- Published on
As a long-time fan of all-things-Science-Fiction, I’ve learned to appreciate both the big budget spectacles as well as the smaller, indie fare, largely because I’m looking for both interesting ideas and winning performances.
Frankly, there doesn’t have to be a lot of special effects. As I’ve grown a bit older and definitely a bit wiser (snicker snicker), I’ve realized that it’s the little theatrical moments captured well that make any project worth the price of admission. Like many SciFi fans, I’m particular fond of time travel, but I do prefer that it take a look at what such an endeavor would mean to its individuals characters: all of the world or galaxy-spanning time-travel storylines tend to fall flat on me as I generally find them devoid of personal consequence. There are a great many ideas, but they end up being wasted when they tell me so little about the journeys’ effects on the players.
Storytellers BP Cooper and Bradley King have delivered a mini-opus that’s garnered tremendous praise on the festival circuit … but does Time Lapse (2014) hold up to my simple expectations?
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“… explores the possibilities of time travel via a camera that takes pictures 24 hours into the future …”
Well, right there, I had the feeling that the wheels had come off this production, definitely so far as the marketing perspective is concerned: there’s no “time travel” in a picture. Instead, what we’re properly dealing with is the explorations of the classic information paradox. Instead of people traveling through time, it’s merely an exchange of data; and it’s that data that is meant to show us something deeper or meaningful about the people. That’s the narrative core of Time Lapse, a teen-angsty-style melodrama that only flirts fantastically with the premise of “What would you do if you had knowledge from tomorrow?”
Naturally, it comes at little to no surprise that these self-absorbed individuals – Danielle Panabaker plays Callie, Matt O’Leary plays Finn, and George Finn plays Jasper – each have their own respective game plans in store for how to benefit from such foreknowledge. Jasper wants to make money; Finn wants to perfect his art; and (for those of you watching closely) Callie seemingly has no investment immediately apparent though her involvement comes clear in the final reel. Basically, the script from Bradley King and BP Cooper eeks out plenty of mileage exploring their youthful anxiety, removing any real questions about preserving time and space in their natural order while amping up their respective young lusts. It isn’t a weakness for the plot; rather, everyone embraces this tale of twentysomethings racing to prevent some small(ish) paradoxes, and – on that level – it works just fine.
Well … except that it doesn’t … at least, not entirely.
What the trio uncover is that a deceased scientist has somehow built a camera which takes photographs 24 hours into the future. Jasper – the money hungry one – launches a campaign to obtain tomorrow’s race results today so that he can build a personal fortune for the pursuit of their dreams. However, in days of old (basically when big city newspapers published morning and evening editions) I can see how this may’ve worked without a blemish; in today’s news-at-the-speed-of-computer-clicks society, I’m still having some trouble wrapping my head around how these three could’ve parlayed this scheme into a winning formula. It would seem that our society may have already surpassed the breadth of this rather puny civilization’s wants and demands; and more thought should’ve gone into the plotline in order to really sell the whole shebang.
Otherwise, Time Lapse is a slightly above average thriller that runs longer than it needed at 103 minutes. Performances are fine for what they are (actor Finn is given the lion’s share of the emotional nitty-gritty which he pulls off nicely, though Panabaker and O’Leary seem occasionally lethargic, including some surprisingly non-erotic lovemaking), and direction – framing, cinematography, editing, etc. – came across as a bit unfocused at times. IMDB.com suggests this is King’s first full-feature debut, and methinks the material may’ve meant more in the hands of a more accomplished auteur.
Time Lapse (2014) is produced by Uncooperative Pictures and Veritas Productions. DVD distribution for this release is being handled by XLRator Media. As for the technical specifications? As an independent production, the flick actually makes pretty solid use of limited settings, so kudos to all involved for delivering some great quality sights and sounds. Lastly: are you looking for special features? The disc boasts two commentary tracks – both curiously involving the same filmmakers (???) – as well as some behind-the-scenes stuff and deleted scenes. It’s a nice package for those interested in knowing a bit more.
Mildly Recommended.
The chief problem that I had with Time Lapse is that if you think about any measure of the logic these characters use to reach their decisions, then it’s pretty clear that the central premise doesn’t quite hold up to even modest scrutiny. (I.E. Tomorrow’s newspaper would detail yesterday’s race winners; and if you don’t get it until 8 pm the day in advance then odds are all of those races are well over with … so you wouldn’t be going to the bank much less to the track to make a winning bet to become rich.) Still, overlook that small conceit, focus on the mild drama amongst three self-absorbed friends, and you’re likely to have mild fun with this potboiler.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at XLRator Media provided me with a DVD copy of Time Lapse (2014) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
Frankly, there doesn’t have to be a lot of special effects. As I’ve grown a bit older and definitely a bit wiser (snicker snicker), I’ve realized that it’s the little theatrical moments captured well that make any project worth the price of admission. Like many SciFi fans, I’m particular fond of time travel, but I do prefer that it take a look at what such an endeavor would mean to its individuals characters: all of the world or galaxy-spanning time-travel storylines tend to fall flat on me as I generally find them devoid of personal consequence. There are a great many ideas, but they end up being wasted when they tell me so little about the journeys’ effects on the players.
