A Wounded Fawn: a misanthropy fest

Greetings, commies and art lovers!

Today's masterpiece is A Wounded Fawn. If you have a special hell circle in your heart for pretentious art majors with nasal voices, this is the flick for you! 

Synopsis:

A serial killer brings an unsuspecting new victim on a weekend getaway to add another body to his ever-growing count. She's buying into his faux charms, and he's eagerly lusting for blood. What could possibly go wrong?

My thoughts:

Whoever wrote and directed this film must have a deeply rooted distaste for the human race. Not just the "patriarchal white man", the butt of all artsy films, but the whole human race. I wonder if the acting was deliberately bad and the characters deliberately unsympathetic. I did not emotionally involved with any of them. With detached curiosity, I sat back and watched to see who will finish off whom. The women are bitchy, cold and self-centered, not to mention oblivious. An entitled art history major who lives in a bubble of neurosis. Let's start with Meredith Tanner. How desperate for attention should a middle-aged woman be to ignore the obvious red flags? How low her "cringe radar" should be set? The scene where she is talking to her therapist about her fragile self-esteem makes the whole mental health industry look like a joke. Clearly, not much was accomplished that day in terms of healing. Most victims of emotional abuse end up latching onto another toxic partner. And that's just what Meredith does. So when the creepy new love interest whisks her off into a spooky cabin, ignoring her pleas to let her use the restroom, nothing in her head sets off. This film left me with the message that the victim always finds its oppressor. One cannot exist without the other. 

Redspace Rising: challenging and rewarding sci-fi

Greetings, commiees & sci-fi fans!

A few years ago I had the pleasure of reading and reviewing Brian Trent's novel Ten Thousand Thunders. Today I am reviewing another sci-fi hit Redspace Rising.

Synopsis:

Harris Alexander Pope is the man who ended the Partisan War on Mars. All he seeks now is solitude and a return to the life that was stolen from him. Yet when he learns that the worst war criminals are hiding in other bodies, he is forced into an interplanetary pursuit.

Teaming up with other survivors eager for their own brand of vengeance, Harris begins to suspect a darker truth:

Maybe what he remembers about the war isn't what happened at all...

My thoughts:

Let me start by saying that Brian Trent's sci-fi is not for beginners. If you have never read a high end space opera novel before, I recommend getting a few under your belt before you tackle this masterpiece. Better yet, watch a few film adaptations of sci-fi classics to gain a visual point of reference. It's not an easy superficial read by any means. You have to prepare to engage you attention and any cumulative knowledge of the genre. This author has a high standard - for himself and his readers. He does not talk down to his audience by overexplaining and giving too much exposition via third person omniscient narrator. You are expected to figure out the rules of the universe he created as you go. Be prepared to backtrack and reread certain passages. Trust me, it's worth it. You will come out a better reader, thinker and, possibly, writer. 

As in his prior novel "Ten Thousand Thunders" he explores the timeless topics of deconstruction and resurrection. Human beings and worlds are broken apart to be reassembled, given chances for redemption - only to become corrupt and vulnerable again. The cycle repeats. No matter where humans go in the universe, no matter what memories they lose and what new skills they gain, they take their human nature with them. We bring the best and the worst to every corner of the galaxy we visit. 

Level 16 - "A Handmaid's Tale" meet "Repo! The Genetic Opera"

Greetings!

Just because October is over, it doesn't mean that Halloween cannot continue. If you have Prime, there is no harm in watching Level 16, a dystopian thriller about a group of teen girls who are trapped in a mysterious and cruel boarding school that hides a dark secret. I would not call the principle of this movie particularly original - it's really hard to come up with anything truly ground breaking in this genre - but it does a decent job weaving some of the classic dystopian tropes. 

My thoughts:

"Level 16" is what you get when you expect a spin on "A Handmaid's Tale" and end up with "Never Let Me Go" (2010) or "Repo! The Genetic Opera" (2008) instead. The emphasis on "feminine virtue" and subjugation and dehumanization of girls/women leads you to believe that gender politics will be at the core of the movie. Yet the plot goes in a different direction, leaving all those references to "cleanliness" as the proverbial gun that is never fired. Their internal qualities end up irrelevant, because in the end, the only thing that matters is the quality of their skin. Their virtue is literally skin-deep. 

"Level 16" is like a beautiful slice of Swiss cheese in terms of holes. There are so many unanswered questions. Not sure if the writers deliberately wanted to leave a bunch of loose ends for the sake of creative ambivalence or pure negligence. We are not told much about these girls' back stories. How old were they when they ended up at the school? Do they have any memory of their biological families? How did their concepts of friendship and loyalty form? These girls look forward to being adopted, so the idea of a family is part of their value system, yet they are told that the school is their family. 

And of course, no dystopian thriller would be complete without some Slavic henchmen. The cartoonish enforcers speak some broken pseudo-Russian gibberish. Not sure if it's a tribute to some Cold War trope or the location is supposed to have some significance. 

All in all, I feel this plot would have worked better as a mini series that would allow the writers to explore the back stories and the motives of the characters. 

The Surrogacy Trap:

Greetings, commies!

October is a pregnancy and newborn loss awareness month, so it only makes sense that I should review a movie that touches upon this sensitive. The affected audiences would benefit from a realistic depicture of the surrogacy process. Instead, Lifetime came up with an implausible wannabe thriller full of legal and logistical loopholes. The writers of The Surrogacy Trap did not do their homework.  

