Directed By: William Asher Written By: Stephen Breimer, Alan Jay Glueckman & Boon Collins Cinematography: Robbie Greenberg Editor: Ted Nicolaou
Cast: Jimmy McNichol, Susan Tyrell, Bo Svenson, Julia Duffy, Bill Paxton, Britt Leach, Steve Eastin
Since the death of his parents fourteen years ago, Billy Lynch has been raised by his overprotective aunt Cheryl. But once he turns seventeen, he is soon set on planning his life…without her. He’s planning on going on to college and is dating local girl Julie. None of which sits well for his aunt, who’s lost everyone else in her life and now with her nephew ready to leave, ensures she starts on a campaign to keep him with her…forever. But as her plans misfire she becomes swept up in a cycle of psychosis and frenzied violence all being blamed on Billy by everyone else…including a homophobic detective, whose anti-gay prejudice is steadily reaching its zenith…leading to an unforeseeable outcome.
This film feels silly even for the time when it was released. Watching the film is a fun experience in its awfulness.
It’s entertainment is marred by its characters’ homophobia. This is disappointing as it easily could have been an unintentional camp classic. Surprised it hasn’t been embraced by a cult audience of not for anything at least the performance and gusto from Susan Tyrell.
The lead performance by Susan Tyrell gives it her all and goes way over the top. So unhinged In one of her rare leading roles.
So unhinged that as the movie moves along even her look begins to deteriorate. She is obviously wearing a wig and once her character cuts it she goes further off the deep end. It ends up being her real hair.
Revealing the killer wept on makes the movie more suspenseful. Especially as the film goes along, there ends up being few choices as to who it could be and where the film can go.
The film has Bill Paxton in an early role as a jealous bully. Not to mention Julia Duffy as the teenage nephew’s love interest.
The film ultimately revolves around a serious obsession between the aunt for her nephew. Which also makes the film feel more suited for a drive in a movie theater.
The movie’s special effects, the few that there Are, are so bad they become laughable especially when it cowls to stabbings and dismemberment.
Memorably bad but the film Means well and tries hard. So that it is more entertaining and fun than scary. If this is a genre you particularly like.
It can be understood that homophobia was the Mood at the time. The film tries to justify that mood as evil by having one fo the good characters be gay. But also at the end, most of the characters with that discrimination end up dead.
This is a film you look for more for fun than necessary thrills or any kind of horror
Directed By: Gunnar Hellstron Written By: Gary Crutcher Cinematography: Vilmos Zsigmond Editor: Lou Lombardo
Cast: Jack Lord, Susan Strasberg, Collin Wilcox Paxton, Tisha Sterling, T.C. Jones, Mort Mills, Marc Desmond
A desert family offers a traveling stranger its hospitality, but the stranger doesn’t realize exactly what they have in store for him.
This film is certainly an oddity the time had never heard of before.
The film is pretty basic in plot and relies heavily on its ending, which is meant to be shocking. So much so the film Mostly depends on it. Though offers two for one. Then leaves you with a Few questions it will never answer.
If you notice early in the film you can’t predict the end. Tone. even if you miss eventually the film will become predictable but then try to still get you
So obviously this is a film to best go in blind or knowing as little as possible to get the best bang for your buck.
This is certainly the first time I have seen star Jack Lord in anything other than the show that made him Famous HAWAII FIVE-O and here he plays a Hungarian drifter with an accent. He does a serviceable job. Though you wonder about the intelligence of his character. As many times he is attacked and almost does from these attacks. Yet he keeps coming back to this family. Yet tries to rationalize it when it appears mostly to be lust.
Even as they are all obviously off in many ways. Though the one he seems to fall for in only one day. Where they talk about their love for each other already. Seems to be the sane one and the one who just needs love in her life.
Whereas her sister’s one already has an instant distaste for him and lets it be known and the teen sister just seems disturbed as when we meet her the family mother is bringing her home after setting a cat on fire to punish someone who was picking on her. Who has she then Tripped down a set of stairs and broke their leg after killing the cat. All of this is scenes as teenage hijinks.
They all come onto him at some point in the film except the mother. As they are fetching in their own ways. Though most would have hightailed it.
The film also can’t seem to settle at times it says that no tourists stop and stay in the town. Yet later the sheriff talks about how the town is torn. They hate tourists but depend on them for income. Just as this family of females run a service station that no one tourists or townsfolk ever seem to come by or use.
