Canal Winchester Messenger - July 25th, 2021

PAGE 4 - MESSENGER - July 25, 2021
www.columbusmessenger.com
is sequel was inescapable
Letters policy
The Messenger welcomes letters to the
editor. Letters cannot be libelous. Letters that
do not have a signature, address, and telephone
number, or are signed with a pseudonym,
will be rejected. PLEASE BE BRIEF
AND TO THE POINT. The Messenger
reserves the right to edit or refuse publication
of any letter for any reason. Opinions
expressed in the letters are not necessarily
the views of the Messenger.
Mail letters to: Messenger, 3500 Sullivant
Avenue, Columbus, OH 43204; or email eastside@columbusmessenger.com.
eastside
Messenger
(Distribution: 16,822)
Rick Palsgrove................................South Editor
eastside@ columbusmessenger.com
Published every other Sunday by
The Columbus Messenger Co.
3500 Sullivant Ave., Columbus, Ohio 43204-1887
(614) 272-5422
Keep tabs on the news in Canal
Winchester and Hamilton Twp.
Look for South Messenger on
Success at the box office doesn’t always
mean a new property is going to receive a
sequel, but it is more probable if the film is
a part of the horror genre and it nets a nice
profit for the distribution studio.
Horror films are relatively inexpensive
to make. The studios cast little known
actors and employ up-and-coming directors
to keep costs down, and then challenge the
creative team to get inventive with their
small budget. They do this because not only
do they hold the purse, but they know fans
of the genre are loyal and will come out and
give just about any thriller a chance.
One such thriller that was given the
chance at the 2019 box office was “Escape
Room.” Working off the popularity of reallife
escape rooms that, allegedly, allow people
to bond through solving puzzles in
order to leave, its premise added a deadly
twist into the mix. While there was tension
throughout thanks to a great ensemble
cast, the impressive thing about that film
was the set design that saw burning rooms,
a frozen tundra, and floors that dropped
out from underneath trembling feet.
Filmed with a budget of $8 million, it
was no terrible loss for the studio if this
film did not profit as much as they would
have liked. However, it amassed a return of
more than $140 million throughout its theatrical
run, making it one of the year’s
biggest hits based on that ratio. With that
success in mind, it was no surprise that a
sequel would be, well, inescapable.
Though I do not often look forward to
sequels, I have to say I was looking forward
to seeing what else this world had to offer.
The Reel Deal
Dedra
Cordle
It teased
secret organizations
run by the
wealthy who set up
these games for
sport, but I was more
intrigued by the
prospect of retribution
against these creators as promised by
the final boy and final girl. After all, it is a
modern tale about David and Goliath, the
haves and the have nots, and the tormented
versus the tormentors. Perhaps I was
being too idealistic about where a film like
this could go, but nonetheless, I wanted to
see what “Tournament of Champions”
could bring to the horror table.
The successes of this film lay firmly at
the path of its predecessor. The sequel
builds a great cast of characters around the
survivors of the first and it comes equipped
with another fantastically fatalistic set
design that features electrified subway
trains, acid rain, and collapsing beaches.
But where this film runs into problems is
that it never tries to walk outside of that
path until it is late — so late you’ve grown
tired of the scenery and are agitated by the
people who asked you to come along for a
trip that was promised to be better.
When you realize this sequel is just a
rehash, it is enjoyable thanks to the
strength of the first couple acts. It begins
with final boy Ben (Logan Miller) and final
girl Zoey (Taylor Russell) trying to come to
terms with the terror that was inflicted
upon them in the first film. Ben has done
Look before you run
what most men do and is suffering in
silence while Zoey is more willing to share
her experiences with a therapist. Both
have a desire to find those responsible for
their escape room trauma.
They go to New York City because Zoey
believes she knows the headquarters of
Minos Escape Rooms Inc. When they arrive
they are lured into a sparsely filled train
car that is not what it seems. Realizing
they are in another deadly escape room,
they band together with a new group of
strangers and solve the clues to escape.
And here is where the film should have
branched off into its own thing somehow,
but it continues to follow the rules set up in
the original where if you make it through
one escape room, you go onto the next.
While the rooms are inventive, it gets to
the point where enough is enough despite
liking the thinly developed characters.
