Editor’s Note: I acquired the screener for the film “Vote Jesus” from the film’s editor, Greg Sucharew, on the set of “Living Will” starring Ryan Dunn and April Scott (my interview with the two actors is forthcoming). Greg appeared to be a cultured and friendly guy…little did I know his film featured a festering sore of a leading man — who’s pretty sore about our negative review. Below is Film Threat critic Jessica Baxter’s response to a 7/27 email from “Vote Jesus” star Vermin Supreme (no lie). I wonder where director Vic David stands on all this.
-M. Sorrento
* * *
Many filmmakers and (and even actors) choose to ignore their critics, or take their reviews in stride. Perhaps even learn something from them. But sometimes they don’t. This is one of those times. First the letter (sic throughout):
Dear Matthew Sorrento of Film Threat,
In regards to Jessica Baxter’s July , 26 review of the film Vote Jesus :
With culture jamming comes the risk of confusion .
>>” A Google search reveals that he’s run for office before under a platform to promote dental hygiene and the promise to fund time travel research. It’s surreal performance art, to be sure. But he’s not exactly taking a stand.”
The same Google search would reveal that The Museum of Hoaxes ranks Vermin Supreme #7 in their ranking of the Top 17 Satirical Candidates of All Time,
(Pat Paulson is #6 and Steven Colbert , #8 ) It would also reveal, with some minor digging, the depth and thoughtfulness that go into my ‘wacky’ packaging.
The only thing that I, and my character in Vote Jesus , have in common is that we have both run for president.
Nowhere in the film, Vote Jesus, is it stated or implied that Ken Stevenson is anyone other than who he says he is in the movie .
To confuse my character in the movie, with my real life persona is truly bizarre , and would change the entire meaning of the film.
>>”At the start of “Vote Jesus,” Supreme reveals his plan. He will pose as a man named Ken Stevenson and run for president of the U.S.A.” <<<<
Contrary to Ms . Baxters’ assertion, this simply does not occur in the film . In the film ,
I am portraying a character . I am acting .
How it is she can write an entire review based on a complete fabrication, and false understanding, is beyond me .
I agree that if it was just me pretending to be ‘one of them ‘ to elicit their not -so -secret-agenda it would be a much crappier premise.
It would be like Sacha Baron Cohn , at the beggining of his movie, saying,
“Hi , I’m Sacha Baron Cohn, and I’m going to pretend to be Barot /Bruno in order to exploit some social situations.”
It didn’t happen.
Unlike The Yes Men or Bill Mahr , this actors’ true identity is never revealed during the movie.
The movie follows my character’s quest for fundie votes , not my own .
In this context the motivation of the character is clear and straight forward.
He is on a political and spiritual quest .
The name Vermin Supreme appears nowhere in the film until the closing credits.
The character, Ken , is never at odds with his beliefs or motivations.
Maybe our movie really does blow , I don’t think so, but a factually accurate based review would carry much more weight .
As it is , this fictional review of our fictional mockumentary is going to cause us some real life problems .
>>”And thus, his project, like his film, just feels like a big waste of time. “<<<<
I will tell Ms. Baxter , the same thing my character tells conservative film critic/blogger Michael Medved,
” I respectfully disagree”
Sir, I ask you . What can we do to make this right ?
Thanks for reviewing the 102 minute rough cut .
We would be more than happy to provide the leaner , meaner 88 minute finish cut .
I am ,
Vermin Love Supreme
PS Prior to the making of ‘Religulous’ , Bill Mahr’s people, who requested our original script , liked it so much, that we never heard from them again. So there.
So this is my attempt to “make this right”. Although what follows probably isn’t what Mr. Surpreme is after.
I shall dissect his letter as he did my review.
With culture jamming comes the risk of confusion .
Wikipedia defines “Culture Jamming” as “a tactic in which an activist attempts to disrupt or subvert mainstream cultural institutions.”
