If you missed it while it was on newsstands, its not too late to get your copy of Fangoria Issue #322. This issue has an in depth look at the Evil Dead remake as well as my interview with 80s scream queen Lori Lethin (Bloody Birthday). Click here to order your copy.
Make sure to pick up a copy of Fangoria Issue #323. It features loads of Lords of Salem coverage, as well as my report from the set of NBC’s hit series Grimm. The mag is available at Barnes & Noble, independent booksellers, comic book stores, and through the magazine’s website. To order your copy online, click here.
VHS collectors seem to be coming out of the woodwork lately. What many thought was a dead format seems to be making a major resurgence, similar to the way vinyl did. We wouldn’t dream of telling you that the quality of a VHS cassette provides superior picture, sound, or anything. But it is certainly a lot of nostalgic fun to revisit some of the more obscure titles by way of your VCR.
ShockTillYouDrop.com had the chance to connect with Jamie Kennedy and Matt Orlando about their new collaboration, A Resurrection. Orlando wrote and directed the film and Kennedy produced through Jamie Kennedy Entertainment.
Matt Orlando gave us the run down on his first time in the director’s chair and the casting process. Jamie Kennedy shed some light on why A Resurrection doesn’t look like a first film and offered his critique on Scream 4. Kennedy also gave us an update on another film Jamie Kennedy Entertainment is producing, Kantemir, which stars Robert Englund.
A Resurrection stars Mischa Barton, Devon Sawa, J. Michael Trautman and the late Michael Clarke Duncan. It’s the story of a down to earth school psychologist who tries to help a mentally ill student that actually believes his brother is coming back from the grave for revenge on the students that killed him.
The film will be in select theaters Friday, March 22nd.
Shock Till You Drop: What about A Resurrection made you want to get involved?
Jamie Kennedy: I’m a big fan of horror movies from working in the Scream films. And I loved the script that Matt Orlando wrote. He had a very specific vision as a director. I thought that we had a great cast with Mischa [Barton] and Devon [Sawa] from Final Destination, and Michael Clark Duncan. At that point, I said “This works.”
Shock: At what point in the production process did Jamie Kennedy Entertainment come on board?
Kennedy: We came in during the middle of the process. They were already casting and getting ready to shoot. I was like ‘Yeah, I’d love to be a part of this.’ I loved the script and I loved Matt’s take on everything. It’s a good scary movie.
Shock: In watching the film, the production value leads one to speculate that you guys spent more on the movie than what you actually did.
Kennedy: That was the director. He really knew what he wanted to do. That’s why I loved working with him. He really knew how to make the movie look bigger than what it was shot for. He just knew how to do it; he picked the best cameras, he got a great DP. He knew all about scoring the film. He’s great.
Shock: It struck me as very impressive that someone with no prior experience as a director was able to turn out a film that is put together as well as A Resurrection.
Kennedy: Yeah. There are just some people that have it. He’s done other stuff on his own, and he’s worked in the industry for some time. But, he just had his own vision and a voice. Some people just know how to do it. I’ve known him for years and I always knew he was going to do it. I was keeping my eye on him.”
Shock: Jamie Kennedy Entertainment is reportedly attached to Kantemir. Can you give us any details on when that may be getting released?
Kennedy: We finished that in January. It’s in post, right now. I’m still waiting to see a first cut. But, I’m really excited. I was on the set for about a week. Robert [Englund] is back in full form. Fans of Freddy are going to see him like he was back in the day. It’s not Freddy, but it’s still encompassing the eeriness of Freddy. It’s really good. There are a lot of twists and turns in Kantemir. That’s our next one coming out.
Shock: Scream 4 was the first Scream film that you weren’t really involved with. What did you think of it, being able to see it more objectively?
Kennedy: I thought it was very entertaining. I went to the premiere and I liked it a lot. I thought it was a lot of fun. I loved the cast. I love Rory [Culkin]. I love Emma [Roberts] I actually really liked it a lot. I thought it harkened back to the first film. I will say one thing, though. It’s pretty bloody. When I was watching it, I was like ‘Man, this is bloody. They didn’t hold back,’ Which I thought was good, but I realized that I must really be in my forties now, because I kept thinking, ‘That’s a lot of blood.’
Shock: Thanks for talking with us. I really enjoyed the film.
Kennedy: I appreciate it. Thank you.
Shock Till You Drop: You started out as an actor and producer. Did you always have directing ambitions?
