Chaos (2005, dir. DeFalco)

Rating: 1/5

One of my all-time favourite horror movies is Wes Craven's film-making debut, Last House on the Left (1972); a film which captured, at just the right time in the political and social development of the US, a shocking and controversial story as a response to many misconceptions and cover-ups. Craven and producer Sean Cunningham were among many young hippies of their generation to feel outraged and lied to when footage of the Vietnam war came home, and the men decided that the sickly violence inflicted overseas was just as relevant in US society. It was clearly within the human capacity to commit torturous acts on our own kind, and it was there. The Man just didn't want you to think it was.

But alongside their own peace-fuelled angst came the basic morals and structure of an old Swedish folk tale, originally adapted to film by Ingmar Bergman in the Academy Award winning The Virgin Spring (1960). This brought us the story of Mari Collingwood (Sandra Cassell) and her friend Phyllis Stone (Lucy Grantham), two teenage girls of 'the love generation,' who are off to a Bloodlust concert in the City. In the remote Connecticut woodland live Doctor and Mrs Collingwood, who are busy preparing Mari's 17th birthday at home while the girls are out.

Through the brilliantly-used medium of a local radio station, we are introduced to the movie's antagonists. Krug Stillo (David Hess) and Weasel Pedowski (Fred Lincoln) - two escaped convicted murderers and rapists - and their companions Sadie (Jeramie Rain) and Krug's son Junior (Marc Sheffler). The girls run into the gang whilst trying to buy some grass and are kidnapped, taken to the woods, raped and murdered. By pure coincidence, the woods they are in - their car having broken down on the road - are the back garden of the Collingwood place, and the gang spend the night after their day of havoc, before the parents discover who they are and what they've done. Then the parents kill them all in miserable revenge.

In 2005, David DeFalco wrote Chaos, originally with Krug himself David Hess attached for the title role. Alas, the potential saviour of this sickening flick was let go, for fear of type casting. However, Marc Sheffler (Junior) signed on as co-producer for good measure. What this picture turns out to be is an almost scene-for-scene remake of Last House, but with the violence skyrocketed, the craft neglected, and the ending absolutely brutalised.

The two girls we have this time are Angelica (Maya Barovich) and Emily (Chantal Degroat) who is mixed-race. The only reason I mention this otherwise irrelevant point is because it is pressed so frequently throughout this outrageous film. In the opening minutes, Angelica (who, we gather has been Emily's friend long enough for her mother to worry about her party animal tendencies) says that Emily's mother should be more liberal, because she's in a mixed-race marriage. Why the hell would a long-term friend bring up their friend's race without any point or purpose? That's just stupid. To be continued...

Anyway, the girls are off to a rave in the woods, and the family at home in the wilderness are Mr Ross (Jewish doctor of some kind, we assume) and Mrs Ross (typical worried African-American sitcom housewife). Yeah, it already sounds terrible, doesn't it? So the girls head off into the woods, where people are still setting up. Angelica, in her irritating 'broken record' manner shouts loudly and obnoxiously about 'scoring some E' and soon her obviously dwindling common sense gets them friendly with our new Junior, Swan (Sage Stallone). He takes them back to a secluded and dilapidated cabin where his pop Chaos (Kevin Gage), sidekick Frankie (Stephen Wozniak) who looks like he may be Jared Leto under a false name, and their eye-candy Daisy (Kelley Quann). Wow, Daisy--Sadie...see what they did there?!

This gang has none of the swagger or chemistry that Weasel, Sadie and Krug had. Chaos, who's a towering skinhead always shot from below to appear terrifyingly large, is soon revealed to be an absolutely (for want of a less-horror-cliché term) twisted fuck. Daisy, whose hair was styled just like Jeramie Rain's, but whose appearance is lacking in the original felinity, is a questionable character. Throughout she expresses remorse, fear and disgust, yet when the gang inevitably torture the girls, she screams, hollers and molests with considerable conviction. She's well acted, but under-developed. Frankie, the aforementioned Leto in disguise, is similarly questionable. He constantly disagrees with Chaos, and although he claims 'We do it because we like it!' is later equally disgusted by Chaos' rampage. It's like his mantra is 'Rape and torture is fun and harmless, but there's a line, man, don't cross it.' 

