Spider-Man: Homecoming

Everybody knows that Sony Pictures botched their re-boot of the Spider-man movies with the last two outings. "The Amazing Spider-man" in 2012 was a satisfactory start to a new series but seemed to be covering a lot of familiar territory. The sequel, "The Amazing Spider-man 2" was a complete mess which screwed up the storyline, wiped out an important character prematurely, and basically repeated every mistake made in the third film in the original Spider-Man trilogy. When Marvel and Sony worked out a deal to get Spider-Man into the MCU, they took a huge step in fixing the things that were wrong with the films. The arrival on the scene of Spider-Man in the terrific "Captain America: Civil War" showed the promise of a young new actor in the part. The story can be about a teenager.

I think that Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield were well cast but played the role much more maturely than the character was originally supposed to be. Since Peter/Spidey show up in Civil War without having another version of the origin story, we get to skip that as well and get right to the fun stuff. Here, young Tom Holland (21) can pass for a fifteen year old. He has a baby face and a voice that certainly will not intimidate anyone, so it works. What also works is his desire to be an Avenger. Even though he has incredible powers and a history with the Avenger team, he still feels like a wannabee and that motivates him to act in a manner contrary to the advise of his "mentor" Tony Stark. Holland is completely believable as a nearly ADHD genius who wants to rush home from school and do some good. His desire to be one of the big guys reminds you of a puppy, anxious to please it's owner but so clumsy in doing so that it upturns the furniture and cocks up the works. The first trilogy and the reboot, all focus on romance, but this film focuses on Spider-Man himself and his struggle to find a place in an era of super-heroes. There is a romance with a surprising turn, but it is not the main point of Peter Parker's life in this film.

The side characters in this story all add to the freshness of the film. They are not merely cutouts to be plugged in for narrative purpose but real flesh and blood  people who matter to the story. Jacob Batalon plays Peter's friend Ned, another nerdy kid who accidentally discovers that his friend is the neighborhood hero that he has seen on YouTube. Ned is nearly irrepressible in his enthusiasm for sharing in Peter's secret. He wants to share it but even more than that, he wants to be a part of it. He offers advice, asks annoying questions and genereally plays Jiminy Cricket to Holland's Pinocchio. Since they both attend a school for gifted students, Ned is certainly as bright as Peter, but he and Peter are still young and they make social mistakes and act on impulse sometimes. Marisa Tomei, plays the youngest version of Aunt May yet. She is just in her late forties or early fifties and even the committed Tony Stark has sexist things to say about her. Tomei has been an excellent actress in films for almost three decades. Anyone who thinks her Academy award for "My Cousin Vinnie" was a fluke, did not see that movie. Her May is not to far a stretch from Mona Lisa Vito. She is more streetwise, flirty and sharp than any of the actresses who have played this character before. I won't spoil the quote but I will say she has the final line of the story and it will bring a big laugh. Jon Favreau as Happy Hogan has appeared in three of the "Iron Man" films but has barely registered because there was not much to his part [even though he directed the first two]. Happy is a happy addition to the Spider-Man story. As the contact for Peter Parker to the Avengers, he is the perfect balance between exasperated and impatient. He gets a laugh on screen every time from simple facial expressions.

As with most action stories, whether they are set in a comic book universe, the spy world, or everyday dramas, the villain is a tipping point for the direction of the story.  Since Iron Man is the template they are following somewhat with this approach, let's use those films as examples. The Iron Monger in the original film had a great actor and a well developed part, the film is stronger as a result. Whiplash is a cipher in Iron Man 2 and The Mandarin is a red herring in 3, both films are less successful from a narrative position. "Spider-Man Homecoming" does not have those weaknesses, instead it has the strength of the first Iron Man, a great actor in a well developed part.  Michael Keaton plays a third winged character, after two turns as Batman and a self referential role as Birdman in the recent Academy Award winner. Adrian Toomes is a character that we can feel empathy for early on. He is pushed in the direction of crime by circumstances that are outlined at the start of the film, but his actions are not driven by revenge but rather the need for financial security for himself and his crew. While it is not clear how he expects to keep a low key presence, given the nature of his new enterprise,  the so called "Vulture" is not really malevolent. His threats to Spider-Man are dire, but in the context in which they are issued they are really negotiation points. There is no spite or lust for revenge, this is a character who is taking advantage of the skills he has and the opportunities that are presented to him. The main caper at the climax of the film is something he enters into very reluctantly. He is not a monster, and Keaton is a great choice to play this working class villain who aspires for so much but also chooses to fly under the radar. Frankly there is a twist in the film that I did not see coming, but looking back it might make sense to those who have closely followed the Spider-Man Franchise. That twist gives Keaton a chance to strut some of his best stuff. He has those great facial ticks and a range in his voice that can go from jocular to threatening in an instant. I thought he added immeasurably to the success of this film.