The thing with these escape rooms is
you never know where the end is, and I feel
the creators might not know that either. It
offers a new rule at the end and promises a
third installment, but, like the characters,
it’s hard to trust anything when you were
told one thing but given a different thing
altogether.
Though fans of the original, or those who
go in with little knowledge of its origins, will
likely find some enjoyment out of
“Tournament of Champions” you can’t help
but think it could have been better than just
the tired retread of a decent indie thriller.
Grade: C
Dedra Cordle is a Messenger staff writer
and columnist.
J
Y
F
X
R
K
G
U
U
B
M
P
T
R
Y
H
A
X
R
E
R
T
E
J
A
T
V
Q
U
T
Become a fan!
To advertise in the
Messenger, call Doug Henry
or Theresa Garee at
614-272-5422.
Puzzle solution
C
W
Q
E
W
R
V
N
S
G
B
N
H
N
H
L
I
F
G
O
E
X
I
L
G
Y
A
A
W
G
D
X
D
N
T
V
G
G
O
A
N
D
D
A
I
N
A
X
E
A
O
N
N
L
G
N
I
V
Y
L
U
T
V
S
P
Y
I
E
A
E
L
D
W
C
F
O
P
D
S
C
A
D
R
T
L
U
Y
I
W
B
B
R
Q
A
T
L
R
T
S
A
G
B
X
N
N
T
R
O
P
R
I
A
T
I
E
G
L
U
X
G
U
R
A
C
V
E
O
L
U
C
A
M
R
A
T
O
C
X
A
C
X
B
V
T
R
G
T
S
M
S
R
X
L
B
L
A
N
I
M
R
E
T
S
L
U
X
S
T
I
C
K
E
T
P
O
T
S
N
O
N
W
R
D
N
U
O
B
N
I
T
K
C
A
N
S
Years ago I was asked by a member of
my local board of education to run for an
open school board seat. I politely declined.
No amount of flattery, coaxing or background
(having covered various boards for
decades) could persuade me.
My answer was simple. Although somewhat
knowledgeable about the district, I
had never attended a meeting of my own
local school board and did not feel qualified
to run for the position. Plus, most of my
work as a journalist takes place on Monday
nights, the same evening as the majority of
public meetings.
I have a long-held standard that a candidate
needs to know about the group or
organization for which they are running.
I have a list I use as a personal reference
when it comes to pursuing the heavy mantle
of public service:
•Have you regularly attended at least
one meeting a month in the last half year?
No, I have not been to a single one. Why
would someone who runs for office not take
the time to familiarize themselves with the
organization or municipality for which they
will be tasked with creating public policy
and/or managing public funds?
•Have you served on a committee that
answers directly to the organization within
the last two years?
No, I haven’t. I am
of the mindset that if
you see a problem,
work within the system
and create
change from within.
Don’t jump into the
fire without first
warming your feet.
Places
Linda
Dillman
•Are you familiar enough with the
organization that you could take on the
position, if elected, and not spend the first
few meetings playing catch-up with basic
policies and procedures?
Not really, but I’ve covered many other
school board meetings as part of my job. If
you don’t know how a public entity operates,
you should if you want to become a
member. Look online and do a little studying
before walking through the doors. And
while many things are the same there are
differences, both minor and major.
•Are you prepared to deal with off-theclock
problems that arise, the public calling
at all hours, having to deal with reporters
to discuss an issue, or lose a good portion of
your privacy during your time in office?
No. No. No and no.
•Are you running for public office for
altruistic reasons and because you feel you
are the best person for the job because of
your skills, interest in the community
and/or you perceive flaws in the system for
which you can offer plausible ideas?
This is more a case of answerable by
way of personal reflection and since I have
no intention of running for public office, it
did not apply. However, I can say that, in
my position as president of our high school
Alumni Association, I could answer yes to
all of the above if asked by a fellow alumni.
I applaud the work and countless hours
public service minded people spend doing
the people’s business. Do I disagree with
them? Sometimes, but that is the brilliant
concept of democracy at work.
My advice to people who want to run for
public office is simple.
Learn not only about the office, responsibility
and limitations of the position
itself, but also attend meetings in-person
before declaring your candidacy and learn
about the organization itself, its challenges,
present/future plans and projects
and its limitations by law.
You will not only be a better candidate,
but you will also be a better citizen as well.
Linda Dillman is a Messenger staff writer.