Scott. Starring Michael Flores, Joe Jones, Cavin Gray. Reviewed by Staci Layne Wilson.
|
Based on Stephen King source material of the same name, Everything's Eventual is the story of a psychic killer (think: Chuck Palahniuk's novel Lullaby, Brian De Palma's movie The Fury, or the classic Billy Mumy episode of Rod Serling's The Twilight Zone). Basically, one bad thought from this guy and you're toast.
In this case, the guy is Dinky Earnshaw (Michael Flores), and the thoughts are articulated through hieroglyphs sent via email. Dinky learns of his terrifying talent early on when he accidently kills some irritating insects and then tests his inner death-ray on the neighbor's barking dog. As he matures Dinky hones his skill and trains it to do good deeds for him (he imagines having apple pie for dinner, and sure enough there's one waiting for him when he gets home from work).
But Dinky's talents are too valuable for the whipping up of decadent desserts — instead, they wind up being used to make sure certain people get their just desserts. These doomed souls are the targets of a mysterious and shadowy institute fronted by a buttoned up Brit known only as Mr. Sharpton (Joe Jones). He acts as Dinky's point of contact and does his best to keep Dinky from asking too many questions. But of course the telepath eventually gets suspicious and embarks on a deadly investigation into the organization that could spell the end of it all.
Normally I would just internally applaud the efforts of the independent filmmakers and inexperienced actors, and let it go at that. I would not write a review. However, with the expectation that a King opus brings with it to horror fans, I feel as though I must warn: Everything's Eventual is terrible. And not fun-terrible in an even vaguely amusing way… it's just embarrassingly bad and hard to watch. I'm sure the director, actors and screenwriter are nice guys and I know they didn't set out to make a subpar feature, but… wow. How'd they get the rights to a Stephen King story? They must either be friends or blackmailers, because I can't see any other way. (OK, I'll come clean: I know it's a "Dollar Baby" project.)
Aside from Jones as the devilishly dapper Mr. Sharpton, the acting is absolutely atrocious. And the film is miscast, to boot. Dinky does not look like the type of guy who sees more ass than a toilet seat at Grand Central Station (even if he had $100 bills falling out of his pockets, which he doesn't), and his best friend Pug (Cavin Gray Schneider), who's supposed to be a hardcore military man, has a physique more like the Michelin Man. The editing, composition of shots, and overall look and flow of the film is a murky mess.
Much as it pains me to write a negative review on a little indie like this, it hurts even worse to watch it — so don't.
= = =
Reviewed by Staci Layne Wilson
Follow Horror.com on Twitter @horrordotcom
Latest User Comments:
| Wow, this is a real bummer. I liked King's short story Everything's Eventual from the collection of the same name. It sounds like (surprise) the story was much better. The "hero" is a loser who looks at soft-porn mags. He is anything but a ladies man. Things magically appear from the secret agency which cleans his house when he is not home and stocks his refridgerator with whatever he wants (he makes a list and leaves it). It's not magic. His powers appears to be killing only, not whipping up apple pies from thin air. I'll bet the ending was better than this film as well. | |
| 10-08-2010 by Sparky | discuss |
| From the director of Everything's Eventual | |
| Staci: Thank you for writing a review on my film, honestly thanks. Though I'm sure you'd be surprised, it is actually the first awful review for the film thus far. I am equally thankful that you even saw the film. The Dollar Deal, as Stephen King calls it, allows these films to only be exhibited in film festivals so it is naturally hard to see them and I'm glad you did. I'm sorry you did not enjoy the film, to say the least. I wish it could please everyone but I know it can't. I have a couple King fans that apparently love this movie and you are the first to, at least openly, hate it. It was my first feature film which I made for my Senior thesis project at ASU. I raised $47k for the budget and we shot at 18 locations over 13 days, all in Arizona (where I grew up and went to school). We also worked with some great equipment (like the RED ONE) and got some good talent (all AZ peeps). I got a great experience out of making it. I never expected it to turn out as good as it did and I couldn't be happier with my first feature film. I understand and can see to a point most of you criticisms. Perhaps it's just a matter of taste or timing or expectations. After all, I did receive an email shortly after finishing the film saying how much Stephen King was impressed with the film. But I guess he was in the right mindset. Most of these Dollar Babies are not very good, far worse than mine, if you can imagine :). All of them, I should also mention, are short films. Mine was the first feature length Dollar Baby ever made. Hell, I'm happy enough that the master himself went out of his way to express how much he liked my film. I wish you saw the same movie he did. Anyway, I'm not writing this as a rebuttal but just as a "hi, I heard you and thanks for seeing my film" shout out. And also, to give a little background on the movie, which may explain some of the things you didn't like. You are more than welcome to write back or contact me personally. Once again, I am sorry you didn't like the film. Hopefully my next one will be better so keep an eye out for it in early 2011. Thanks again, J.P. Scott Director/Producer Everything's Eventual PS: I guess I should throw in just one little rebuttal huh :) The characters of Dinky and Pug were actually right there on the screen as you saw them. Pug wasn't supposed to be "he-man", just a new recruit with a good attitude. And Dinky wasn't supposed to be the "ladies-man", it was just another method of control by TransCorp to keep there new guy happy and distracted (note how there were no women in the second half of the film). So in your read of the characters, I believe you to be incorrect. Thanks again for your comments and for seeing the film! | |
| 10-08-2010 by J.P. | discuss |