Post by Casablanca on Jan 26, 2010 23:49:19 GMT -5
I always imagined that writing a horror film would be, at least in part, somewhat similar to balancing on a tight rope. You had to make sure that you had the right amount of curiosity, a sense of discovery and tension that you can relate to the audience. On the other hand, one can say for equilibrium’s sake, you must have an element of surprise, and of, it suffices to say, old fashioned slicing and dicing. This is a film that begins with, and I quote, “messages of death [and] murder” written in blood; and proceeds from that, already gruesome sighting, to even more grisly, “mangled”, naked bodies. There are butcheries; women beaten so badly, they look as though they came from a blender; and furthermore, heads exploding in blood- all of which lie within the first few pages, practically everything but the kitchen sink. Given this information, it may seem as though the film is not merely unbalanced, but plain-out took a leap of faith off the tightrope. It did, don’t get me wrong- this is a film of murder, plain and simple. There is, however, one key point that I thought made the film stand above your average horror film, and really rise a notch or two higher then the usual canon we see, and that is, none other, then the director Krew. He is a fantastic narrator, and the description he utilizes in his scenes, filled with little ironic subtleties (the song choice, for instance, right when we enter the hospital), as well as more then a fair share of delightful metaphors and figurative notions. Not only that, he is a director who knows how to make a fine image, and set up a good scene; and I suspect, that if he ever had it in himself to start an ambitious project, a yearlong horror epic, or the sort; he could really create something special.
Despite handling his visceral sense so well, Krew’s dialogue does jump up and down, fluctuating from the good, to the decent; the nicely delivered lines of cleverness, to the all-caps adrenaline-pumped attention grabbers. What is a nice delight, though, is how some of the characters, most notably Laurie, are handled. Without even saying if they were performed with grave, or if they were fumbled; it was nice to see some clear consistency. There were no radical character developments, no bizarre turns- everyone acted in part, and, to me, that shows this writer knows what he is doing, as opposed to the writer who seems to use their characters like a mixed salad. As I said, some of the lines were mishandled, and some character attitudes seemed to be underdeveloped and the caricature of a teenage victim- but you cannot doubt that’s all they were throughout the film, no inconsistency.
The plot itself is fine, and while I have no prior reference point with the story, it certainly seems like Krew stamped his own brand of moviemaking here; either in the chain of events directly, or in the manner it was written. I would not call his style absolutely distinctive, yet; but with another film or so, I would believe I could be at that point where, sitting down in front of a film, I could identify it, in a second, as aKrew film or not. If not for the themes and ideals he puts into his films, then for the sheer visual aspect, which, as I praised above, is probably the highlight of the film, for me- as well as the one point I can praise without exception. Take, for instance, this line of description:
“Black and White checkerboard walls, with red carpeted
floors.”
That isn’t the idle typing of an amateur who is racing to finish a script, that is the unnecessary description that proves a writer has, in their mind, an image of the way a scene should be, not just the way it must be carried out. It is the sort of stuff that professional producers will tell you not to include, but I say, “the more the merrier”, as a finished script is only half the battle. Sure, it may sound good on paper, but what I truly love to see is a concept that looks good in the mind. Krew made me view his film, not read it- and that, more then the characters, dialogue, or plot; made it a more pleasant experience then it would have been without.
And to prove how these visuals can make a difference, I doub the film would have been as eerie as it was, without them. I am not one to be scared now, and I would be lying if I said I was here, but the film had just the right atmosphere to make it eerie enough, to the point where I felt something. A little shiver in the spine, a slight sense of paranoia, the utmost notion of fear- whatever you want to call it, there was an inkling of that while reading this film at a few points, and I give credit mostly, though not entirely (the plot itself is not bad, realize) to Krew’s ability to set up a scene and let it play out “exactly” as he wants it to.
One last thing I wanted to reiterate, before wrapping this up, too, is that ironic manner I loved while reading. This is a horror film, yes; but Krew added something of a darkly humorous spin on some things. The film is really not as dark and serious as one would come to expect, and really can have some chalky, good moments. Not a comedy, by any means, but it does have a fair share of, at least in my opinion, nice black humor, and this ius a field I hope to see Krew working on further.