Synopsis:

After losing hope of conceiving a child on their own, Christy and Mitch turn to surrogacy in hopes of creating the perfect family. However, their confidence is quickly shaken when they discover that the young woman might not be as perfect as they first thought.

My thoughts:

I realize that Lifetime doesn't always aim for accuracy, but this movie contains a few pretty gross factual errors. I am pretty sure it's a uniform rule that the surrogate must have at least one biological child - for good reasons. She needs to prove that she is at least capable of carrying a pregnancy through. Second, they really prefer women who are "done" having their own children, as surrogacy can potentially lead to infertility.

The couple comes across as unsympathetic and shallow, not to mention hypocritical, as they reject a more experienced surrogate for using the program as her main source of income and serving as a "professional incubator". Well, duh! What do they think a surrogate is? They wanted to a a "virginal" and altruistic surrogate who also looks like a supermodel?

Nobody specifies what sources of income Mallory has, yet she is able to afford a pretty fancy apartment. But that's to be expected in most TV productions. People live in apartments they would never afford in real life.

The cops look extremely naive and slow-witted. There were a few pretty close calls. Amazing how one psycho can totally outsmart the police department.

So, if you want to view this movie was a psycho fantasy, it you will be satisfied. But if you know the specifics of surrogacy, you will be rolling your eyes at the inaccuracies.

Kept Woman: "The Collector" meet "Stepford Wives"

Greetings, commies!

If need more moderately satisfying guilt-free guilty, not too mind-numbing pleasure, consider Kept Woman, a dark dark comedy exploring nightmares and gender stereotypes

Synopsis:

Jessica and her fiancé finally move out of the city and into their dream home on a quiet suburban street. When their strange and mysterious new neighbor lures Jessica inside his home, she finds herself imprisoned in a meticulously decorated 1950's bunker.

My thoughts:

Many of the reviewers already brought up the classic novel by John Fowles "The Collector" as the genre-setter. It's impressive that the novel is still read and remembered. "Kept Woman" is a satirical take on the hostage trope. Do not take it as a straight drama. It's a dark, dark comedy. No, it's not a feminist manifesto. It doesn't put down the work of homemakers. But it does make fun of stereotypes. It's also an allegory. The characters represent movements and ideologies. The dynamic between Jess and Robyn kind of busts the myth that women, when facing the same ordeal, will stick together. The only thing that seemed implausible is the naivete and stupidity of some of the characters. If you suspect that your neighbor is a murderous creep, why do you go into his house unarmed or alone? The cop who took it upon himself to confront the antagonist should have known better than going into his house alone. Same for Jess. She acts like a curious 12-year old schoolgirl. One would expect someone her age to be more cautious and savvy.

The Voyeurs: a guiltless guilty pleasure

Greetings, commies!

You don't have to wait for Halloween to enjoy a creepy treat. For some of us it's been political Halloween for the past 7 months. If you want to take a break from WWIII, consider streaming The Voyeurs. 

Synopsis:

A young couple (Sydney Sweeney and Justice Smith), find themselves becoming interested in the sex life of their neighbors across the street (Ben Hardy and Natasha Liu Bordizzo). What starts as an innocent curiosity turns into an unhealthy obsession, after they discover that one neighbor is cheating. Temptation and desire cause their lives to become tangled together leading to deadly consequences.

My thoughts:

"If you see something, say/do something." Right? Not necessarily. Modern culture is filled with mixed messages and moral ambivalences. If you see "something" that "looks like something", what do you do? How do you decide if it's your place to step in? Are you truly following the call of your conscience to expose lies, or are you merely gratifying your idle, obscene curiosity? By the way, there is no such thing as "innocent curiosity" when it comes to other people's sex lives. I felt strangely dirty and guilty myself for watching a movie about voyeurs. I would call it "guilt-free guilty pleasure". 

A few words about Sydney Sweeney. I saw her in "Nocturne". She does a decent job playing a "good girl" with a few pesky demons who suddenly grow on her and take over her life. She has an expressive face and can go from innocent to psycho in a few seconds. 

Alas, the absolutely implausible ending cheapens the movie. If you can cut out the last 5 minutes, you will find yourself much more satisfied. I am not going to dismiss the movie altogether, because it does raise many valid questions in the realms of ethics and social norms. Take it as a cautionary tale about dark impulses masked as good intentions. 

Brimstone: a religious thriller

 

Greetings, commies!

In a mood for a light summer flick? Not a chance! I don't watch or review those. Brimstone is an excellent choice guaranteed to give you nightmares. It's billed as a "A gritty revenge western, about a young woman in a frontier community who must go on the run when she is targeted by a diabolical preacher."

Not every film set in the West qualifies as a "western", and not every plot that contains elements of revenge automatically becomes a "revenge" piece. "Brimstone" is more of a multi-layered religious thriller. It helps to have some understanding of the Scripture to appreciate the structure of the film, all the theological references. If you are a totally secular viewer without any interest in the Bible, you will view this film as yet another attempt to make Christians look bad. If you already have an aversion to organized religion, this movie will not change your position, certainly. But this film is so much more than just another criticism of the hardcore evangelical movement in the US. The cinematography is stunning, horrifying and stern. The plot is blood-chilling. The antagonist is so repulsive, that you forget that he is a minister. You don't focus on his position in society. That kind of fades into the background. One thing that put me off is the idealized depiction of less than ideal women. Of course, they are depicted as agents of compassion and solidarity in this harsh, male-dominated world. I wish there had been more ambivalent female characters, capable of backstabbing and manipulation and cruelty. These acts should not be reserved to men alone.