Not to mention it’s hard to see how or why they would stay or live in this town as it comes off almost as desolate as a ghost town.
This is definitely a movie of its time. Making it today would be too obvious. As we have become used to these kinds of twists. Though for what it’s worth even if at times it seems ridiculous. It definitely keeps your interest.
Written & Directed By: Michael Heneke Cinematography By: Darius Khondji Editor: Monika Willi Production Design: Kevin Thompson Art Direction: Hinju Kim
Cast: Tim Roth, Naomi Watts, Michael Pitt, Brady Corbet, Devon Gearheart, Siobhan Fallon, Boyd Gaines
In this English-language remake of a deconstruction in the way violence is portrayed in the media, a family settles into its vacation home, which happens to be the next stop for a pair of young, articulate, white-gloved serial killers on an excursion through the neighborhood.
Not as good as the original of course I think the real weakness of the film is not only going back and repeating something that was never wrong, to begin with just to expose it to a massive audience that might have not seen the film the first time just because it was in a foreign language.
The remake doesn’t show growth but hey rockstars have to play their classic hits once in a while, Even with new band members. If they are willing to pay you to do it why not.
I think one other weakness this film has is that it is opened up more than the original, with more characters. Who are minor but it opens it up. which in the beginning was scarier and more intense because it was more intimate.
It’s not a shot-for-shot remake but is similar enough. Maybe the film doesn’t affect you because we already saw the original and know what’s going to happen. Whereas when you see the original it’s a shock and keeps you on the edge of your seat. Watching this is like watching an imitation even though it is by the same director. Maybe it is also because whereas there were no stars in the original. So anything could happen and It felt realistic. Seeing stars in this you know it’s just fake and doesn’t penetrate any of my emotions like it seems to be directed to. By bringing well-known actors into the film also gives them nothing to do but whimper in pain for two hours there are no great characters to play or great lines unless you have the villain’s role in this film.
you also notice that in the original the female star was in her underwear for a scene then gets clothed. Here Naomi Watts spends most of the movie in her underwear. Sure it’s great to look at but I guess it was meant to tap into American horror films as usually the females run around naked and in their underwear as they are stalked and killed rarely do they survive. In fact, there is no real violence shown only the aftermath. The only time there is violence it happens to one of the villains.
The main villain also doesn’t speak to the audience as much as he did in the original, maybe it was deemed annoying. The remote scene which seemed daring in the original seems like a gimmick here. Here in making it bigger, it is marketed as a thriller but shot like an art film with attention to detail and colors but with no real shown violence that the audience is waiting for.
It also plays with the conventions of films such as foreshadowing and making an excuse for the violent behavior, breaking the fourth wall, and the illusion that in the end, everything will turn out fine. The false hope that it can all turn around because that’s what happens in the film. They wouldn’t be that messed up.
It plays with the rules that you have come to expect and then just when you think it will follow narratives you have seen it switches it upon you.
The pacing also seems off that it makes the film almost seem boring. Some could look at it as satire. It is obviously a message movie because all that happens in the film makes you realize your own bloodlust and includes you as a co-conspirator in all that happens because you are sitting there watching for entertainment.
SPOILER:
Like the scene where Anna is then taken to the boat where she attempts to cut herself loose with the knife shown earlier in the film, only to have it taken from her as a way to mock the standard Hollywood foreshadowing. She is then dumped overboard and drowns as the two boys discuss school fiction and state the message of the film quite clearly by stating (in reference to a novel they read) “the family was real, the hero was in fiction”, demonstrating that violence is real and what occurs for entertainment happens in reality, however rising above the odds and becoming a hero only happens in fiction. And as a note, all of the killing is off-screen, this is a pro-reality but anti-violence film in its own brutal right
SPOILER END
Now I didn’t exactly write the last paragraph but it is summed up pretty well that I agree with it I say if you didn’t see the original this might be interesting but if you did you don’t really have to bother with this film. Trust me rent the original it’s a lot better.
Written & Directed: Emerald Fennell Cinematography: Benjamin Kracun Editor: Frederic Thoraval
Cast: Carey Mulligan, Bo Burnham, Adam Brody, Sam Richardson, Clancy Brown, Jennifer Coolidge, Laverene Cox, Max Greenfield, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Alison Brie, Connie Britton, Molly Shannon, Loren Paul, Christopher Lowell, Steve Monroe
A young woman, traumatized by a tragic event in her past, seeks out vengeance against those who crossed her path.