The screenplay balances the intimate story of Peter Parker and his family and friends, with the two parallel plotlines of the Vulture and The Avengers. Peter is an effective hero occasionally but he also makes the kinds of brash mistakes that any headstrong kid might make. Robert Downey Jr. as Tony Stark, knows all to well the trouble he can be getting himself into by aiding in Peter's development as a hero, but he lacks the requisite supervisory capacity to guide Parker correctly. Happy and Tony together are the indifferent parents that need to put their foot down but also need to listen empathetically. Stark is too narcissistic to realize this and happy is too busy. There is great humor throughout the story and it comes naturally in the incidents that crop up and the characters that have been developed. There are the usual story patches that allow Spider-Man to be around when it is necessary, but they do not show too much and with all stories in a comic book universe, they need to be forgiven a little.

I have heard talk of a potential backlash on comic based films. There is a danger of burnout in the audience. That will certainly be true if every film in the genre has to invent or resurrect an alien threat, a maniacal genius bent on revenge, or a scientific accident that creates some kind of chaos. When you have a film like this or the recent "Wonder Woman" where the settings are fresh and the characters compelling, you don't have to have burnout. The creators of the MCU have found compelling stories about half the time. The hope for the immediate future is that "Thor Raganok" will be closer to "Ant-Man", "Guardians of the Galaxy" and this film rather than Iron Man 2 and 3 or "The Age of Ultron". WW holds out the hope that DC is on the brink of making the same discovery. What entertains us is not empty spectacle but stories that are involving with characters we can like or identify with. If you get some well deserved humor in there without shoehorning it in, all the better. "Spider-Man Homecoming" was not a film that I was particularly desperate to see or hopeful for. It turns out to be a wonderful re-invigoration of not just that character, but of our whole desire for comic book films. There are little details in the movie that add to the experience and I don't want to spoil them for you, but from the moment the Marvel Logo streams on to the screen, if you listen, you will know that the film makers want you to be entertained, and they find some good ways to do that.

Baby Driver

While I was tempted at one point to suggest that the hyperbole around this film was a bit over the top, I got closer to the end of the film and realized that I was wrong. This movie may not be able to be oversold to the audience that it is made for. Baby Driver hits the notes, plays a nice melody, and has a crescendo that will build and satisfy like  the final movement of a symphony. All these music references are relevant because the song score for this movie is an integral character and you need to be able to grove to it to appreciate the way the film is put together.

In fairness to all of you, I will say upfront that I am an Edgar Wright fan. His off kilter story development and flashy cinematic style is strong enough to make a mundane story work, but it usually does so within the constraints of the universe that he has created. People who don't like "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" are put off by how excessive the imagination seems to be. That film however is a comic book story that is designed to flaunt convention and dazzle us with flash. "Baby Driver" is full of flash, but not the kind of cinematic magic that you see in every other action film these days. There are not bullets tossed in the air and then magically landed into the chamber of a gun as it is twirlling in slow motion through the air. Lots of movies will have those moments (in fact I saw that very thing in the trailer for "The Dark Tower" which played before this film). The synchronized cinematic moments have to do with the soundtrack and the pop songs that populate it. The music matches the driving, shooting and running action on the screen. Yet when Baby, as played by Ansel Elgort, drives a car or runs across the screen, if is not obviously digitally enhanced. The moves look real.