Matt Orlando: I may not have admitted it, at first, but I think I always did. It got to the point where I was thinking that if I was going to be working as hard as you do as an actor or producer that I wanted it to be my own thing.”
Shock: You hadn’t really been involved with genre filmmaking, prior to A Resurrection. What made you want to direct a horror film?
Orlando: I was always terrified by horror, but I liked it. When I was younger, movies like The Exorcist and Salem’s Lot terrified me. I would be so scared that I would have to jump on my bed from practically all the way out in the hall, because I was afraid that something was going to reach out from underneath and grab me from under the bed. I loved being scared, though. I like the tension that horror movies provide. I think it’s a very important genre and it’s a fun way to escape. When you’re writing the script for a horror film, you find yourself going through the emotions that the characters do, as you are writing the script.”
Shock: Where did the original idea for the script come from?
Orlando: As a writer, you have a bunch of ideas just swimming around in your head. One of the ideas was to have a lead character. But, it just didn’t make sense. There was no heart. There was no learning or discovery for that character. Then, it just kind of changed in to what it is. I normally have like ten ideas swimming around in my head and the whole thing just kind of took form; I started playing with it and pretty soon, it was the one.
Shock: You have worked as a producer in the past. Did you consider taking on a producing role in A Resurrection?
Orlando: It was kind of fun, actually, because I had produced before, but I got to let everybody else do that. It was nice to be able to concentrate on the story and working with the actors. I was able to do that rather than deal with all the duties of a producer. The cast and crew were actually really protective of my time and me. It was really nice.
Shock: At what point in the process did Mischa Barton and Devon Sawa become attached to the film?
Orlando: I didn’t have such an ambitious cast in mind. I don’t know how we ended up with such a great cast. I never thought I would be working with Mischa Barton, or Michael Clarke Duncan, or Devon Sawa. When I wrote it, we didn’t have a very big budget. So, I didn’t think we would attract talent like that. When our cast agreed to do the film, I was like, “You’ve got to be kidding me.” So, I was really shocked that we got the cast that we did.
Shock: You did get a great cast. And A Resurrection doesn’t feel like a first film. I was impressed with what you were able to do as a first time director.
Orlando: Thank you. I’m as flabbergasted as anybody else. I think I just got lucky in that I was hooked up with the right producers and the right crew. I really auditioned everybody, even extras, to make sure that they were right. We got really lucky. J. Michael Trautman did a fantastic job. We also auditioned some Pittsburg talent and they turned out to be great, as well. We just kept wondering how we ended up with such great people. Everyone was great.
Shock: Having worked on all sides of the film business, what’s the next step for you?
Orlando: I should never act again. There are so many people that love it, but it’s just not my thing. [Laughs] I like writing. I write every day. I love directing. So, doing both of those things would be great. Writing and directing will be my focus, from now on.
Shock: Do you have anything in development, right now?
Orlando: There are two projects that we are actively looking at. One is a surf horror film and one is a suspense thriller.
Shock: Awesome! Sounds fun. Thanks a lot for talking with us.
Orlando: Thank you!
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com
Shock Till You Drop had the chance to talk with Sasha Grey and David Guy Levy about their new movie, Would You Rather. David Guy Levy directed the film and Sasha Grey is one of the film’s stars.
Would You Rather tells the story of Iris, who in the wake of her parent’s death, struggles to make ends meet while caring for her terminally ill younger brother. Shepard Lambrick, a seemingly philanthropic aristocrat, expresses an interest in helping them. When he invites Iris to an exclusive dinner party, she accepts. Also attending the dinner party are seven more desperate individuals. They soon find themselves trapped in Lambrick’s mansion and forced to play a sadistic game of Would You Rather, where the winner will be awarded untold amounts of money. As the game progresses, the dilemmas Iris and the other players face grow increasingly deadly.
David Guy Levy shares some insights in to the creative process, talks to us about casting the film, and about directing genre great Jeffrey Combs. Sasha Grey fills us in on the nuances of her character, Amy, playing a wild child, and what she brought to the role.
Shock Till You Drop: Amy, your character in Would You Rather was a wild card. Was she fun for you to play?
Sasha Grey: It definitely was, in that David Guy Levy, and I had a lot of fun creating the character and bringing her to life. I was excited to play a character that had nothing to do with me, or my image, as it’s known.
Shock: Did you audition for the part or were you cast based on your involvement in past projects?
Grey: I don’t remember if it was a casting director that recommended me, but I do remember there were a few other people up for the role. I sat down with David and we discussed the character and I told him I really wanted the role. It went back and forth over the course of a week or so, and I got the part.