So, the gang have taken the girls to the woods, for some reason. 'Nobody'll bother us way out here.' Yeah, dude, but nobody would've bothered you in that perfectly good hovel in the middle of nowhere either. Why the woods? Anyhow, it is suggested it would've been a good, old-fashioned rape and murder spree until Chaos came in and added his ridiculously vile torture that is obviously designed purely to sicken us. Do we really need one girl force-fed her own nipple before being stabbed and her dying body raped by two different men? Do we really need the other girl's two orifices being carved into one? No we fucking don't. 

Craven's movie was distinctly lacking in any really 'original' killing methods. Phyllis was stabbed, Mari was shot and both were raped. The content of the violence was not the point of the movie, the context was. But Chaos is not so subtle. The only real object here is to make the audience vomit til their stomach linings hang from their mouths. This is truly gross shit. 

Anyhow, the girls done away with, we are given Last House-style cuts back to the parents at home. The original used this as a mild form of comic relief, with jaunty music and lack of worry. It was used as a contrast. But the constant cuts back to the parents here are increasingly annoying and pointless, just going round in circles, conversation-wise. The mother character is irritatingly pitiful, but the dad is strongly played, particularly towards the end. But again, the original story's pivotal third act is barstardised, made totally pointless and fruitless. 

The gang finally arrive at the parents house, for whatever reason, a mere ten minutes from the end, and there is no development between them, or trickery. As soon as they set foot in the house, the dad realises what's happened because Daisy's wearing her victim's belt. He manages to get a call out to the cops-- wait, wait, I'm getting ahead of myself. I must mention the cops. Earlier the worried parents called the local sheriff, who is again ridiculously and pointlessly racist. Taking Emily's picture with him he comments, 'Would you believe one of her parents is white?!' I reiterate-- WHAT?! The mom goes into typical housewife outrage, while in the car the sheriff rambles on to his deputy about 'All that perfectly good white pussy out there and he goes and marries a nignog.' What a crazy fucking asshole. There is no point to any of this shambolic conversation, except if it is to emphasise the fascist attitudes of all the male characters, bar Pop. 

The original 1972 cops were a wicked delight, again used as comic relief. They see the gang's car broken down outside the Collingwood place, but choose not to pursue it. Soon after they realise the car belonged to their wanted felons, their sudden chase is stalled as their car runs out of gas. They spend the remainder of the movie walking and trying to hitch various hilarious rides back to the Collingwoods'. These here cops are not only backwards pricks, they are also mindless idiots, as the show's jaw-droppingly ridiculous, and point-defeating anti-climax proves.

Five mins to run: The cops have arrived, and are busy wrestling with the hysterical Mrs Ross, while Doc Ross has Chaos, Daisy and Frankie at gunpoint (oh by the way, the son is dead. I forgot about that. He dies). Anyhow, after wasting his first chance to blow them away by chatting shit, Dad's gun is snatched away by Chaos, who shoots and kills Daisy. While this happens, Doc runs off and grabs a chainsaw (wink to the original) and guts Frankie like a leather-clad fish. He wastes the remaining fuel, and his second attempt to blow them away, by sawing through various wooden objects. A struggle between Doc and Chaos sees the latter with a screwdriver to the leg, and Doc reloads the gun, aiming it at his aggressor's head. Here it goes, third chance, that was lucky, better not screw it up... In runs the sheriff, who immediately SHOOTS DOC ROSS IN THE HEAD in his own fucking living room!!!! Mrs Ross runs in and sees her dead husband, and grabs the sheriff's gun and shoots him dead with it. By now Chaos has grabbed the gun again and shoots the deputy, and then the mom. Everyone's dead except Chaos, and his cruel laughter runs over a black screen. End of movie.

What the fuck did I just see? In the words of Ron Burgundy, "Well, that escalated quickly." One of Craven and Cunningham's key points of their movie was showing how ordinary, good people can become killers, the same as those scum we don't believe live in our neighbourhoods. What did it take for that to happen? And would it give any satisfaction, or did it just have to be done? Well it wasn't done in Chaos, that's the problem. So now not only the ending, but the entire story is obsolete. The parents were meant to be central characters, victims who become aggressors. But they weren't; they were victims like everyone else, turning this movie into one long, mindless killfest by a single sick bastard, and in the end, he is better off. What does this mean? 