The story is not new. There are standard gangster tropes throughout the film. The crews have nicknames, the main character is involved against his will, the brains behind the plots are ruthless and there are innocents that are used as leverage against our hero. Yet for every trite moment, there is a variation or twist that makes the story pay off for the character. An eight year old is used for cover in the process of casing a job, and the kid does a better job than the criminal. When there is a car chase, the cars really get damaged and the criminals shook up. The innocent romantic interest is tougher than we expect her to be, and the big boss turns out to have more empathy than you would have imagined given the stereotype that is set up. There is a seemingly indestructible bad guy who keeps going like the energizer bunny, but he is a character that is motivated by romantic revenge not simply the story requirements.

Except for the style of filming and the ability to use camera angles and editing tools so very smoothly, this feels like a 1970s heist picture. Everyone knows that something will have to go wrong, the interesting things in the story are what things go wrong and how they play out. It's as if this film is the grandchild of "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" crossed with "The Taking of Pelham 1-2-3". The bad guys make  few mistakes but when they do, a double cross or a shift in loyalty is coming. Jamie Foxx and John Hamm are effectively grim and disturbed as members oif the violent crew of criminals. Eiza González is perhaps the most blood thirsty of the gang, so there is a feminist moment for you. Lily James as Deborah, Baby's love interest kept reminding me of one of the girls from the original "Twin Peaks". Maybe because she is a waitress (trope #243), she just seemed a lot like Shelly Johnson. Baby is over his head in the violence department, but he is never afraid for himself. He is smart, but clearly not as smart as Doc, the mastermind played by Kevin Spacey, in a role he feels like was tailored for him. He has played enough bad guys that this part is hardly a challenge but it still feels natural.

The practical car stunts and gritty character moments are the things that make this film enjoyable for an old timer like me. I only knew half of the songs that were used in the film, but all of them felt right for the moment and the fact that they are not as well worn as the songs used in a lot of other films, is a plus from my point of view. There were a few moments in the middle of the film that are not action heavy and I started to wonder if the film was moving off track, but it was just a counter tempo and a character theme and we get right back to the melody after those brief solos. "Baby Driver" is definitely gritty and stylish. It is not a garish shoot-em up, but rather a fast paced heist movie with a strong 70s feel. Just the thing to help rescue the movies from the summer doldrums of films like the "Transformers" sequel or "The Mummy".  Be sure to buy the song soundtrack, but make sure you get it on vinyl.


   

Galaxy Quest Special Presentation

Having made the trip to downtown L.A. last night for a fantastic screening of "Jaws", we returned to the area today for another screening that was equally marvelous, "Galaxy Quest" at the Regent Theater. This is a much smaller venue, and it lacks the historical value of the movie palace we visited last night. The venue is more of a club now a days but they do show films occasionally so they have a big stack of folding chairs that they can dig out and put in rows with zip ties. I can't really complain because the folks there treated us well and made sure that we got an accessible seating spot, so the staff is great.

The one time I have written about this movie before was in a post I titled "Three Perfect Movies". It is the second film on that list and as I said at the time, there is nothing that I think could be changed about it to improve it at all. The screening today was sponsored in part by "Screen Junkies", a website I am sure most of the readers of this blog have visited. They are putting together a documentary about the legacy of "Galaxy Quest" and there were cameras in line and during the Q and A, to insure there will be contemporary original material to go with their interviews.

They are working in conjunction with Alamo Drafthouse, who will be opening a theater complex in Downtown L.A. next year, and they provided a rough version of a trailer for the film at the start of today's presentation. Hopefully that preview will be available soon so that everyone can anticipate the film. The screening today included several guests, but there was also cosplay going on in the line and in the theater.  A young woman right behind us in line had her own Lt. Tawney Madison uniform and she was interviewed by the film crew. Later, a band of Thermians showed up in character and charmed everyone and willingly posed for pictures. That group ended up in the front row and will certainly be a part of the documentary feature as well.

