Change Your Image
blahdyblahdyblah
Reviews
Red White & Blue (2010)
If a character-driven indie and a gory exploitation flick had a baby, this would be it
If you're looking for a non-stop gore-fest, this film might not be for you. However, if you are a lover of both innovative, indie character studies and films that make it on the most disturbing lists, you just might love this film.
Red, White and Blue chronicles the collision of three troubled adults who are all suffering in their own ways, lashing out at those they feel are responsible.
You get to know these characters well. You care about what happens to them unlike most of the one-dimensional twenty somethings that are thrown into most modern horror films just because they're aesthetically pleasing. They are deeply flawed, but sympathetic in their own ways. Each of the three main characters display the capacity to love as well as brutalize. Their multiple layers make you question whether or not to loathe or root for them.
Simon Rumley uses quick cuts and fast pacing to convey a lot of information and story in a very short amount of time. He shows rather than tells, allowing each character's actions to speak louder than their words. The limited dialog is almost exclusively utilized as a vehicle to tell each character's unique back story, so that the viewer will understand why they do what they do, regardless of whether or not we agree with their motives.
This is not a film that is going to tie everything up into a neat little package and make you feel as though justice was served. This is a film about suffering and desperation. There is no possibility for a happy ending.
Chaos (2005)
A pathetic attempt to remake a horror classic
I'll state the blatantly obvious: Last House on the Left ripoff, as in up until the ending, it was the exact same story. Horrible acting and dialog. Cheap and unprofessional look and feel. A pointless attempt at movie making.
One major problem was the warning before the movie started. Really? I'm not a fan of the phrase "victim blaming," but this was a prime example of it. And the interview with the director and producer further illuminated their stance on blaming the victim. Is it safe to go buy drugs from a stranger? Of course not always. But this doesn't mean that you're going to get killed, and it doesn't mean that you deserve to get killed. People are abducted by people they know well all the time and most people who trust strangers are fine. It's really a backwards, old fashioned idea to perpetuate. It only aids in fueling the idea that you shouldn't help someone in need, which is what they claimed to be against when talking about the person who could've helped, but chose to ignore her.
The only saving grace was the ending, but not in the way they intended. At that point I had given up on the movie completely, only to find myself laughing hysterically at the ridiculous chain reaction. I could tell the director and producer were really proud of themselves for delivering what they thought was such an edgy and controversial ending, but it was nothing more than a joke.
And the so-called disturbing torture scenes? They were very cheap, unbelievable, and unimpressive. It was a pathetic attempt to shock the audience and it was in poor taste. They chose genital mutilation because they knew it's a taboo and that people are particularly squeamish about it. They took lines from reviews out of context which stated that they were effected by the mutilation to make it seem as though they effectively portrayed emotions. If they were truly setting out to make a cautionary tale, they wouldn't have needed to include these scenes, as they ultimately added nothing to the film.
This film is an insult to women everywhere. It portrays them as weak, stupid, and deserving of violence. It makes the statement that women should not seek independence, nor could they hold their own in an altercation. It shows them as sexual objects to be brutalized and disfigured. If anything, this film does the exact opposite of what it claims it's intentions are.
I Can See You (2008)
This movie offered neither substance nor beauty. Total waste of time.
The first hour was an incredibly slow, boring movie with annoying characters. The last twenty minutes was an incredibly nonsensical movie with annoying characters. All of a sudden it became a mixture of a bad Eraserhead ripoff and one of those art student film clichés. Maybe I'm totally wrong and the movie just flew right over my head. But I seriously believe that there's nothing to "get." Plus the acting and cinematography were awful. The guy who shot this needed to adjust his iris. Every single shot of nature was totally washed out. They looked like they were using a Handycam from Walmart. It completely defeated the purpose of those shots.
12 and Holding (2005)
I don't know what the DP was thinking.
The look of this film was horrible. It felt like a bad Disney Channel movie or a sitcom. Everything was way too illuminated, there was absolutely no depth. The inconsistent angles were incredibly distracting. I don't understand how these people get work.
Also, the stereotypical nature of every character was a bit much. The obese father eating french fries while talking to the doctor, their plates of donuts, the child insisting on wearing a sweat suit and sweatbands. It was all so cliché.
I wouldn't recommend this movie to anyone. That is, of course, unless you're looking for tips on how not to make a good movie.