In 1972, every member of the gang was dead, and the parents left in confused misery at what has happened. But the gang was dead, so revenge had been dealt. Evil had been punished. That is, one way or another, a satisfactory conclusion. But here evil is not punished, it is fed and it prevails. The beginning of the movie features a particularly long-winded 'true events' bullshit title card, which claims the movie should 'serve as a warning to parents and potential victims...and perhaps save lives.' So what is this movie's warning? That sick, evil people will always win? Or that evil is everywhere so parents should lock their daughters in the attic for life? What was DeFalco doing? There is no clear message or moral to this movie. It's just a torture album.

All of this turf was already covered by the mighty Ebert, but it's true and obvious. Not only lacking constant attitude or perspective, it's craft is minimal. Last House featured some good, while certainly amateur, cinematography, and an amazing score by none other than David Hess. The music, Hess' main passion, was meaningful, lyrical and beautiful, and made a few scenes eerily sensual. Music in Chaos is negligible, and when it's present, it's just bullshit rap-dance beats anyhow. It's pointless, an empty medium which could convey so much.

Chaos is a sick and senseless film with absolute lack of direction, meaning or creativity (except when it comes to methods of killing innocent people), and the unwanted bastard child of Last House which should have been nipped in the bud before it got worse. 

The Great Gatsby (2013) dir, Baz Luhrmann

Rating: 4.5/5

This may be only the fifth feature film to come from his twenty year directorial career, but Baz Luhrmann is one of those rare artists who puts years worth of effort into one spectacular show, and his adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald's classic novel is undoubtedly one of the biggest movies of the year.

With a story and style reminiscent of Luhrmann's insatiable Moulin Rouge!, The Great Gatsby is a visual wonder - especially in 3D - with penniless writers, modern music in period settings, and colourful characters that burst onto the scene with ceaseless energy. The director's undeniable talent for creating really engaging and three-dimensional atmosphere is as noticeable as ever, with stunning scenery and dazzling cinematography captivating the audience from start to finish.

Jay Gatsby is a mysterious, and judging by his palatial abode disgustingly rich, reclusive eccentric who hosts parties to rival The Playboy Mansion, splashing out countless dollars on indulging his uninvited guests every weekend. One night, young hopeful Nick Carraway (Tobey Maguire) is actually invited to one such soiree, who having been fed Oz-style "not nobody, not nohow" lines is stunned to be greeted in person by his questionable host.

Gatsby - Leonardo DiCaprio in a passionate, matured performance - quickly befriends Nick, whose now-married cousin Daisy (Carey Mulligan) is the long lost love of the millionaire, and the two pull off a humorously floral reunion, triggering a jealous, obsessive and destructive love tangle.

Tension boils, with every performance right on the money, and particularly overwhelming maturation from DiCaprio, whose recent thriller films like Shutter Island and Inception have proved him a capable handler of older, darker roles.

Interesting use of soundtrack stands out, with heavy techno beats pumping out covers of Beyonce and Amy Winehouse hits, which certainly seem like odd choices all things considered. However, the pace of narrative and camera work make the music strangely well suited to the visuals, and in keeping with Luhrmann's favourite era-merging technique.

A word about the 3D feature: it is most definitely worth it. Unlike most 3D movies where action is in regular 2D, with the occasional flying machete or shower of confetti making use of the effects, The Great Gatsby is entirely in 3D. Characters, sets and backdrops alike stand out with perfect clarity, only enhancing what is already a visually stunning and wonderfully thrilling movie.

Love Is All You Need (2012) dir, Susanne Bier

Rating: 4/5

The trailer for Love Is All You Need made me believe two things about this upcoming movie: a) That it was yet another soppy, cliched romcom, and b) That it was a British film. I was wrong, and I was wrong again. Turns out that it’s quite a moving, yet light-hearted drama, and it’s in fact a Danish film, with the majority of dialogue subtitled.

Perhaps they only used the English words in the trailer to attract people who wouldn’t usually watch world cinema. And with Pierce Brosnan starring, it wouldn’t be an unfair assumption that this was a British film, but even Brosnan speaks some Danish, and the subtitles don’t detract from the movie’s quality in the least.