The film, for anyone who has missed it, is a humorous tribute to the cheesiness of the Original Star Trek series and their fans, who would form the basis of the current geek culture. The movie does not treat the characters disrespectfully and it clearly has a warm spot in it's heart for the actors that are being thinly lampooned. 

The screening today looked to be a DCP presentation, and it lacked to switch from one aspect ratio to another that I so distinctly remembered from my original viewing of the film way back in 1999. The sound was great for the audience, but the setting were such that the cast and crew who spoke after the film, had a hard time hearing each other in spite of using microphones.

It is the guest list that makes the presentation today so special. Mark Johnson, the Academy Award winning producer of "Rain Man", was also the producer for this film and his appearance here suggests how deeply he really cared about the project. Also speaking of a film he seems to truly love was director Dean Parisot. Screenwriter Robert Gordon was included in the proceedings as well and his contributions to the discussion and to the screenplay were great. Two of the actors who starred in the film also were surprise guests, they were Enrico Colantoni who played the Thermian leader Mathesar and Missy Pyle who was the other female star of the film.

Johnson told a story about how the film came together and mentioned that he hired Parisot after having worked with him on a previous film, when the original director (Harold Ramis) left the Galaxy Quest project. Parisot was also described as famously handling notes from the studio by nodding his head and then ultimately not doing anything of the sort. The best example of that was the line that Sigourney Weaver was supposed to deliver upon seeing the crushers she and Jason (Allen's character) are expected to traverse. She said the original "F*@k" and Parisot did not shoot any coverage or alternate takes of that scene so when it is dubbed, it is clear what she originally said. Gordon spent some time revealing an odd note that came from Dreamworks Exec Steven Spielberg, that he'd had a dream about the villain of the film "Sarris" and a large ball. Everyone was a little unsure how to tell the genius that his idea was wack, and Gordon said he thought it might have been a test, to see if the screenwriter really believed in his own work and would stand up for it. Enrico Colantoni shared a little bit about his time with the film, and he appears to have created the dynamics that represent the Thermians behaviors during the movie. Casting Director Debra Zane was in the audience, and the director asked to to explain how she used Colantoni's audition tape to prompt the other actors for their roles. Missi Pyle told a couple of stories about everyone who played a Thermian attending "Thermian Academy", basically a camp project where the actors honed their off kilter vocal delivery and practiced the odd walk and arm movements of the aliens. The best piece of information revealed was that the rock monster, when finally ejected into space, was supposed to have a thought line that read "Tranquility at last", but someone decided we don't really need to know the motivation of a rock monster.

Everyone was heartsick about the loss of Alan Rickman last year, and that seems to have put the "Galaxy Quest" limited TV series on hold for the moment. Both Johnson and Parisot seem to hold out hope that it will still happen, and the crowd was very enthusiastic. We also met up with my friend Michael who writes the site "It Rains...You Get Wet". We last saw each other at the TCM Film Festival, and today he was joined by his daughter who is about to embark on her senior year. So it was a successful afternoon and a joy to see a great movie with fans who love it as well. 

Jaws: The 2017 Annual Post

As regular readers know, "Jaws" is an annual event at the KAMAD site. I probably watch the film two or three other times in the year, but when summer shows up, and the Fourth of July is on the horizon, I look for a big screen presentation of this family favorite film. It will be playing at the Egyptian on the holiday weekend, but we are traveling so that was out. Lucky for us, the L.A. Conservancy is hosting a screening at the historic Orpheum Theater in the "Downtown" area this evening and there are several bonus elements to be had.


Two years ago, I went all out for the fortieth anniversary of the film, with four big screen visits in a ten day period.You an access those posts, here, and here and here.  Sadly, there will just be the one screening in a theater this year but it will be packed with goodies, including a rendition of the soundtrack of the film on a Mighty Wurlitzer Organ.

This was pretty much the same panel we saw at the L.A. Film Fest debut of "The Shark is Still Working" back in 2009. They told a couple of the same stories and once again gave credit to Bob Mattey, the creative consultant they remembered from "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea". It turns out that the fact they were pushed off the lot by higher priority effects for "The Hindenburg, Airplane 75 and Earthquake" gave them the opportunity to be more creative. Roy Arbogast was able to use new urethane products instead of latex and that made a big difference.