Shock: There’s no exploitation of violence in the film. Had Would You Rather been more focused on violence for the sake of violence, would you still have been interested in it?
Grey: That was all David’s doing. He had a very methodical vision for how the film would play out. A big thing for him was not to show everything. He wanted it to be very suspenseful and leave the horror up to the viewer’s imagination. Had it not been that way, maybe I would have said no. I didn’t really want to be that girl running through the forest with her dress torn. Yeah, that definitely would have effected my decision.
Shock: Did you enjoy working with David, as a director?
Grey: He was fantastic to work with. I hadn’t seen his previous film, so I was a little nervous. I just asked as many questions as I could before we began filming and during the process. He was really easy to talk to and he let me provide input. As long as it made sense, he kind of let us experiment and try different things.
Shock: Did you guys primarily stick to the script, or did you make a lot of changes to the character as you went along?
Grey: For the most part, everybody stuck to the script. You kind of have to in a film like this, where it’s all really laid out. I think that each person brought nuances to their character, though. I think that my character, Amy, was always the outsider, but I tried to make her even more unlikable.
Shock: Most, if not all of your scenes, take place in one room on a small set. Did it start to feel claustrophobic, being stuck in a small space for long hours?
Grey: It did, but we were really fortunate to have a great cast and crew. Everybody seemed to get along and everything gelled. There was no drama. When you have that many people in a confined space, things can get uneasy. But, we didn’t really have that. We shot in the middle of the summer, so it was hot, but other than that, I think it went pretty well.
Shock: What can you tell us about your upcoming film Skinny Dip?
Grey: I don’t think that film is going to happen. I would love to work with Frankie Latina in the future. Danny [Trejo] and I both stay in touch with Frankie. I did just finish a film called Open Windows; Nacho Vigalondo directed it. I was in that with Elijah Wood and Neil Maskell.
Shock: That’s too bad about Skinny Dip.
Grey: Yeah. It happens.
Shock Till You Drop: How did your experience directing Would You Rather differ from your first feature film?
David Guy Levy: My first film [A Love Affair of Sorts] was kind of a surprise, because I had just produced the film Terri with Azezel Jacobs. Azezel knew that I had always had directing ambitions and he was the one who challenged me to make a movie. We had an idea for a film, but no script, and two weeks later, we were improvising a movie. Azezel edited the movie for me. Then, a distribution company saw the film and wanted to put it out. My last film was always kind of experimental, for me. But Would You Rather was always a commercial endeavor. It was intended for a larger audience, any audience, really. My last film was sort of an experimental feature that became more than that. A Love Affair of Sorts was made for about $1,000. Would You Rather was made for about half a million. The two experiences are miles apart.
Shock: Sasha said that you gave the cast a lot of creative freedom. Do you think that helped the outcome of the film?
Levy: Yes. I choose people to work with because of what I thought they could bring to the table. When it came to casting Sasha, I knew that the pieces fit together. She wanted to make some character and wardrobe choices and I let her go with it because she made the right choices. With each actor, there might be one or two things that I didn’t go with, but 99.9 percent of the time, they are going in the right direction and I would let them run with it.
Shock: Something that I was really impressed by was the way that you steered away from exploiting violence.
Levy: The script sort of left it open to interpretation. I’ve always liked movies without monsters. I like movies with real people. We knew that we wanted to make a movie that could be so simple but the things that were said would be very powerful. When we came up with Would You Rather, we knew that we were making a movie about the game Would You Rather, but we wanted to tell it in a way where the ideas were scarier than the images. I’m a firm believer that I can show you someone’s hand being blown off or someone cutting his or her eye, but when I show you that, it’s limited to what I decide to show you. If I don’t show you and I leave it up to your imagination, it’s going to be so much greater than what I could have shown you. This movie is letting people’s imagination take them places that I could never take them, especially on our budget. I think that the approach is paying off because a lot of things are left up to the viewer.
Shock: What was your level of involvement with the casting process?