The film seeks to try to make its points over and over again that feel like overkill and preaching to a certain extent.
The film manages to surprise the audience using exploitation expectations though giving something else entirely.
This film would have worked fine enough if it was what one was expecting a revenge tale against so-called nice guys and bad guys alike.
Though the film addresses more and it tries to be a film that inspires discussion and becomes more of a think piece than necessarily Just a film. This is fine as long as it offers more arguments and evidence for what it seems to want to spark conversations.
Some aspects are left vague as we never really See what happens once she is down with her encounters with these men and are never really told what happens after. Is it just confrontation as a kind of exposing and warning to them? Does she do anything violent to them and if the just warning does she really Get revenge and does she have a backup security measure if these guys decide to get violent?
Even with her little notebook which she seems to make markings in of another case or victim. What Is it all for?
Not to mention afterwards though it seems to happen around the same town and area. It never comes back to her until the film needs it to, which comes off as a bit too convenient.
The film offers interesting twists but while there is a certain level of guilt. We still might wonder why she takes on this mission.
Her revenge schemes are thought out, cruel, and make their points. Even though most men are made out to be villains throughout there are some women who are just as guilty in their ambivalence.
The film seems to make a point against nice guys being as bad or worse than predators. As they see themselves above it all and defend or support women. Though deep down they hold the same attitudes as those predators and believe because of their other good deeds that they are somehow owed love or a woman. Even as these nice guys already seem kind of predatory or at least douchey beforehand.
Especially by casting actors, we have seen as the nice guy nerdish characters in other films and television shows. Who here makes cameos or has a scene or two Then disappear. That truly only one character actually does surprise me.
This also gives the film a whiff of superiority as it comes off more about issues than character. Which for some might feel for some
Preachy and while a film about the issues it presents are welcome. The film isn’t as good to back it up, Or be a good example.
Nice to see comedian Bo Burnham Giving more of a meaty supporting role.
This is a revenge tale that takes comfort in being in and having the rules but acts like it is better than them. When it actually might be a little smarter and more discreet in its handling And treatment of the Material.
Which helps the film not be as exploitative. As the character and scenes aren’t made erotic or sexualized. It comes off as more of a new normal get more through a feminine gaze. Though strangely in its set-up and backgrounds it feels almost like it’s taking place on a kind of dreamland as it is real but feels artificial, more pretty than anything.
The design of the film is remarkable and quite brightly colored to offset the dark behaviors and characters.
The film’s strength is more in its surprising and unpredictable third act.
This is also a movie that loses some points due to hype. As ever since hearing about the film before it Came out wanted to see it and heard nothing but good things to the point of it’s Multiple academy award nominations And win for best original screenplay. But not after finally seeing it. That hype hurt the film in my eyes.
Even when trying to put that aside others might have Been lucky to Discover it to admire it for what it is. (The best way To see any film) But coming into the film with preconceived thoughts. It doesn’t live up to the prose exactly. As it isn’t horrible but not as good as expected though better than average.
It feels like a lifetime movie due to the can be anywhere, Polished no violence but always a threat of it and actions mostly Done on theory with big histrionics and a cast more known for appearances on television.
The film even introduces an idea that might even work as a sequel
Directed By: Tanya Rosenberg Written By: Craig Clyde, James Hennessy & George Saunders Story By: Jim Makichuk Cinematography: Sam Gart Editor: Rick Mitchell
Cast: Gregory Scott Cummins, Laura Albert, Shelley Abblett, Luke Shay, Ross Hagen, Don Dowe, George Buck Flower, Julie Hall, Paula Manga, Sabrina Hills
A team of softball players get lost in the woods after their bus breaks down. They get attacked, beaten, raped and murdered by some psychotic men. The women fight back with baseball bats and bows and arrows.
This film is quite the throwback. As I believe i saw this back in the day on late-night HBO as a kid.
The film is simple and stupid yet entertaining. As it was released in 1990 but feels made from pure 1980’s ideas all the way.
As essentially it pits an innocent team of female softball players versus what seems like a whole county of evil redneck men bent on revenge. Even though the females are assaulted the perpetrator is killed by accident but he is seen as innocent and the ladies as bloodthirsty.