Storytellers BP Cooper and Bradley King have delivered a mini-opus that’s garnered tremendous praise on the festival circuit … but does Time Lapse (2014) hold up to my simple expectations?
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the product packaging:
“… explores the possibilities of time travel via a camera that takes pictures 24 hours into the future …”
Well, right there, I had the feeling that the wheels had come off this production, definitely so far as the marketing perspective is concerned: there’s no “time travel” in a picture. Instead, what we’re properly dealing with is the explorations of the classic information paradox. Instead of people traveling through time, it’s merely an exchange of data; and it’s that data that is meant to show us something deeper or meaningful about the people. That’s the narrative core of Time Lapse, a teen-angsty-style melodrama that only flirts fantastically with the premise of “What would you do if you had knowledge from tomorrow?”
Naturally, it comes at little to no surprise that these self-absorbed individuals – Danielle Panabaker plays Callie, Matt O’Leary plays Finn, and George Finn plays Jasper – each have their own respective game plans in store for how to benefit from such foreknowledge. Jasper wants to make money; Finn wants to perfect his art; and (for those of you watching closely) Callie seemingly has no investment immediately apparent though her involvement comes clear in the final reel. Basically, the script from Bradley King and BP Cooper eeks out plenty of mileage exploring their youthful anxiety, removing any real questions about preserving time and space in their natural order while amping up their respective young lusts. It isn’t a weakness for the plot; rather, everyone embraces this tale of twentysomethings racing to prevent some small(ish) paradoxes, and – on that level – it works just fine.
Well … except that it doesn’t … at least, not entirely.
What the trio uncover is that a deceased scientist has somehow built a camera which takes photographs 24 hours into the future. Jasper – the money hungry one – launches a campaign to obtain tomorrow’s race results today so that he can build a personal fortune for the pursuit of their dreams. However, in days of old (basically when big city newspapers published morning and evening editions) I can see how this may’ve worked without a blemish; in today’s news-at-the-speed-of-computer-clicks society, I’m still having some trouble wrapping my head around how these three could’ve parlayed this scheme into a winning formula. It would seem that our society may have already surpassed the breadth of this rather puny civilization’s wants and demands; and more thought should’ve gone into the plotline in order to really sell the whole shebang.
Otherwise, Time Lapse is a slightly above average thriller that runs longer than it needed at 103 minutes. Performances are fine for what they are (actor Finn is given the lion’s share of the emotional nitty-gritty which he pulls off nicely, though Panabaker and O’Leary seem occasionally lethargic, including some surprisingly non-erotic lovemaking), and direction – framing, cinematography, editing, etc. – came across as a bit unfocused at times. IMDB.com suggests this is King’s first full-feature debut, and methinks the material may’ve meant more in the hands of a more accomplished auteur.
Time Lapse (2014) is produced by Uncooperative Pictures and Veritas Productions. DVD distribution for this release is being handled by XLRator Media. As for the technical specifications? As an independent production, the flick actually makes pretty solid use of limited settings, so kudos to all involved for delivering some great quality sights and sounds. Lastly: are you looking for special features? The disc boasts two commentary tracks – both curiously involving the same filmmakers (???) – as well as some behind-the-scenes stuff and deleted scenes. It’s a nice package for those interested in knowing a bit more.
Mildly Recommended.
The chief problem that I had with Time Lapse is that if you think about any measure of the logic these characters use to reach their decisions, then it’s pretty clear that the central premise doesn’t quite hold up to even modest scrutiny. (I.E. Tomorrow’s newspaper would detail yesterday’s race winners; and if you don’t get it until 8 pm the day in advance then odds are all of those races are well over with … so you wouldn’t be going to the bank much less to the track to make a winning bet to become rich.) Still, overlook that small conceit, focus on the mild drama amongst three self-absorbed friends, and you’re likely to have mild fun with this potboiler.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at XLRator Media provided me with a DVD copy of Time Lapse (2014) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review; and their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2013 (in the Czech Republic), A Field In England enjoyed its theatrical unveiling when it was first screened for audiences of the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival. Written (in part) and directed by Ben Wheatley, the film starred Julian Barratt, Peter Ferdinando, Ryan Pope, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Amid the Civil War in 17th-century England, a group of deserters flee from battle through an overgrown field. Captured by an alchemist, the men are forced to help him search to find a hidden treasure that he believes is buried in the field."