We are introduced to sweet, middle-aged Ida (Trine Dyrholm), in her doctor’s office, insisting that after her recent affliction with cancer, a breast reconstruction won’t be necessary as her husband loves her for who she is. She then returns home to find the loyal darling cheating on her with Tilde from accounting. Ida is broken, but has no time to grieve, as she’s got to catch a plane to Italy for her daughter Astrid’s wedding. In her frustrated sorrow, she has a minor auto-scrape with uptight brit Philip (Brosnan), who just happens to be the father of her daughter’s groom.

After confiding in him about her disease, they fly together to his old lemon grove villa, which he’s given to the young couple; Astrid is kind and fun-loving, and Patrick is emotional but distant. Family and friends start to arrive, such as Benedikte, the far too flirtatious sister of Philip’s deceased wife, and Ida’s idiot husband Leif, along with Tilde from accounting. The presence of many people with many confused connections brings about a tangle of romances, some healthier and more truthful than others.

Of course, Ida’s charm turns the stone-cold Philip into a hopeless romantic, and they eventually have some kind of happy ending, but what surprised me was the events in between, and what kinds of endings the other characters get. Not all loose ends are tied. But there is a moving acceptance of cancer as a plot-line, rather than a mere gimmick to create sympathy for Ida, whose portrayal by Dyrholm is tender and endearing.

As a person who very seldom likes romantic movies, Love Is All You Need is enjoyable, because it is well-acted, well-written, and isn’t ridiculously generic. It has some real feeling to it.

A Late Quartet (2012) dir, Yaron Zilberman

Rating: 4/5

Without its characters, A Late Quartet has very little. Without its astonishing actors, it has no character. It is true, A Late Quartet will not appeal to everybody – it is very much based on passion for classical music – but for those audacious enough to see this movie and move past the music to the characters it presents us with, it is a very fulfilling, bittersweet portrait of human relationships and existence. Featuring one of the strongest ensembles in recent history, it tells the story of  string quartet The Fugue, who are still at the top of their game after 25 years of touring the world and playing to refined audiences, but suddenly cracks start to emerge when the unofficial leader of the troupe may not be able to play again.

The incredible Christopher Walken plays Peter, the sagely cellist 20 years senior to the rest of the group, whose recent bereavement of his wife and now shattering diagnosis of Parkinson’s Disease, leave him existential and unsure about the future of his beloved four-piece. Walken’s exorbitant talent for communicating many personalities and feelings through an expressionless face gives the character its vital intrigue, and provides the audience with its emotional identification with him.

Shattered by the heart-wrenching personal struggles of her lifelong father-figure, Juliette (on viola – Catherine Keener) and her second-violinist husband Robert (Philip Seymour Hoffman) soon find tension simmering in their own relationship; between her sorrow over Peter’s illness, and Robert’s insatiable idea of it as an opportunity to play the solos. Meanwhile, first violinist Daniel (Mark Ivanir) is serious about everybody’s roles within the quartet and within his private instruction: Juliette and Robert’s daughter Alexandra in particular.

Throughout many profound and often somber events in the unraveling of the quartet, there are dashes of unusual humour and light-heartedness, which acts as one of several methods of realism. The situations, and the flow of events, are tangibly believable, and dialogue is performed so naturally: people talk over each other extensively when fighting, rather than taking it in turns so every word is heard, and there are appropriate pauses of hesitation and contemplation. This realistic effect gives us an almost voyeuristic feeling at times, as if we are just gazing over the characters’ shoulders.

The leading group of actors deserve total recognition for the success of this picture. It is curious that while they have all served well in comedic roles – Walken especially – with good timing and delivery, they all perform such captivating personalities and emotions and situations. This is a line-up of versatile, gifted actors who produce real on-screen chemistry with one another. Their 25 year past is worn on each of them; in their faces and their attitudes, and we never once doubt that their struggles are real.

Throughout the movie, given the opening ultimatum of Peter making this season his last and the Fugue having to find a new cellist, we are left wondering how it will end. A turnabout happy ending? A miraculous recovery from Parkinson’s? True to the entire film, the ending is realistic, graceful and to an extent, comforting. We still wonder about the unresolved disputes between the quartet, but the writers couldn’t have created a more appropriate ending. It is grand, yet grave.

