Love Stalker
by C.W. Blair
First of all, to shoot this film on an independent filmmaker’s budget of an estimated $100,000 (according to IMDB which may or may not be accurate) is impressive. So, hats must be tipped to the production team of LOVE STALKER for managing to pull together a feature length film on such a tight budget.
The story, set in St Louis, centers on a 30 something bar fly called Pete (producer, writer and co-director Matt Glasson) who loves to chat up the ladies in the hopes of later bedding them. Pete is a desperate man and unbelievably ruthless in his attempt to achieve his magic number of sleeping or should that be shagging 75 women. He leaves them hanging after he has his evil way with them until he meets Stephanie (Rachel Chapman), the girl of his dreams who then dumps him when she finds out he keeps a notebook filled with records of his sexual escapades.
The opening scene sets up the protagonist really well and we, the audience instantly see Pete for what he is, a sleazy, slimy cheeseball who has no respect for himself or the woman he spends his life pursuing in an attempt to self-gratify.
Casting is strong, Pete really looks like the horrible sleazeball he is meant to be, and Stephanie is gorgeous and totally believable as the girl who could stop any guy from sleeping around and want to settle down. She is very attractive and it’s easy to see how any guy would fall in love with her; she’s sexy, intelligent, with green eyes and long red hair.
The script has some strong elements. There is a great line when Pete’s friend Tony tells him that Ted Bundy looks less like a serial killer than him. But overall, I’m not sure whether the script or storyline is really strong enough to justify making this into a feature length film. There were some unnecessary scenes and dialogue – e.g. a bar scene between Stephanie and Pete – where he says he will get the check in one shot then turns around (new shot) and asks for the check – totally pointless in my opinion and should have been cut as it brings nothing to the story or character progression.
The use of visual storytelling is strong with a lot of show, not tell, so it’s clear that the director knows what he is doing and understands story. However, I felt there were some unnatural scenes that don’t feel real. You can really tell they are acting sometimes which is not a good thing. I got the sense I was watching people act on more than one occasion. This may have been due to the lack of depth in the characters or simply a less than string script. There is an elevator scene and Pete says, ‘don’t run away from me Stephanie’. It’s cringe-worthy stuff and sadly not in a comedic fashion.
The film is supposed to be a comedy but gets too serious and loses elements of fun. I didn’t find myself laughing once. There were no real comedic scenes unless you count Pete’s face during the sex scenes.
I didn’t find myself being drawn into this film enough nor was I truly interested in Pete’s story. The concept is just not strong enough. There is no second story either. Pete’s friend Tony the sidekick could have had a love interest rather than just being a sounding board for Pete perhaps, to add some more spice.
In conclusion LOVE STALKER is a very good effort on a tight budget but I do feel that the script could have used another rewrite with the addition of a few more interesting scenes, a more substantial plot and more intricate character development. That said I would certainly watch a future Glasson/MacLean production, especially if it stars Rachel Chapman.