Levy: I had a lot of autonomy when it came to casting. With some of the characters, I had the actors in mind before the script was even written. For Julian Lambert, we knew we wanted Robin Taylor, so that role was written for him. As the film was written, we sort of wanted to have people in mind for the characters. For Conway, we had envisioned John Heard. So, when he agreed to do the film that was great. For Cal, we thought that Eddie Steeples would be good for the role and he ended up being a fan of the script. The last piece of the puzzle was Shepard Lambert. We had no idea who could capture the character that was written. We had a lot of doubts about the people that were being suggested. Finally Steffen Schlachtenhaufen sent me a YouTube video of Jeffrey [Combs], who hadn’t been on any of the lists, and for the first time, I thought, this is the Shepard Lambert. We had the script sent to Jeffrey and within a day he had responded. Not only did he say that he would do it, he thanked us. He said it’s rare that he gets to play a character that he can really dive in to. It turned in to kind of a thank you note. It was the coolest beginning of a relationship, and I cherish that. He came in to production with such an energy and that rubbed off.
Shock: I thought John Heard was perfect as Conway. He is such a versatile actor.
Levy: He was great. The scene with the drinking was heartbreaking. When we were watching it on the monitors, we were asking ourselves “Are we really getting performances this amazing?” That’s when we knew this was going to be something special. When we shot that scene between him and Jeffrey, we knew that we were in for something special.
Shock: Horror fans have responded really positively to Would You Rather. Are you interested in directing another genre picture in the future?
Levy: I would love to. I’m not against being labeled a genre director. I think it’s fun. Those are the movies I like to watch. As a producer, a lot of the stuff that I’ve done has just been a job. This is the first time that I really felt like I was having fun. I’m ready to do it again. So, it just depends what the next idea is.
Shock: We are looking forward to seeing what you do next.
Levy: Thank you.
Would You Rather is now available on VOD and is enjoying a limited theatrical run.
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com
While working on a research project, a group of high school students discover dark secrets behind a grisly set of murders in the town’s past. As the teens uncover details of the fateful account, they get caught deeper in an intricate web of paranormal happenings and pandemonium. The town’s violent past is catching up to the students. They will have to outsmart the malevolent forces at work if they intend to stand a chance against the demonic camera lenses in this bizarre horror thriller.
Written and directed by Michael A. Nickles, Playback is, overall, a disappointment. It’s well below average. Nothing about the film stands out. As a viewer, it’s quite difficult to figure out where the sizeable budget was actually allocated (an estimated $7.5 million). No aspect of the film stands out as well-funded or keenly-executed. With the exception of a relatively brief appearance from Christian Slater, Playback doesn’t have a well-known cast, the effects were far from mind-blowing, and the finished product didn’t have a polished look to it.
The film spends no time on character development. We know next to nothing about any of the characters’ back story, so it’s impossible to warm up to any of them. I had no desire to cheer for or against any of the cast, as I knew almost nothing about any of them. The acting is bearable but not great. The performances were unconvincing. They felt stale and uninspired. Nickles’ “paint by numbers” script didn’t give the cast a lot to work with, but I was left with the impression that he didn’t provide a great deal of stimulation from the director’s chair, either.
The film’s pacing was problematic for me. Playback starts out with a bang, and then proceeds to follow it up with a thud. It’s nearly an hour in to the movie before it picks back up to the pace of the opening sequence. The plot is threadbare, at best. It’s been done before, and it’s been done better. Playback reminds me a lot of similar titles, which also missed the mark, such as Shutter and White Noise. Playback also bears plenty of striking similarities to the superior Ringu/The Ring. It has a couple of plot twists that are not entirely predictable, but that isn’t enough for the viewer to maintain the patience needed to get through to the end of the film. The ending wasn’t satisfying in the least. It left too many loose ends and too many variables up to the viewer’s interpretation.
The film leaves the viewer feeling like they’ve missed something. It feels like a series of takes edited together, rather than a cohesive and functional finished product. I kept wondering if I had missed something. As it turns out, I missed nothing. The film was just badly edited, lacking continuity, and poorly put together.
Aside from a couple of mediocre gore scenes and a jump scare here and there, Playback didn’t offer much to the horror fan. It really doesn’t offer much as a thriller, either. It fails to find firm footing in either genre and plays out in an “unsure of what it’s trying to be” kind of way. The aforementioned sluggish nature of the film’s pacing makes it difficult to sit through, and there are very few thrills to be found. Even at 98 minutes, Playback is far too long. It fails to rise above the confines of its formulaic “teens go up against evil and bad shit happens” plotline, it also fails to take advantage of its ‘R’ rating.
A locker room scene and a handful of violent images, peppered throughout the film, are all that push it to its ‘R’ rating. If Nickles had leveraged the film’s rating to work in some shock value or especially gruesome death scenes, Playback could have been easier to sit through. It wouldn’t have made it a better movie, but it may have made it more tolerable to its viewing audience.