Joe Alves was on the project longer than anyone else. His production drawings had a huge impact on the look of the film, and even though they were not embraced by all the executives at Universal, the right guy found them to be very promising. Alves was on the movie before Spielberg was and later directed "Jaws 3D".

Carl Gottlieb showed once again why he was an important part of the crew. As the principle author of the screenplay, he helped build the beats in the story that keep it involving. Last night he did the same thing, contributing a comment or correction at just the right moment and almost always getting a laugh as he does so. He was in the lobby before and after the show, selling and signing copies of his book. I already have "The Jaws Log" signed, and you can read about it there.




Jeffery Kramer is the actor who played Deputy Hendricks to Roy Scheider's Brody.  He does get elevated to Chief in Jaws 2. He has been a producer in television for a number of years, but the blogging community will all love the fact that he was also in "Clue".




The screening was part of the L.A. Conservancy program "Last Seats Remaining" , earlier in the day they did a screening of "E.T." so it was a Spielberg day at the Orpheum. A couple of months ago we went to a live  podcast  at the old United Artists Theater now known as the Theater at the Ace Hotel. It is just down a block from the Orpheum. There are eight or nine old movie palaces on Broadway, and a few of them have been restored and are used for special events and historical purposes.

There was a beautiful flyer distributed to patrons, which explained a little about the conservancy but also listed the program.

One of the biggest pleasures was seeing this film with a huge live audience in a classic movie palace.  These theaters put to shame the new multiplexes which are long on modern technology but often short on style.

The fantastic neon accented marquee out front looks glorious at night, who would not want to go in and see way mysteries will be revealed beyond the door.
As was mentioned, the organist entertained for an hour before the program started, and while the whole Jaws Score was not presented, there were a number of John Williams pieces that were shared with the enthusiastic audience.

Steve Markham, a longtime member of the Conservancy, a WW2 veteran, and a collector, shared some of the beautiful backdrops he has. My Dad actually had two or three backdrops like this that he sold with the Thurston show. I did not take pictures last night but there is a nice video that includes several of the pieces we got a chance to see.



The theater itself has a magnificent lobby and there is a three level mezzanine to view it from. We might have been tempted to watch the film from the balcony or from the Opera Boxes on either sides, but getting up there would have been a little complicated for our group. There were bars on all the levels, including the lower level where generous lavatory facilities are located. There was also a lounge where one of the traditionally garbed ushers was answering questions for guests before the show had started. This is the kind of luxurious presentation of films that made movie going in the golden age of Hollywood a real special event. You did not simply see a film, you took your time soaking up the atmosphere, lingering over the opportunity to share a night out with other like minded patrons. The theaters were also used on the vaudeville circuit so live entertainment would also be on a program on a regular basis.

The world has changed, and maybe if we look around a bit more we will appreciate some of the things that have passed a bit more.

I've said it before, I miss the days when music filled the air before the show and then curtains parted to reveal the screen. I'd be happy to pay extra for these kinds of amenities if I could skip the half hour of commercials that precede most theatrical presentations these days.

The props and costumes were not elaborate by any museum standard, but they were a nice bonus to the evening. The movie was a complete hit with the audience. It was great listening to 1500 people scream and laugh together. There was spontaneous applause after a number of scenes and once again, you could hear a pin drop as Quint tells us his story of survival on the U.S.S. Indianapolis. Robert Shaw has to be remembered forever for this five minute sequence.

The movie "Jaws" has mesmerized audiences for forty plus years, it is one of the great accomplishments of the cinema. If you think the effects are old fashioned, you need to watch the film with an audience. No one is longing for a CGI shark, we are all holding our breathe as the practical effects and live footage take us into the story. When you add in the surrounding environment to the experience, I can say we got one of the best presentations of the film in a theater ever. I know I have seen this film more than a dozen times on the big screen, and that is just in the last dozen years. This will be one viewing that will never get lost in my memory.

