The Moleman of Belmont Avenue (Special Preview)
12:22 PM November 8, 2011
Theatrical Release / 2011/ 96 mins / R
THE FILM:
THE MOLEMAN OF BELMONT AVENUE is a new horror/comedy that is making the rounds at the film festival circuit. It is the brainchild of co-writers/co-directors/stars Mike Bradecich and John LaFlamboy who got their start in the Chicago acting scene making short films and working with various improve comedy clubs including Second City. The low budget film is the duo’s first attempt at a feature following their internet short debut with TYLER’S NEW BIKE. While THE MOLEMAN OF BELMONT AVENUE is branded as a horror/comedy, the emphasis is purely on comedy with the film populated by broad caricatures, wild situations and over the top weirdness sprinkled with exploitive nudity and a cheesy monster. None of that is a bad thing here.
Bradecich and LaFlamboy play brothers Marion and Jarmon Mugg, two slacker brothers very much in the mold of Kevin Smith and Jason Mewes’ Jay and Silent Bob and Simon Pegg and Nick Frosts’ Shaun and Ed from SHAUN OF THE DEAD. Two years ago the pair inherited their mother’s brownstone apartment building and has let it slip into near ruin. The tenants (the smart ones) are fleeing without notice, the gas has been turned off and the electricity is being stolen from the next door church. On top of all this, all of the tenants’ pets have been mysteriously vanishing. As the boys discuss cleaning the building up, they witness the titular moleman pulling a small dog through a tenant’s mail slot and then vanish through the air vents. Now the slacker duo has a monster to contend with on top of everything else.
Bradecich and LaFlamboy knew their filmmaking limitations going into production and get great use out of the very few locations the story takes place in (hallways, small apartments, the bar under the building and the basement.) Even though the story takes place in essentially one location, we never feel tired or bored by it since the building offered a decent variety of sets. Also, it appears that they had practically no money for special effects, so our moleman is seen mostly as glimpses, quick shots from the back or a gnarled hand springing from various openings and vents. While we do get a decent full on shot of him during the finale, the decision to keep him in shadows pays off well by letting the audiences’ imagination work the make-up effect magic.
THE MOLEMAN OF BELMONT AVENUE is not a perfect film. While there is much that is a success, it does have one near (not completely, but near) fatal flaw; the movie seems to wander off at about the 40 minute mark, losing sight of the main story and becoming a talky stoner flick for a healthy chunk of the second half. The first part of the script does a great job setting up the colorful characters that populate the film and making us like and care about them. It also is decently focused on setting up the moleman mystery and laying the foundation for the Mugg Brothers to deal with it. But once the buildings’ final pet is taken, the movies feels like it didn’t know what to do and we just hang with the characters for a while before coming back in the last 10 minutes to wrap everything up.
The greatest strength THE MOLEMAN OF BELMONT AVENUE has is its excellent cast. Robert Englund (the original Freddy Krueger) may be the one big name the film boasts to get people to see it, but it’s the lesser known cast members (from Chicago’s Second City improve club and “Strangers With Candy”) that will keep you laughing and get you through the films’ weaker sections. Bradecich and LaFlamboy are in just about every scene and more than anyone else carry the movie with an amazing amount of infectious enthusiasm. Even if they are just walking through one of the hallways, their manic energy gives the scene a sense of urgency and childish fun.
THE MOLEMAN OF BELMONT AVENUE may be a film you have to search for to see, but fans of the weird, the wild and the low budget wonderful should be pleasantly surprised by what they find.
Reviewed by Jeff Allen
Posted by Erik Candiani | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)





Comments