In the case of “Vote Jesus”, the activist (Vermin Supreme) attempts to disrupt the cultural institution of the Religious Right by pretending to be one of them. Whether or not Ken Stevenson reveals himself within the film’s narrative, this is his film’s intension. The premise stands. Therefore, my review based on this premise is still accurate.
The same Google search would reveal that The Museum of Hoaxes ranks Vermin Supreme #7 in their ranking of the Top 17 Satirical Candidates of All Time,
(Pat Paulson is #6 and Steven Colbert , #8 ) It would also reveal, with some minor digging, the depth and thoughtfulness that go into my ‘wacky’ packaging.
OK, so maybe I didn’t read every single result of my Google search. But who has time for that? This is one film and I have a whole box of them yet to watch. Many reviewers would just read the press notes that came with the screener (in this case, there weren’t any) and that’s it. I don’t know how prestigious a ranking from the Museum of Hoaxes is, but I do know that Steven Colbert’s satire is very accessible. He is mocking a precise sort of conservative “journalism” and, in doing so, reveals the ridiculousness of their hypocritical and reactionary viewpoints. Even after hearing from the man himself, I’m still not sure what Vermin Supreme’s deal is.
>>”At the start of “Vote Jesus,” Supreme reveals his plan. He will pose as a man named Ken Stevenson and run for president of the U.S.A.” <<<<
Contrary to Ms . Baxters’ assertion, this simply does not occur in the film . In the film ,
I am portraying a character . I am acting .
Fair enough. Here’s how that happened. I was attempting to fully understand and represent the thesis of a film about which I had little to no information and in doing so, received too much information. During my research on Mr. Supreme, I came across this trailer: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIew3R_jAIk] in which he DOES reveal himself and his plan. Along with a line that definitely occurs in the 102 minute cut, in which Ken Stevenson says in regard to the Values Voters, “I need to find out what kind of things these fine Americans need to hear. I need to learn all the right phrases and code words…I need to convince them that I am one of them. Better yet, I need to become one of them.” Perhaps I am the only viewer who would draw the allegedly erroneous conclusion that Ken Stevenson is posing from a statement like that. But I doubt it.
Regardless, he seems to think that in my misunderstanding his film’s premise, I gave a low rating to an otherwise brilliant film. The fact that Ken Stevenson is a character and not a subversive does not change my core criticism.
To confuse my character in the movie, with my real life persona is truly bizarre , and would change the entire meaning of the film.
Not really. If it is a “mockumentary”, as he calls it, it does change the fact that we can now “trust” our narrator to be who he says he is. However, even when a sincere character interacts with sincere real people, the final paragraph of my review still applies. “Agreeing with these people, even facetiously, accomplishes nothing and Vermin is the only one who’s in on it. It’s clandestinely subversive. And thus, his project, like his film, just feels like a big waste of time.”
If it’s meant to be more “Spinal Tap” than “Borat”, we also have a much simpler problem. It’s not very funny.
I will tell Ms. Baxter , the same thing my character tells conservative film critic/blogger Michael Medved, ” I respectfully disagree”
Of course he does. He made the film. No one likes to hear bad news about his or her babies. It’s perfectly normal. But I am a critic and it is not only my right but also my job to tell people what I think of a film.
We would be more than happy to provide the leaner , meaner 88 minute finish cut .
It would appear that Mr. Supreme acknowledges some problems with the film if they’ve since found 14 minutes to remove. I stand by my rating.
PS Prior to the making of ‘Religulous’ , Bill Mahr’s people, who requested our original script , liked it so much, that we never heard from them again. So there.
PS: “So there”? If anything, Mahr’s people used his script as a guide of what not to do because “Religulous” is not only vastly different, but also vastly superior.
And with that, I bid Mr. Vermin Good Day. I SAID GOOD DAY!
– Jessica Baxter, 7/27/09
Bookmark to:
Posted by Matthew Sorrento in Writer's Corner