 

Lambcast MOTM: The Spy Who Loved Me

I get to talk about James Bond with other bloggers, and it's great.

The Hero

Obviously Writer/Director Brett Haley put this project together with a single thing on his mind. The goal here is obvious, give actor Sam Elliot the kind of part that is worthy of his talents but yet seems to have escaped him for his nearly fifty year career. Elliot is iconic to most of the film fans of today because of his role in the cherished "The Big Lebowski". He has a small role as a laconic stranger who imparts wisdom and narrates the story of the slovenly hero in that film. Elliot though has been around a lot longer than "Lebowski". His first movie was "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid", blink and you will miss him, but he was the star of one of the films I featured in my original blogging project on the summer films of the seventies. "Lifeguard" has a similar theme to it as this film, a man has to assess the life he has been living.  In that film, he is at the start of middle age, in this film he is closer to the end of life than the supposedly rich middle. He is terrific in both parts, but clearly "The Hero" comes closer to reflecting the life of an aging working actor than the previous movie did in showing us a lifeguard's mid-life crisis.

The script goes all in on making Elliot the only actor who could play this part. While Tom Selleck could give him a run for his money in the mustache department, two other elements would disqualify him. Selleck may have played some cowboys, but not as many and with such effectiveness as Elliot over the years. Second, Tom lacks the sonorous tones that are the voice of Sam Elliot. Both of them get lots of voice over work, but Elliot has a gift, much like Morgan Freeman, Elliot has a baritone to kill for. Both the mustache and the voice are focal points in the story, which happens to be about an actor as loved for his voice and mustache maybe even more than his acting talents. It is a double edged sword because it means he has had only one role that he feels really proud of, in spite of the fact that a lot of people do love him. This gives him doubts about his own worth and combined with the knowledge that he has been a failure as a father, puts him a bit into crisis mode.

There are two or three sets of tropes that can define the story. He is faced with career issues, mortality issues, daddy issues and while many will not want to say it, drug issues. The two films that keep creeping into my head while thinking about this movie are "The Wrestler" and "Crazy Heart". These are other films that use similar points to tell their stories and the comparisons are apt for another reason, they rely on charismatic performances by the central character. Like both of those films, an unlikely younger woman becomes part of the picture as well. In this film, that is actress Laura Prepon, as Charlotte a woman half the age of Elliot's Lee Hayden. In a refreshing change of pace, the difference in ages is an important part of the complexity of their relationship. Prepon gets two chances to read poetry in the film, and she has a very winning way of saying the words of Edna St. Vincent Millay. She and Elliot have great chemistry together in spite of their differences.

There is an important segment of the film where a Western Fan group wants to honor Hayden for his lifetime achievements. Of course this forces him to think a bit about what those achievements might have been. He has the one film he is proud of and a failed marriage and broken family to be haunted by. The sequence could have been a parody of fandom if it had gone the wrong way, instead, it comes as an opportunity to recognize that the source of his life force has been film fans like these. Although fueled a bit by some drug use, his heartfelt speech at the event creates some additional territory for the film to explore. What is an actor's worth? Sometimes it is in their talent, sometimes it is a unique relationship that they have with an audience and sometimes it is just the heat of a moment. All of those force Lee to consider what his life is worth. There was a nice little part in this scene for actor Max Gail, who I don't know if I've seen him since" D.C. Cab". As great as this moment was, a few hours later there is an uncomfortable counter moment in a comedy club, which forces Lee to reassess again where his life has lead him to.

The style of the film is dramatic with comic overtones and is punctuated by frequent dream segments that visualize the metaphorical nature of Lee's self reflection. It is not an action film or a slapstick and many people might be put off by the languorous approach to the story. I was not put off by it but my daughter found it a little slow at times. There is something great however in how the film takes it's time in letting Lee's story play out. Scenes feel complete and never too rushed. The relationship with Charlotte makes more sense with the pace of the film. The interaction of Lee and his neighbor/drug dealer played by Nick Offerman, is languid, in much the way you might expect consumers of particular substances to behave.  The relationship with his ex-wife (played by real life wife Katharine Ross) is prickly and the connection with his daughter is neglected and frigid.  Although there is a Hollywood element to the movie, it does not dominate the action but rather reflects some of the same doubts that Lee has about himself. If you have ever heard the audio clips of Orson Wells or William Shatner doing commercial voice overs, you might think they were being asses. Elliot clearly has a lot of experience in this area so he can convey the frustration of an actor with just a look and a pause or change in pace to reflect his own impatience.

