Today I made time to watch Christopher R. Mihm's film, Guns of the Apocalypse. This film was released in 2018, and is now available through Amazon Prime. You won't see superb acting on the level of Tom Hanks or Meryl Streep, but that's kind of the point with this film. While watching it, I was reminded of how adults can have incredible purpose and fun through expressing the objective of their art. For a low-budget film that cost approximately $10,000. to produce, I was impressed by Guns of the Apocalypse, which is a story of survival, a purposeful journey, and difficult decisions on behalf of mankind in a "nuclear ravaged wasteland." The film begins with a narration via the main character's first-person perspective and with exposition that gives way to active dialogue as other characters are introduced.
With films of today overdosing on computer graphics, Hollywood churns out money-making hits aimed to please broad audiences. But, what about the imperfect and independent film-makers who take big risks with little money? They must make every red cent count with next to nothing available as a contingency.
From the start of the film, it is noticeable that there wasn't much of a budget, but it was refreshing to watch the story come together with an effective use of cool special effects and interesting mutant make-up, and wardrobe which kept me intrigued. The story begin with a punch of color before moving to crisp black and white, giving it an enjoyable old-school vibe, and the mutant-makeup and special effects didn't overwhelm the film's content, which was a pleasant bonus.
There's an applied standard that I've maintained throughout my adult life and that's a refusal to clutter my perspective with outside information or research before I've had a chance to experience it with a "virginal" perspective. If not possible to avoid influential input beforehand, I do my best to keep an open mind. I try to avoid critical-reviews until I've finished reading a book, admiring a piece of art, or watching a movie to give myself the opportunity to solidly settle into my own viewpoint. After I reach "the end," then I can digest and enjoy an outsider's musings.
Too often, we allow outsiders, whether they're a close relation or a distant professional, to dictate the direction of our opinions. Outside interpretations can skew our perspectives, and we mustn't settle for the status quo. Sometimes we've got to go with the whirlings of our own mind. I think it's sometimes a good idea to break free of the hand-holding circle and to take a chance on thoughts and opinions that belong to you. Of course, it can be great to gain the circle's insight, but there's always that fringe-element that remains independent. It's okay to agree with the status quo, but don't let them wrangle you their direction... stroll that way, by choice.
I jotted a couple of brief notes during the film, particularly noting the old-school vibe that I truly enjoyed. So, after I watched the film then read that Christopher R. Mihm purposefully sought to give his films a drive-in-theater quality similar to the standard experience of movie-goers in the 1950's, I wanted to jump for joy. I was thrilled that he successfully delivered that goal to an ordinary observer and that I caught it. Then I read about the reason he went into making these old-style films; they celebrate his childhood years as he and his father watched old films with their "wooden acting" --- his father loved them.
Mihm's father died at age 51 after a brief battle with stomach cancer, then he figured out what we often do after such pivotal experiences... he finally understood that our treasured moments in life don't have to pass away with the ones we love. So, Christopher Mihm started what I am referring to as an "Awkward Acting Revival." After watching Guns of the Apocalypse, which is the first film I've seen by Mihm, I knew I liked it. At first, I was about to turn it off, but something kept me hanging in there, telling me to stay invested, and I'm so glad I did. And now I've become a solid fan. For me, as a writer, it all became even more meaningful after discovering the artist's inspiration for creating his films.
Of course, in this film, Guns of the Apocalypse, the main character carries a gun to shoot mutants and Death Dealers, and after one scene in particular, I'd love to ask Mihm to contact a professional who has working-knowledge and real-life experience about guns. Some of the scenes indicated the actors and film-crew lacked comfort and knowledge about guns, especially as certain camera angles revealed empty chambers during a scene where the main character's gun is pointing at direct threats, which he shoots. Yes, revolvers need something to block the holes so it appears as if bullets are actually loaded into the gun.
And another thing, if there's not time to reload, then a six-shooter can only shoot six bullets. There are no more bullets to fire until you insert more into the gun. However, those details aren't crucial to an Independent / Indie film-maker...their focus is to tell the story on a choking budget, and to let the viewer use their imagination, which prompted me to reluctantly toss aside the fact that the gun clearly lacked loaded ammunition. I get it, go with the main idea of the story instead of with prop issues.
Overall, this film should make the people who worked on it feel proud to declare that it was created from a low-budget and I find it interesting to see how far the money can go and to see what locales, settings, and music they use. By the way, some of the music for this film was secured via the public domain site of Archives.org. - further proving that this crew accomplished a great deal with minimal funds. After seeing shows such as "Game of Thrones" with their seemingly infinite budget, it is almost sporting fun to see what people can do with their rent money.
And Mr. Mihm, next time, stuff the gun's empty chambers with cotton that's sprayed with dark metallic or black spray-paint... have the actors shoot the correct number of times to match the number of bullets supposedly available to the coordinating weapon, then have them reload. There is a heart-pounding intensity that comes with having to reload while being observed by or chased by the bad guys. There's added stress that comes with knowing a certain amount of bullets is available, then after they're spent, it's time to hustle while multitasking, which adds realistic tension that transfers to an alert audience. Bullets matter, but it also matters to finish and release another film without going too hungry.
Who knows? Perhaps the mismatching of reminders of gun-ignorance is part of the film's charm. I think artistry allows for a lot of berth, but I'd still rather see filled chambers to reduce distraction. In the end, I suppose it doesn't matter all that much because Mihm tries to release one film a year, since 2006, I believe, and he's not slowing down. I've got some catching up to do since each of his films tie together in some way.
If you're also into quirky things, check out Mihm's website page that details Guns of the Apocalypse:
Visit: http://sainteuphoria.com/bio.html.
In the meantime, beware of those Death Dealers.