The film is made by a female filmmaker. So that it feels more sympathetic to the female character as heroes and survivors. Even though they have short-cut tight semi revealing outfits. They are rarely nude and the sex that the film shows is violent and involves rape. So that while it heaps on the violence. It stays not explosive when it comes to sex and nudity. Giving the female characters a sense of pride. It treats them more as human beings and less as sex objects. They are treated more respectful
Even when it comes to the deaths of characters. When it’s a male you feel a kind of happiness. More like they deserved it. Whereas when it is a female character it is tragic and makes you in the audience want to get emotional.
The villains come off at times as more comedic releif than at least two of the characters do. Who manages to survive despite being thought of, or left for dead in many accidents throughout. Though early on they are more comedic releif until the hunt begins. Where they are rarely scary just armed doofuses and then only own becomes a threat later in the film. Even though most of the male characters believe themselves to be badass. That only appears to be true in numbers.
Titillation was used to their advantage constantly though more accidentally and as a survival technique.
The film stands as a kind Of statement in a genre that usually leaves female characters as the damsels in distress who can’t help themselves, wives & girlfriends meant to be by someone’s side but barely have anything to do or as sex objects. This film sets the female characters apart from that not necessarily in a better quality of filmmaking.
The one Minority character gets killed off early and quickly.
The initial premise that sets this film up is ridiculous. Why would the females team coach/manager trust the town’s matriarch in a fair game? Also is the female team professional traveling along to take on exhibition games and pick-up games? Are they hustling unsuspecting towns and teams which should be tipped off by their team bus and matching uniforms? Are they using sexism to help them be underestimated and hoping that by showing their talent that men will see them in a different way and then be respectful? That seems like the premise for another film. As this film seems to want to set up and get to the action quickly.
The film is barely 90 minutes. Though while it doesn’t feel longer than Its running time. It could have been easily 10 minutes shorter
This film is ultimately meant to be a tale of survival.
Written & Directed By: David Mamet Cinematography By: Juan Ruiz Anchia Editor: Barbara Tulliver
Cast: Val Kilmer, Derek Luke, Kristen Bell, Tia Texada, Stephen Culp, Clark Gregg, Ed O’Neill, Aaron Stanford, Geoff Pierson, William H. Macy, Said Taghmaoui, Zosia Mamet
Maverick Ranger Scott, known for ruthless, unorthodox methods but good results, is called in to help the secret service after Washington big whig’s brat daughter is abducted while studying at Harvard. Scott quickly realizes the protection detail’s prime suspect, her boyfriend Michael Blake, is innocent and dumped her for being a drug-addicted slut. Next, he traces her to a bordello, only to realize the captors didn’t realize who she is but simply recruited her for the Middle Eastern white slavery market, and are likely to dispose of her rather than confront her father. But instead of the support expected in such a high-profile case, Scott gets orders to work in secret before the press catches on, and even finds his quest sabotaged.
This is a tight and taut film. Like a clock with airtight precision. It is also a strange film that has a rhythm and beat all its own.
It’s a top-notch thriller with a good story that plays small and close to the chest rather than a grand conspiracy blockbuster, but when you think you have it figured out. A twist you honestly didn’t see comes, then another one, then another one.
Truthfully I wouldn’t expect any less from playwright-writer-director David Mamet. Though I must say that while this is good. it is one of his lesser works. Which considering the excellent standing of his previous films isn’t bad.
His films specialize in sleight of hand movies. These days though he seems to take stories where you know and subvert them so you care more about the characters, their rapid-fire dialogue, and line delivery which have hidden meanings. Characters’ faces rarely betray emotion but do say so much with simple gestures and tone.
This film is noteworthy for a few reasons. It’s one of the closest Mamet will ever get to mainstream entertainment blockbuster type. Which is the direction. he has a top-notch low-key cast. Val Kilmer is the lead for one of the few times that a film he appears in makes it to the big screen. He really doesn’t get enough credit for how good an actor he is.
The film moves at a slow pace which adds to the slow burn of scenes, it is ultimately rewarding and gives the film more nuance. As it fleshes out characters. Which in other films would be strictly one-note. Mamet shows the procedures and what motivates their actions and reactions. So that you don’t get too far ahead of the lead, but doesn’t not leave you behind him in some scenes.
