Look (2007)

     The concept is great; construct a narrative entirely from surveillance camera footage.  The execution is quite good; overlapping storylines captured only from cameras that could actually capture such activities.  The acting leaves a bit to be desired and is really the only thing stopping this little film from being flawless.
    The film starts with assertive white font on a black background.  It informs us as to how often we are captured on cameras- 200 times daily- and how much surveillance footage is accumulated from the countless robotic eyes watching our actions.  It is a film that could only be set in the present.  Someday, its meager concept will be tame as everyone has their own reality show and 15 hours of fame.
    It should, if anything, be an eye-opening reminder of how public our lives are whether we intend them to be or not.  The opening shot is within a department store dressing room as two nymphets undress and the face-to-face mirrors reflect into infinity.  Their actions are then monitored as they navigate the store, the entire mall, and then back into a car as they exit the parking lot.  Public space is aptly named.  The cameras continue to observe as one of the underage girls seduces her reluctant teacher.  His arrest is captured by an eager student’s phone.  Or we see a set of candid camera killers whose crimes are preserved by ATM cameras and police car dashboards.  They are eventually identified by a keyboard playing stoner who works at a gas station.
    The great success of the film is undoubtedly its social relevance.  Candid camera and reality TV shows depend on the audiences’ inherent voyeuristic qualities.  Laura Mulvey must be salivating with the prospects of discussing Adam Rifkin’s 2007 film and the ripe cornucopia of scopophilia it offers.  If it were real, we would know the subjects were unaware of our presence.  But alas it is not, and the acting alerts us that the characters know they are being watched and their actions are choreographed.  We will forgive their actions, be they vile or illegal, for these reasons.  Unless, of course, they start throwing cats into dumpsters.

Update: Upcoming Feature: Robert Rodriguez's Predators

     If you've never taken the time to watch John McTiernan's (Die Hard, The Hunt for Red October) 1987 classic Predator, starring our Californian governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, then you might be interested in giving it a chance. Recently, the Predator concept (which had a sequel in 1990, starring Danny Glover) has blossomed into a full-blown franchise, mingling with the Alien franchise to satisfy the ever-hungry pit of Hollywood remakes and sequels. Alien vs. Predator, which came out in 2004, earned $172 million worldwide, plenty more than its predecessor (which earned $98 million worldwide back in 1988) if you don't adjust for inflation. Unfortunately, both Predator 2 and AVP 2: Requiem (2007) did much more poorly than their predecessors, earning $57 million and $130 million respectively.

     In my opinion, the box office figures do accurately represent the quality of the films. Predator is an amazing film, if a bit slow at times. Alien Vs. Predator is also surprisingly decent, taking the most frightful parts of Alien and mixing them with the thrill of the hunt in Predator. While these two films were well made, their sequels were less interesting. Predator 2 takes the hunt out of the jungle into a major city, where a police officer (Danny Glover) must fight for the city. It really was not that amazing of a movie.

     Likewise, AVP 2: Requiem took the concept of AVP out of its remote icy location and stuck them in a city. Stealing some concepts from the 1999 independent film The Interceptors (also called Predator 3: The Interceptors, even though it's not really a Predator film), placing the aliens and predators in a city that the government has quarantined... it really was not a very well written or well made movie.

     So the sequels weren't as good... big surprise. It's no wonder Hollywood pulled the plug on AVP 3. They did not, however, pull the plug on a new Predator franchise. Robert Rodriguez's Predators, set to release in July 2010, is supposed to "restart the franchise." It's directed by Nimród Antol (Kontroll - 2003 and Armored - 2009) and stars Topher Grace, Adrien Brody, and a Robert Rodriguez favorite Danny Trejo. Principle photography should finish within the year according to Comingsoon.net who recently spoke with Nimród about Predators, in an article you can read here. Be sure to check it out, and check back later for a trailer.




     Robert Rodriguez's revamping of the Predator series is well under way, set to release this summer. They've recently opened a website dedicated to the film, which will have a trailer on March 18th. Take a look!
http://www.predators-movie.com/
     The film is about a group of mercenaries, convicts, and murderers, led by Adrien Brody, are taken to a remote location, which they soon come to realize is an alien world inhabited by the most vicious of murderers: Predator Aliens. They must now fight for their lives and figure out what they were brought there for.

Shotgun Stories (2007)

I required a much-anticipated second viewing before fully addressing this film with more depth than a sentence or two. To my satisfaction, this occasion outmatched its predecessor and firmly solidified the film as one of my favorites. And it could be for its simplicity, the static camera and location filming, or it could be for its complexity, the social implications of moral and personal motivations, but is probably for their fusion.

In a small Arkansas town, the death of a father refuels hatred between seven sons. The two sets of half brothers, one set estranged from their mother, one encasing her, were raised to hate the other. And in a cold yet decidedly personal conflagration of emotion the sides are forever damaged. Michael Shannon, plays Son, who with his younger brothers Boy and Guy, carve out a meek existence in a sedated and un-stimulating small town. With the death of their father, and words exchanged at his funeral, their brotherly rivals demand that the feud end. If the threat wasn't clear enough, blood will have to be spilled to do so.

The camera in this film is an observant bystander; it could almost act as another unseen sibling. It watches the interactions with formal documentation, identifying the players involved and letting their actions determine outcomes. There is nothing flashy in the delivery; even the title could be considered a misnomer by suggesting a prevalence of shotguns. The trailer itself is much more action oriented than the film remains, although for a trailer there is still very little. The film relies on a brooding and unrelenting anger, a deep seeded and growing bond of hatred. Nichol’s film is so stylistically understated that it could easily be confused with something drab and unrewarding. Rather, its execution becomes flawless, not relying on commercial tactics to build its much more developed climax.

For a film about family, it is truly scary. At the same time, its devotion, for a lack of a better word, is inspiring. The rounded characters do not exist as cut outs of small town yokels, but exist in a much more fully formed state than much of what we see today. It is difficult not to notice the aggression fermenting under the mellow, if stern, facades. A town, so depressed and uninspiring, has bred people whose complexity and intensity make up for their un-motivating surroundings. We are not to be distracted by an abundance of environmental stimulators with such a precarious status of social networks.

Shotgun Stories is a fascinating portrait of small town life. It is disarming and alarming in its content and discerning and concerning in its depth. The film broods over anger and the perpetuation of rage. And it does not, for one minute, suggest that the world is an un-navigable or inhospitable place to be.