In The House (2012) dir, François Ozon

Rating 4/5

There is often disregard for the deeper thoughts of teenagers; their feelings are supposedly set in stone, and everybody knows what to expect. There are ‘regular teenagers,’ and then there are the oddballs, who few take the interest to listen to. Claude (Ernst Umhauer) is an oddball; a ‘back row student,’ but amongst a class of uninterested time-wasters, he is the only one worth his teacher Germain’s (Fabrice Luchini) attention. 

Germain’s first assignment of the year, ’48 Hours In The Life Of A Teenager,’ turns out mindless drivel about cell phones and eating pizza, until he comes to Claude’s work, which details – very explicitly – his voyeuristic visits to his friend Rapha’s ‘perfect middle-class house.’ The boy’s writing is skilled, his subject is tantalizing, and Germain has to know more.

Claude continues to submit installments of his ‘project’ to his teacher, each one closing ‘To be continued,’ as he creeps himself closer into the perfect family he so envies. His behaviour is strange: he searches, spies around Rapha’s house, watches the family as they sleep, and goes to extraordinary lengths of manipulation to get what he wants. He exhibits lust over Rapha’s mother, Esther (Emmanuelle Seigner), raving over ‘the scent of a middle-class woman,’ and as his story progresses, Germain and his intuitive wife Jeanne (Kristin Scott Thomas – who speaks fluent French) begin to worry about the dangers of the boy’s obsession, and the outcome it could have for all involved.

In The House is a gripping thriller, which reminds me somewhat of Blue Velvet and Fatal Attraction, in its themes of voyeurism and frightening obsession, and of the overall quality of its plot progression. It is surprising, yet darkly believable, and of course supported by tremendous performances. Luchini’s Germain is reminiscent of Michael Caine’s Frank in Educating Rita: a man weary of his years of thankless literature teaching, with decades of emotional wear on his face, whose interest in life and work is suddenly reignited by a particularly unusual student.

Young Ernst Umbauer is tremendously fox-like in his presence, with a sly smirk always either on his lips or in his eyes. He expresses huge understanding of his topic and something of an omniscient control over Germain, and by extension, Rapha and his family. The two leading males are a very peculiar pair, but have some kind of mutual understanding, and make intriguing friends/enemies.

Creative cinematography – with dizzying fast-motion shots of the busy school, and creeping steadicam spying into the scenes – work with later surrealist sequences, in which Germain enters Claude’s fantasies as they are ‘marked,’ in making this a visually exciting movie, as well as an interesting and well acted one.

In The House is an incredible story of manipulation by a disturbed teenage boy, and how his sinister fantasies impact the lives of those who dare to get involved…and those too intriguing to not become characters in them.

Share this:

Compliance (2012) dir, Craig Zobel

Rating: 4.5/5

At one point during the showing of ‘Compliance,’ around a third of the audience walked out apparently upset or disgusted. Apparently they had come to see a movie without reading even a basic synopsis, totally ignored the BBFC warning at the beginning, and weren’t happy with the results. The subject matter of ‘Compliance’ is controversial and chilling, but I certainly knew that when I walked into the theatre.

I came across a newspaper article about the event this movie is based on the other week, and having seen the evidence, am glad to say that this is one of very few films to pull the ‘based on true events’ trick and get away with it. An introduction assures us ‘Nothing has been exaggerated,’ and this claim seems supported by the correlation of the two stories.

On a busy Friday night shift at a fast food restaurant, flustered manager Sandra (Ann Dowd) receives a phone call to the office from a man claiming to be ‘Officer Daniels,’ and dealing with a a theft allegation against Sandra’s young employee Becky (Dreama Walker). Faced with a caller who claims to have CCTV evidence and the big boss on the other line, poor Sandra agrees to co-operate with Officer Daniels until he can get police to their location.

In the bizarre ordeal that follows, Sandra and several colleagues are manipulated into subjecting Becky to horrendous abuse and sexual humiliation by the caller. The way in which this plays out sounds unbelievable: “You stripped a girl naked cos someone on the phone told you to?” an interviewer later pushes. This is perhaps the same response people who haven’t seen the movie would give to the situation. But as Sandra insists, “He always had an answer for everything.” And this guy really does. What makes this movie work as an intense thriller is the perfect screenwriting by director Craig Zobel, which not only words the story, but makes every step of Officer Daniels’ manipulation somehow believable.