The drab cinematography brings nothing to the already bland film. Scene after scene of dreary and uninspired imagery brought me to the point of wanting to poke my eyes out.
Ultimately, almost every aspect of Playback worked together to the film’s detriment. There were so few redeeming qualities that the film is simply not worth your time.
The film hits theaters March 9th. You can check it out then, or find it on VOD now, but I would suggest exploring other options.
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com
Shock Till You Drop had the opportunity to screen the new CG film, Starship Troopers: Invasion at Comic-Con 2012. We also got a first look at the video game of the same title. The game looks fun. The film is a different story.
The plot goes something like this. Some troopers aboard a starship fight some giant ass bugs. Some other stuff happens. Some bugs die. Some people die. The end.
That should tell you everything you need to know and more about the Starship Troopers: Invasion movie. It was a big waste of my time and I would like to encourage you not to waste yours watching the film.
Starship Troopers: Invasion is nothing more than a vehicle to promote the release of the video game of the same title. The problem with the film is that unlike a video game, you are not in control. You just have to sit there and watch as the troopers shoot giant bugs. It’s like watching someone else play a video game for 90 minutes.
The pacing in Starship Troopers: Invasion is silly. It never spends any significant amount of time explaining what’s going on or why. The film is made up almost entirely of action sequences and nudity, which is strange, because the film is in CG. Something about watching animated boobs makes me feel like a pervert.
The character development, not surprisingly, was non-existent. We knew little more than the character’s names. Their motivations and back story remained a mystery in most instances. We learned a little about a select few, but nothing to make use care whether they lived. I was actually hoping they would all get hit by an asteroid and die.
The characters’ ridiculous nicknames didn’t lend any credibility to the film. How are you supposed to care about people with names like Bug Spray, Ice Blonde, Ratz Ass, etc…?
Mind you, I am a big fan of the original Starship Troopers film. I loved Dina Meyer and her “tough as nails, yet vulnerable for the right person” performance. I thought it was a fantastic film. It did a lot of things right. It wasn’t too campy. It wasn’t too serious. It was, and still is, a great flick. It’s unfortunate that the franchise has sunk to this level.
The only positive I can find is that the CG was pretty good as far as CG goes. I don’t like CG effects and I really don’t like CG films, but for what it is, the effects were fairly well done. The bug death scenes looked about as realistic as one can expect from computer generated bug deaths.
Starship Troopers: Invasion will hit Blu-ray August 28th, but do yourself a favor and avoid it. If you are feeling nostalgic for some Starship Troopers fun, read the book or re-watch the far superior original film. Shock Score: 2/10
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com
Dr Emmet Cole, the host of a wilderness reality show, goes missing in the Amazon. He is presumed dead by friends and family until a signal from his communication device shows up on radar. With renewed hope, a group of his family members, friends and colleagues head out to into the jungle to try and locate him. They, of course, decide that their exploits will make for good television, so they bring a camera crew to document their findings.
Oren Peli (Paranormal Activity) and Steven Spielberg’s new “found footage”-style television show was somewhat of an acquired taste for me. After watching the entire season, I kind of enjoyed it, but there is no way I would have continued watching The River if I had caught it during its original broadcast. The first episode simply doesn’t provide enough motivation for the viewer to return for the next episode. The series gets progressively better in its sophomore episode and beyond, however.
Each episode of the series was at least a little bit more gripping than its predecessor. Each episode left off with some unanswered questions, but they were never any compelling reasons to tune in the following week. The season finale was no different. It left a few unanswered questions, but most of the story arcs were tied up neatly enough that I was really indifferent as to whether or not a season two would even be necessary. As it stands, a second season is up in the air. Netflix has reportedly looked in to picking up The River, but no official announcement has been made regarding the ultimate fate of the series. [Editor's Note: It's not looking good for season 2...]
The River develops its cast over time and the viewer becomes at least casually invested in the welfare of most of the main players. Most of the performances were bearable. Thomas Kretschmann (Dracula 3D) was enjoyable as Kurt Brynildson. I had trouble warming up to the Leslie Hope, as Tess Cole (Dragonfly), however. She was very cold and distant through the entire season. I thought the part should have been played in a way that showed her mourning a profound loss but still showing some degree of vulnerability or approachability. I didn’t like Joe Anderson’s (The Grey) portrayal of Lincoln Cole, Emmet’s son, either. Nothing about his performance endeared the viewer to his character.