The release is not wide but I'd encourage you to seek it out.   I may put together a mid-year list of films that have distinguished themselves. This movie will have no trouble making my top five. I really liked it and a appreciate the talent of Sam Elliot even more. Sure his mustache and voice are the key to getting us to watch or listen to him, but acting ability carries this film and it is clear that the director meant that to be the case.

It Comes At Night

If you have not seen the trailer above, wait to watch it until after you see the movie. It is filled with visual moments that will take away a little of the mystery of the film. I would not say they were spoilers so much as they are more detail than you want. I can say that when I first saw the trailer I was intrigued by the movie, but I only saw it the one time and I did not recall all of the information that it doled out. That was fortunate for me because the pieces of information that show up bit by bit help add to the suspense of the story. As usual I will try to keep this commentary spoiler free.

To begin with, the title of the film is accurate, but not in the way you expect it to be. There are substantial elements of horror in the story and they are often envisioned as a part of the night time experience of the people involved in these events. There is no prologue or background information, we are introduced to our characters as they are carrying out the inevitable but brutal task of surviving in the world they live in. Something has happened in the world, we never get a clear picture of what it is, but it has brought isolation, infection and paranoia with it. There is a family at the heart of the story and they are struggling to maintain a sense of family identity, surrounded by fear and unpleasantness. Writer/Director Trey Edward Shults has fashioned a claustrophobic Rorschach test for his audience, and there are two excellent performances that get us there. 

Joel Edgerton is an actor that I apparently first encountered in the Star Wars prequels. I did not realize it until I looked him up today, but he plays the young version of Luke's Uncle Owen. He really came to my attention however in 2011 when he was in two high profile pictures within a month of one another. He was one of the two brothers in my favorite film of that year "Warrior". The second was a film that I really ended up disliking and it came out just a month later, "The Thing [Remake/Reboot/Prequel]". In the years since he has had an interesting diversity of roles to play. The role he fills in this film is certainly different from what he has done before. He is a man named Paul, who has created a set of rules that he and his family are living under, in order to protect themselves from the horror that is happening around them. His terse delivery of lines and flinty looks suggest that he is a hard man. In truth he is a dedicated family man who has been forced to become hard by circumstances. One of the reasons a film like this works is that the audience members try to identify with characters and they are forced to ask themselves, what would I do? Paul is faced with tough choices on a daily basis and it may be alienating him from his son.

The son, Travis, played by actor Kelvin Harrison Jr., is really to main protagonist of the film. We see the effect the way the family has to live on his psyche. He is an inquisitive and sensitive seventeen year old, who needs to grow but is being asked to do so under difficult circumstances. He loves his father but seems less and less close to him as more tough decisions have to be made and sometimes Dad just chooses rather than discussing it. This is a dystopian film without a macro view of society, but rather a micro perspective. The horror elements involve tension and uncertainty with the consequences being equally unknown. The imagination creates as much of the unpleasantness surrounding the characters as their actual situation does. The question will arise on several points, Is Travis having memories, nightmares or vision of the future? The tag line in the trailer sets it up very well, the real monsters are created by fear.

This is not a traditional horror film and if that is what you want and expect you are likely to be disappointed. It is however a truly frightening film which build up tension, creates horrific anticipation on the part of the audience and then asks us to judge our selves. What would we do?  There are a couple of jump scares but it is the paranoia and rationale follow through of the philosophy of survival that Paul has adopted that creates the real terror here. There are moments of tenderness by all of the characters in the story, but they underline the dangers that this necessary route to survival would result in. It will certainly leave you doing more thinking than quaking in your boots, but they will not be the comforting thoughts that arrive at the climax of most horror films.