The caller is always quick to remind the colleagues, “I must insist you address me as Sir. I am an Officer of the Law, you need to calm down now!” It is not just the colleagues he sweet-talks into carrying out his perverse fantasies, but he regularly talks to Becky, intimidating her into…compliance. The overall psychological affect of the caller’s abuse is what makes us believe in the reactions, and just how this crazy incident could have occurred.

Despite the content warnings, ‘Compliance’ is not an exploitation movie, and has very little in the way of nudity or on-screen abuse. Most of the humiliation is implied or not shown explicitly, and in context, it is actually a very modest portrayal of the ordeal. The point of the movie, as explained at the start, is the psychological experimentation into how people behave under the influence of an authority figure.

It is a portrait of human behaviour, and there is moving emphasis on our attitudes toward each character, Sandra in particular. Although she is the main perpetrator, Dowd’s performance and again, clever screenwriting, conjure up strange sympathy for her and her situation. She really is a victim too.

‘Compliance’ is a gripping, intense and very realistic independent crime thriller, and in the same way that Wes Craven’s ‘Last House On The Left’ (1972) was a very well-made portrayal of a gruesome story, I give it 4.5/5.

Trance (2013) dir, Danny Boyle

Rating: 3.5/5

With Danny Boyle fresh off the Olympic ceremony gig, he proves he’s still got it, as people flock to see his latest picture ‘Trance,’ which is so very Boyle-esque, fans will not be disappointed. It’s a high-pace crime drama, with flashing colours, thumping action music and of course, blurring boundaries between reality and imagination/insanity.

Beginning with the awesome heist of a priceless painting from an art auction, ‘Trance’ hits the ground running when a hitch in the plans leaves the gang’s insider Simon (James McAvoy) a concussed amnesiac, and unable to remember where he stashed the loot. After a good dose of torture by his boss Franck (the suave badman Vincent Cassel) fails to jog his memory, the gang takes Simon to a hypnotherapist in a last ditch attempt to recover the painting.

At first, they sell some story about lost car keys to try and deal with the matter discreetly, but when it turns out hypnotherapist Elizabeth (Rosario Dawson) knows more than they had hoped, she is initiated to work with the gang in regaining Simon’s memory of the painting’s location. On the way to making this discovery, a downward spiral of secrets, deceit and other ‘forgotten’ incidents unwinds as we piece together what really happened during the heist, and the precedents behind it.

In a series of cuts back and forth in time to explain each step of the plot, ‘Trance’ is somewhat reminiscent of ‘Fight Club’ (1999), and every bit as Boyley as ‘Trainspotting’ and ‘The Beach.’ The crime action is actually exciting, contrary to many pictures of the genre that often plunge me into severe tedium. The pace is fast, electric, and highly intriguing.

The subject of hypnotherapy, it must be pointed out, is only portrayed semi-accurately though. A close family member of mine has been a hypnotherapist for years, and in this time I not only learned a lot about the practice, but also utilized it on several occasions, so I am fully aware of the procedure. As a nice aide to the plot, it is said that hypnotherapy (disagreeably frequently referred to as ‘hypnotism’) can make a suggestible person do almost anything. This is not true: successful hypnotherapy requires absolute willpower of its subject, meaning even if a smoker has hypnotherapy willingly but does not really wish to quit, the results will be negligible. Hypnotherapy is still a very misunderstood practice, and plotlines like this don’t help this image, so I feel it is important for the truth to be emphasized.

Mise-en-Scène – that is, all the elements that go into the scene – is used so perfectly in this movie. Bass lines shake the very floors during the action sequences. Set design is stunning and contemporary, and there is some very beautiful lighting work. Performances are strong and intense, with McAvoy and Cassel standing out particularly. McAvoy’s native Glaswegian accent, seldom heard in his bigger movies, brings a nice edge to his character, and reminds us of another of Boyle’s leading lads- Ewan McGregor’s Renton in ‘Trainspotting.’ Here is a Danny Boyle film, that seems almost a tribute to other Danny Boyle films.