My opinion of Ti West continues to dissolve as I sample more of his work. I love HOUSE OF THE DEVIL and thought that this was a bright new director who had a grasp on the "slow burn" style of film making. I felt that THE INNKEEPERS was a great movie ruined by a rushed, poor ending, but was still good enough to maintain my opinion of his future. Then, I saw his phoned-in entries in VHS and THE ABC's OF DEATH, but willing to chalk those up to being short stories. With this movie, he's now officially making me question whether he is a one-hit wonder.
I'm actually struggling a little bit with exactly what my opinion of this movie is and what my rating should be. I'll start with some of my issues with the movie. I had heard a lot of talk going into this movie that it was influenced by the Jonestown Tragedy and I was ready for a movie that explored the nature of fanaticism and religion in the framework of West's slow burn style. What I was not prepared for was an EXACT simile of the Jonestown events. Except for one of two creative liberties, West never strays from the story, at all. By the midpoint of the movie it is clear that he's not going to offer anything new and, as a result, all tension is lost because the viewer now knows exactly what is going to happen later. If he wanted to do a Jonestown movie, why not just do one? Why not use the character's names and just call it what it is? This feels like a blatant attempt to disguise his thievery for a younger generation that may not know any better. As someone who's interested in the more macabre side of life, I've seen a half dozen documentaries on this subject already, including prior dramatizations of the events, including a recent one on cable television that was pretty much just as good.
My other major issue is the "found footage" attempt. I have no inherent issue with found footage, at all. In fact some of my favorite horror of the past few decades would fall into that category and you'll never hear me complain about shaky camera-work or motion sickness. The problem, is that it just doesn't work at all and comes across as a crutch used by West to try to hide some of the cracks in the foundation. The quality of the film itself, the camera angles, the cinematography...all of them are too well done to be believable in the context of found footage. You know he wants you to believe that's what it is, but it's just not believable. There are even moments in the movie that are just plain impossible within this framing device. For instance, the climax with the two reporters and "Father". Anybody who could possible be filming is in the frame, so who exactly is taking the shot?
So, I started the review by stating that I wasn't sure of my opinion and how to rate it, but until now I've pretty much bashed it, so where's the confusion, you may ask. Well, let's assume for one second that I'm 20 years younger than I am and don't really have a base of knowledge on the Jonestown events, or am not aware of the prior versions of this story, that maybe this is new material. Let's also assume that I'm not very critical of film style and don't care about the found footage attempt. If you can put those two things aside, the movie is entertaining. Yes, I knew exactly what was going to happen, so tension was shot for me, but West's directorial style still saves this somewhat. Gene Jones is very good as Father, though definitely needed more screen time. AJ Bowen is decent as our main character and elicits a sympathetic reaction from the audience. There are brief shock moments, mostly in a few of the deaths. Those things keep this from being rated lower, for me.
As many have suggested in prior reviews, it's probably time for West to give up complete control. No matter who you are, in what business you work in, most suffer when given complete reins. It helps to have other opinions and thoughts. Maybe it's time for West to direct someone else's story and let someone else edit. And, for the love of God, stop casting your friends in movies. Joe Swanberg cannot act and should not be given roles.
I'm actually struggling a little bit with exactly what my opinion of this movie is and what my rating should be. I'll start with some of my issues with the movie. I had heard a lot of talk going into this movie that it was influenced by the Jonestown Tragedy and I was ready for a movie that explored the nature of fanaticism and religion in the framework of West's slow burn style. What I was not prepared for was an EXACT simile of the Jonestown events. Except for one of two creative liberties, West never strays from the story, at all. By the midpoint of the movie it is clear that he's not going to offer anything new and, as a result, all tension is lost because the viewer now knows exactly what is going to happen later. If he wanted to do a Jonestown movie, why not just do one? Why not use the character's names and just call it what it is? This feels like a blatant attempt to disguise his thievery for a younger generation that may not know any better. As someone who's interested in the more macabre side of life, I've seen a half dozen documentaries on this subject already, including prior dramatizations of the events, including a recent one on cable television that was pretty much just as good.
My other major issue is the "found footage" attempt. I have no inherent issue with found footage, at all. In fact some of my favorite horror of the past few decades would fall into that category and you'll never hear me complain about shaky camera-work or motion sickness. The problem, is that it just doesn't work at all and comes across as a crutch used by West to try to hide some of the cracks in the foundation. The quality of the film itself, the camera angles, the cinematography...all of them are too well done to be believable in the context of found footage. You know he wants you to believe that's what it is, but it's just not believable. There are even moments in the movie that are just plain impossible within this framing device. For instance, the climax with the two reporters and "Father". Anybody who could possible be filming is in the frame, so who exactly is taking the shot?
So, I started the review by stating that I wasn't sure of my opinion and how to rate it, but until now I've pretty much bashed it, so where's the confusion, you may ask. Well, let's assume for one second that I'm 20 years younger than I am and don't really have a base of knowledge on the Jonestown events, or am not aware of the prior versions of this story, that maybe this is new material. Let's also assume that I'm not very critical of film style and don't care about the found footage attempt. If you can put those two things aside, the movie is entertaining. Yes, I knew exactly what was going to happen, so tension was shot for me, but West's directorial style still saves this somewhat. Gene Jones is very good as Father, though definitely needed more screen time. AJ Bowen is decent as our main character and elicits a sympathetic reaction from the audience. There are brief shock moments, mostly in a few of the deaths. Those things keep this from being rated lower, for me.
As many have suggested in prior reviews, it's probably time for West to give up complete control. No matter who you are, in what business you work in, most suffer when given complete reins. It helps to have other opinions and thoughts. Maybe it's time for West to direct someone else's story and let someone else edit. And, for the love of God, stop casting your friends in movies. Joe Swanberg cannot act and should not be given roles.