This film has action but is low on it. A fight scene for instance is started, but the camera stays on the face of Val Kilmer. while he watches it instead of on the actual action. So you can use your imagination to fill in the blanks while hearing it. Then you see the aftermath of the fight.
David Mamet performed rewrites during production using nothing more than a typewriter on a cardboard box between takes.
Except for a single day on a soundstage, the film was shot exclusively at practical locations.
Producer Art Linson and David Mamet were having lunch when Linson informed Mamet that he could not get anything more than a no-frills budget for the movie. Val Kilmer was literally at the next table. Linson knew Kilmer and asked him to come over, and they talked about the production. Kilmer was so impressed with the story and Mamet’s vision that he agreed to the role of giving a significant discount to facilitate Franchise Pictures giving a green-light to the production.
The film might be an acquired taste as I went to this film with one of my constant film companions my female cousin who was bored and really didn’t like the film. While I was quite captivated throughout
I don’t want to spoil too much, that would spoil the experience of seeing it with open eyes. Which I believe is where much of the film’s enjoyment lies.
One of the problems, with the film, is that one character does who is very close to the lead. When it happens he shows no emotions, but later when a character dies who the lead barely knows he tears up like a baby, delayed reaction as the person was hardly innocent. It feels out of place.
David Mamet incorporated a number of real-life experiences from various U.S. special forces members for the production, including Eric L. Haney who had served in highly classified operations during his 20-year military career. Haney’s experience included front-line combat units as a combat infantryman, as an Army Ranger, and as a founding operator within the elite Delta Force under Colonel Charlie Beckwith.
These experiences helped Haney effectively serve as a technical advisor, weapons expert, and actor’s mentor to Val Kilmer, ensuring that Kilmer reflected an accurate depiction of a special forces operative in every capacity. Haney retired as a highly decorated Sergeant Major, and his documented experience also includes security surveys, metro SWAT team arms training, oil company guard force management, executive protection, and the recovery of American children kidnapped and taken overseas.
The film never comes completely alive for all the thrills stays sedate and calm. While the size of production staying small and intimate brings a certain reality to the conspiracy it also feels like a letdown as the size of the story seems more on The scale of epic Or at least bigger proportions.
This is Mamet keeping his style for a major release that offers him a bigger palate. It actually reminds me of the minimalist style of Steven Soderbergh. I am surprised they never collaborated on a project.
Directed By: John Carchietta Written By: John Carchietta, Sage Bannick, Chris Sivertson Story By: Amelia Yokel Cinematography By: Justin Kane Editor: John Carchietta, Josh Ethier & Ben La Marca
Cast: Nichole Bloom, Fabianne Therese, Pat Healy, Joshua Leonard, Michelle Borth, AJ Bowen
Feeling confined by their small town and overbearing parents, Annie and Jules hatch a scheme of running away. But as the girls soon find out, consequences can blindside you. Sometimes violently.
Who is this film supposedly for? As it plays like a hard edged after school special. Though it does involve a central coming of age lesbian love story. Though then kind of spoils it by going into a thriller element of sex work and picking the wrong person to do it with.
The film has a weird almost laughable scene where one of the girl’s father looks at her computer ad’s and never says anything. In fact he is more embarrassed and see’s his daughter in her lingerie. Which comes out of nowhere. If the father really cared that should have been the moment to show care and discipline. It is understandable that he is shocked but irresponsible to do nothing about it This is a film that seems to be searching to be something and coming off all wrong.
I believe maybe the film might have been better if directed by a female or at least someone more sensitive to it’s material and nature. As many of the scenes of the two girl making out and frolicking seem more exploitive and vivid. Almost more like fetish and fantasy more than anything else. So that it feels uncomfortable or soft core pornographic rather then just fun or revealing. It reeks more of the male gaze, making any intimacy between the leads more erotic and physical. Rather then romantic, personal or endearing. As most of the time it feels like we are intruding on the girls and watching them as voyeurs. Not in a good way as we invade their privacy and tender moments.
So much so that it feels like an adult film only without the hardcore scenes and not as over the top. Which unfortunately makes it feel slow. Though it had an starter emo indie artist soundtrack. That showcases how amateur the film comes off. As since it doesn’t know how to identify itself. Like it’s characters it just seems to try anything to fit in and be relevant. So that it can say something, but as it has it’s chance. There is nothing new or too striking to say.