Overall, I do apologize to both Krew and any readers, if this review (I scarce call it that), seems more like an article on Krew’s visual sense. It is just that sometime, in a fine film, there is one thing in a director, especially in a debut, that shows quite a bit of promise, and also a delightful impression of labor and ingenuity. I could write here, saying, “a good horror script; some lower moment, but overall, a chilly good time”. But why do it? I doubt my review will change your opinion on whether you are to read the film or not, so I thought it would be better to talk about something that is truly worth mentioning, and truly worth writing. There is a prowess in this director, Krew, of a painter. He has already proved that he can take a canvas and make t something one can imagine; and he has proved that, to him, a film is more then just words on a page; and finally, that a true viewing experience, even of a script, requires not only the eyes, but the imagination and the mind. Now I cannot wait to see where he takes this. Which peaks will he hit, and how far will he manage his budding talent? I sense a writing career of nothing but improvement from here on out, and I tell you that, call it intuition, or hope; if he can find another concept he truly wishes to put himself into, this is a director well worth checking out.
Despite handling his visceral sense so well, Krew’s dialogue does jump up and down, fluctuating from the good, to the decent; the nicely delivered lines of cleverness, to the all-caps adrenaline-pumped attention grabbers. What is a nice delight, though, is how some of the characters, most notably Laurie, are handled. Without even saying if they were performed with grave, or if they were fumbled; it was nice to see some clear consistency. There were no radical character developments, no bizarre turns- everyone acted in part, and, to me, that shows this writer knows what he is doing, as opposed to the writer who seems to use their characters like a mixed salad. As I said, some of the lines were mishandled, and some character attitudes seemed to be underdeveloped and the caricature of a teenage victim- but you cannot doubt that’s all they were throughout the film, no inconsistency.
The plot itself is fine, and while I have no prior reference point with the story, it certainly seems like Krew stamped his own brand of moviemaking here; either in the chain of events directly, or in the manner it was written. I would not call his style absolutely distinctive, yet; but with another film or so, I would believe I could be at that point where, sitting down in front of a film, I could identify it, in a second, as aKrew film or not. If not for the themes and ideals he puts into his films, then for the sheer visual aspect, which, as I praised above, is probably the highlight of the film, for me- as well as the one point I can praise without exception. Take, for instance, this line of description:
“Black and White checkerboard walls, with red carpeted
floors.”
That isn’t the idle typing of an amateur who is racing to finish a script, that is the unnecessary description that proves a writer has, in their mind, an image of the way a scene should be, not just the way it must be carried out. It is the sort of stuff that professional producers will tell you not to include, but I say, “the more the merrier”, as a finished script is only half the battle. Sure, it may sound good on paper, but what I truly love to see is a concept that looks good in the mind. Krew made me view his film, not read it- and that, more then the characters, dialogue, or plot; made it a more pleasant experience then it would have been without.
And to prove how these visuals can make a difference, I doub the film would have been as eerie as it was, without them. I am not one to be scared now, and I would be lying if I said I was here, but the film had just the right atmosphere to make it eerie enough, to the point where I felt something. A little shiver in the spine, a slight sense of paranoia, the utmost notion of fear- whatever you want to call it, there was an inkling of that while reading this film at a few points, and I give credit mostly, though not entirely (the plot itself is not bad, realize) to Krew’s ability to set up a scene and let it play out “exactly” as he wants it to.
One last thing I wanted to reiterate, before wrapping this up, too, is that ironic manner I loved while reading. This is a horror film, yes; but Krew added something of a darkly humorous spin on some things. The film is really not as dark and serious as one would come to expect, and really can have some chalky, good moments. Not a comedy, by any means, but it does have a fair share of, at least in my opinion, nice black humor, and this ius a field I hope to see Krew working on further.
Overall, I do apologize to both Krew and any readers, if this review (I scarce call it that), seems more like an article on Krew’s visual sense. It is just that sometime, in a fine film, there is one thing in a director, especially in a debut, that shows quite a bit of promise, and also a delightful impression of labor and ingenuity. I could write here, saying, “a good horror script; some lower moment, but overall, a chilly good time”. But why do it? I doubt my review will change your opinion on whether you are to read the film or not, so I thought it would be better to talk about something that is truly worth mentioning, and truly worth writing. There is a prowess in this director, Krew, of a painter. He has already proved that he can take a canvas and make t something one can imagine; and he has proved that, to him, a film is more then just words on a page; and finally, that a true viewing experience, even of a script, requires not only the eyes, but the imagination and the mind. Now I cannot wait to see where he takes this. Which peaks will he hit, and how far will he manage his budding talent? I sense a writing career of nothing but improvement from here on out, and I tell you that, call it intuition, or hope; if he can find another concept he truly wishes to put himself into, this is a director well worth checking out.
. 