The River borrows from a little bit of everything but doesn’t offer much in the way of original ideas. There were ideas borrowed from everything from The Exorcist to The Blair Witch Project. It also explores a lot of different themes that we’ve seen before. The show has trouble defining itself. It suffers from a touch of schizophrenia, dabbling in the horror, the supernatural and survival sub-genres.
I am not typically a fan of the “found footage” approach to filmmaking. I found that certain aspects of The River worked well, though. The camerawork was well done. There were very few shaky, handheld, headache-inducing moments. I appreciated that the “found footage” style wasn’t used as an excuse for shoddy camerawork and a micro budget. The footage was well edited. One thing that impressed me was that the cast members of The River who played camera operators actually captured some of the footage that was used on the show.
The effects were a mixed bag. They were primarily done digitally. I’m usually not a fan of digital effects. But, to my surprise, some of them were quite good. The monkey, in the first episode, was superimposed digitally, and I didn’t realize that until delving in to the special features. The dragonflies were pretty poor looking, however. There were some definite accomplishments and some definite misses. The gore effects were realistic enough.
The River isn’t without its problems, but it does have its moments. If you go in to it with low expectations and an open mind, you may not hate it. You might even kind of enjoy it. It’s worth a rental, if you have a few hours to kill and nothing better to do.
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com
Wound is written and directed by David Blythe who has worked on a variety of projects, but doesn’t seem to have found his niche. He was attached to House III (The Horror Show) and reportedly fired. He went on to direct several episodes of The Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers in the ‘90s and since then has done some video documentaries and somewhat obscure films.
This film struck me as similar to the director’s career path, in that it is a hodgepodge that doesn’t seem to fit together or make any sense.
Going in to it, I had no idea what the film was about. I didn’t get any information with the disc and I didn’t do any research on the film until after I had watched it. Usually, it’s more interesting that way. This was not the case with Wound. I wish I’d had some kind of warning, prior to watching the film, at least then I would have known what I was in for.
I will not attempt to provide much of a plot synopsis, as I cannot actually say that there was much of a plot. It was more of a stream of consciousness that moved forward and backward and gradually began to fade in and out. Instead, I will cover a few of the notable sequences that occurred during the first few moments of the film.
Wound really starts out with a bang. The viewer sees a little patricide right from the get go. No more than seven minutes in to the film, we see a very crude penectomy with a pair of scissors. This is not a penis removal, like what we saw in Hostel II. This is an arterial spray inducing, slow, and torturous cutting that seems to go on forever. I can hang with the best of the gore hounds. But, even I had to divert my eyes, because it was too sickening to watch. Shortly after that, the real craziness starts.
The film takes a long time to give the viewer any insight as to what’s going on. It gave me the same feeling of confusion that I get when I start a movie from the middle. None of the characters are properly introduced. The viewer doesn’t have any idea who anyone is or what purpose they serve until about halfway through the film. Even then, the viewer is still left with a multitude of unanswered questions.
Wound has a very surreal and dream-like quality. It’s not clear which portions of the film are really happening and which are hallucinations or dreams. We become fairly certain that Susan, the lead, is completely nuts, but want to hold out hope that Susan is actually sane. Most of the movie had me scratching my head and asking myself “What the fu**?”
In terms of any type of cohesion, the film fails. Wound plays out like one long acid trip (speaking hypothetically, of course). The film is heavy on symbolism, but Blythe leaves much too much up to the viewer’s interpretation and doesn’t make anything clear enough for the average moviegoer to make any sense of it.
David Blythe appears to have taken some of his cues from Tarantino. The film is filled with flashbacks and takes a non linear approach to storytelling. It was almost impossible to tell what was happening, or why. The difference between Wound and a Tarantino film is that you actually want to know the answers to those questions in a Tarantino flick, and in the case of Wound, I did not. Tarantino also ties up some of the films loose ends and brings all of the sub plots together to create a cohesive film. Wound doesn’t accomplish any of that.
The production values are better than many film’s I’ve seen with similar budgets. The camerawork is pretty well done. The effects aren’t bad. The film has a cast of virtual unknowns but, the performances are not terrible. The film does an effective job of helping us identify with the Susan, the lead character’s misery. The viewer can almost feel her agony reaching through the screen. Unfortunately, none of that mattered. Wound was so bizarre and hard to follow that it is simply unsalvageable.
You can find the film currently on DVD, however, I would absolutely not recommend watching it. Even if you are on a plane and it’s the in flight movie, you would be better off reading the evacuation instructions that are adhered to the emergency exit for entertainment.
Originally posted at www.shocktillyoudrop.com