Though the final 15 minutes seem more stupid and ill advised even if the characters are young. As all of a sudden the man turns psycho and desperate. In a way over the top way. Rather than subtle.
You can’t shake that the film and the females characters in particular are being shown and shaped under a male glaze that turns everything into titilaion instead of emotional drama. One just wishes there was more to it. As it seems to make an emotional drama about friendship and connection. Then all of a sudden veers into thriller territory. Which could have worked if it didn’t feel so rushed all of a sudden.
It’s a shame as all the actors are usually good in other films and have a real chance to shine here, but what they are given is so mundane and silly that it never makes a mark.
Written & Directed by: Rose Glass Cinematography: Ben Fordesman Editor: Mark Towns
Cast: Morfydd Clark, Jennifer Ehle, Lily Frazer, Marcus Hutton, Lily Knight, Noa Bodner
Deeply religious Maud, a tight-lipped live-in nurse with a dark past, takes a job in a humdrum English coastal town to look after Amanda Köhl: a once-celebrated, now terminally ill former dancer and choreographer. Convinced that she has been sent to sensualist, chain-smoking Amanda with a purpose, ascetic Maud soon becomes obsessed with saving her vulnerable patient from herself, and in the process, lead her to the light. However, is worldly Amanda prepared to receive absolution for her sins?
This is a film that I was looking forward to seeing. It was at the top of my must-see list for 2020, until it got postponed, and finally got to recently watch. It is definitely a case of a movie living up to my expectations.
You can tell that this film feels lien something special. Even for as dark as it is.
The film is a great production and has committed performances and is definitely the work of a gifted filmmaker. As the filmmaking is gorgeous and sumptuous. That doesn’t fit into expectations.
The film offers a lot of build-ups. That has a bunch of elevated horror cliches. As the film Challenges the audience’s expectations. As they might be looking for more than what the film has to offer.
The film revolves around loneliness at heart. While going through mental illness and stability. It ends up with strongly disturbing images.
The film is a slow burn that takes it’s Time with it’s Story and characters. Where it is meant to be more than what you are seeing. This film wants to be more than entertainment. It wants to affect you. Say, present and experience its Story more.
It deals with obsession which causes a mental undoing to someone who was already fragile. Where she punishes herself. When she is only
Trying to help and seeking forgiveness for her past through religious fundamentalism. Which strangely she turns into a kind of eroticism for herself.
Her devotion spins takes form In trying to awaken others and give them what they want to try and help them. While having more and more delusions.
Where eventually she keeps building an intimacy out of loneliness. That once making a connection in helping others to make herself feel better and not worthless.
As we are given hints to her life before he became so devout that seemed aimless and wild before an accident that changes her.
By the end, the film is Sad and depressing but effective. In the last act of the film, the film becomes more of a horror. as it becomes more tension-filled. Where it feels like anything can happen.
Written, Edited & Directed By: Jan Belcl Cinematography: Cezary Stolecki
Cast: Julia Wieniawa, Adam Turczyk, Nikodem Rozbicki, Aleksandra Pisula, Monika Krzywkowska, Szymon Raszak, Michael Sikorski, Paulina Galazka, Adam Bobik
During the New Year’s Eve party of a bunch of friends, a series of crazy events brings out secrets, breaks hearts and leads to a shocking ending.
This film plays out like a 1980’s party film where a horror film finally starts to come into play in bits and pieces. Due more to the more macabre deaths and subject matter.
Even the soundtrack has nothing but purely 1980’s music on it.
The film is supposed to be horror or advertised that way. This plays more like a bleak comedy of errors and misunderstandings.
The film is sex-filled with acts and/or talk of it that leans a bit into the exploitation zone, but it doesn’t feel as dirty or tawdry here.
At first, you in the audience are waiting and looking at what will set everything off abs start the killings. As the opening Lets us know the aftermath. So that the film is one big flashback.
The opening doesn’t make the film look too promising. As it is a totally different tone from the eventual film.
The film is an ensemble following different characters. Each character here is more of a type then it feels fully dimensional. Mroe set up to be a piece in the game that This film seems to want to play.
The film is vulgar and juvenile. The kind of film the filmmakers seemed to aim for and the film that the characters all resemble. As it definitely has energy but is not for everyone. As at times it is very lowbrow but takes you by surprise.
It feels more like a male fantasy then anything else. As there is plenty here that feels like it belongs in a sex comedy with most of the female characters willing or looking for sex.
Each character and situation seem to influence each other as they cross paths. Making this a truly crazy and deadly house party.
The last act where everything goes bonkers abs becomes officially a bloodbath. Where as what starts it all off makes this grill like an extended TALES FROM THE CRYPT episode. Never exactly going where you expect it to.
This is a more audience-pleasing blockbuster that lacks depth but tired to appear to have some at times.
I know I might sound down on the film but actually, it’s a simple film with a good follow-through that keeps you interested and enthused.
Directed By: Jonathan Levine Written By: Jacob Forman Cinematography By: Darren Genet Editor: Josh Noyes
Cast: Amber Heard, Anson Mount, Whitney Able, Michael Welch, Edwin Hodge, Aaron Himelstein, Luke Grimes, Melissa Price, Adam Powell
A group of high-schoolers invite Mandy Lane, an innocent, desirable girl, to a weekend party on a secluded ranch. While the festivities rage on, the number of revelers begins to drop mysteriously. The film has a sensational ending.
The film is way too short, but there is a logical reason for that. Too much more would have made it feel long. Plus it was running out of victims and things to do between the killings after all. It is not a supernatural tale and there aren’t too many victims to go around on an endless blood lust.
As much as I like the film due to it’s limited budget and claustrophobic feel and relatively small production. Everyone being attracted to Mandy Lane is a little believable especially when Dealing with teenage hormones, but when the girls also begin getting attracted to her it feels a bit forced. Their attraction and her being so innocent and not realizing the peer she has over them. Feels a bit far fetched but realistic enough. As does the rest of the film. As the murders, the motivations. It becomes less of a mystery. As to who is doing it. Then When, who will be the next victim and how the killer will strike is more of the mystery in this film.
From it’s visual arresting beginning set to the song “IN ANTICIPATION OF YOUR SUICIDE” by Bedroom Walls, I was hooked, I knew the film would be something special. A little different. –The direction is tight, but I feel the material is not sensational until the end and at that point the film makes you rethink everything. You have just seen and analyze it.
SPOILER
The ending finding out Mandy was part of the killings the whole time. Making her a kind of inside man, setting all the victims up. So her friend Emmett could get access and know each person’s location and her bobble cords of him. During what is supposed to be their murder suicide. So she can be the survivor and get more attention on a grander scale. Truly makes this film a portrait go a sociopath in a certain situation in which she is always the victim of most people’s fantasies of her. So she becomes everything to all people and realizes she is not what they think. She is a lot worse and wants to take control of her identity in a way, she lets them believe what they want. While secretly hating it and wanting to get revenge on them for it, but realizes that she gets what she wants because of it. So she deduced her best friend to do her bidding. So she can get away with everything. He is just as bad as the rest to her and the only person she finds a connection with is the one guy not going gaga over her and actually is moral and just.
The most chilling part of the film is not that she just got away with it, but what will happen to future people who cross her path and dare to try and be close to her. It’s a sort of psychological story that makes you think through constant list of an innocent. This is what you create in that person. Thinking about the film probably makes the film smarter and more interesting then it actually is, but for the most part it is a solid film that tired to buck certain Conventions. While following them at the same time.
SPOILER END
The casting is good though only Amber head as Mandy Lane seems to be the only one who really benefited from the film and the role. She does look like a fantasy come to life. It is one hell of a role though. An impressive skeleton in the closet. As for awhile after this film she was the next big thing. It seems a bit more based on her looks as she barely has any liens through the film. Even though she is the lead. She is In Almost every scene. Sort of like Brandon Routh in SUPERMAN LIVES. Sometimes i wondered if her character was borderline autistic.
Emmy Rossum was offered the role of Mandy Lane, but turned it down, stating that she did not want to be in a slasher movie.
The deaths throughout the film are not that spectacular. What takes the film down is that it believes it is smarter than the audience. So much so that it feels a bit glib. Especially when all of it’s power is in the ending.
The film can be dull, while you are waiting for something, anything to happen. It tried to be atmospheric, but it doesn’t work. It’s an average film that has been hyped to be better than it actually is. Only because at the time the limited access to it. So this is a film that runs more on reputation than anything else
Cut To The Chase 