For the record:
To the film's credit, A Field In England enjoyed a good amount of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
On this day in 2013 (in the Czech Republic), A Field In England enjoyed its theatrical unveiling when it was first screened for audiences of the Karlovy Vary International Film Festival. Written (in part) and directed by Ben Wheatley, the film starred Julian Barratt, Peter Ferdinando, Ryan Pope, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Amid the Civil War in 17th-century England, a group of deserters flee from battle through an overgrown field. Captured by an alchemist, the men are forced to help him search to find a hidden treasure that he believes is buried in the field."
For the record:
To the film's credit, A Field In England enjoyed a good amount of praise from screenings on the film festival circuit.
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so much to celebrate!
On this day in 1962 (in the U.S.), the good people of Miama, Florida were treated to the exclusive theatrical premiere of Panic In Year Zero! Directed by Ray Milland from a story by Jay Simms, John Morton, and Ward Moore, the SciFi/Drama starred Milland alongside Jean Hagen, Frankie Avalon, Mary Mitchel, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A family leaves Los Angeles for a camping trip just before hydrogen bombs destroy the city. In the midst of the chaos, the father must fight to keep his family alive along the highway."
-- EZ
On this day in 1962 (in the U.S.), the good people of Miama, Florida were treated to the exclusive theatrical premiere of Panic In Year Zero! Directed by Ray Milland from a story by Jay Simms, John Morton, and Ward Moore, the SciFi/Drama starred Milland alongside Jean Hagen, Frankie Avalon, Mary Mitchel, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"A family leaves Los Angeles for a camping trip just before hydrogen bombs destroy the city. In the midst of the chaos, the father must fight to keep his family alive along the highway."
-- EZ
- Published on
site update
So many movies ... so little time ...
On this day in 2004 (in France), Atomik Circus (aka Atomik Circus - Le retour de James Bataille) enjoyed its first theatrical screening when it debuted for audiences of the Neuchâtel International Fantasy Film Festival. Directed by Didier and Thierry Poiraud (who both had a hand in the screenplay), the French-language film starred Vanessa Paradis, Jason Flemyng, Benoît Poelvoorde, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"James Bataille escapes from prison to find his fiancée Concia. But on his return, octopussy like aliens come to play bloody spoilsport. After lucky battle James and Concia escape to parallel world."
-- EZ
On this day in 2004 (in France), Atomik Circus (aka Atomik Circus - Le retour de James Bataille) enjoyed its first theatrical screening when it debuted for audiences of the Neuchâtel International Fantasy Film Festival. Directed by Didier and Thierry Poiraud (who both had a hand in the screenplay), the French-language film starred Vanessa Paradis, Jason Flemyng, Benoît Poelvoorde, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"James Bataille escapes from prison to find his fiancée Concia. But on his return, octopussy like aliens come to play bloody spoilsport. After lucky battle James and Concia escape to parallel world."
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so much to celebrate!!!
On this day in 1985 (in Canada and the U.S.), Red Sonja made her first appearance on the silver screen, and she was given the face of Brigitte Nielsen. Directed by Richard Fleischer, the Fantasy film also starred Arnold 'Screw Your Freedoms' Schwarzenegger, Sandahl Bergman, Paul L. Smith, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"The fearless warrior Red Sonja sets out to avenge her family's murder and rid her kingdom from the tyrannical rule of evil Queen Gedren."
For the record:
Some days, you have to take the good with the bad, and such is the film history of the kinda/sorta beloved character of Red Sonja. This particular incarnation, however, never quite fared well with critics or audiences. In fact, the 1986 Razzie Awards gave its lead the 'Worst New Star' honor at its annual ceremony. Ouch.
-- EZ
On this day in 1985 (in Canada and the U.S.), Red Sonja made her first appearance on the silver screen, and she was given the face of Brigitte Nielsen. Directed by Richard Fleischer, the Fantasy film also starred Arnold 'Screw Your Freedoms' Schwarzenegger, Sandahl Bergman, Paul L. Smith, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"The fearless warrior Red Sonja sets out to avenge her family's murder and rid her kingdom from the tyrannical rule of evil Queen Gedren."
For the record:
Some days, you have to take the good with the bad, and such is the film history of the kinda/sorta beloved character of Red Sonja. This particular incarnation, however, never quite fared well with critics or audiences. In fact, the 1986 Razzie Awards gave its lead the 'Worst New Star' honor at its annual ceremony. Ouch.
-- EZ
- Published on
So many movies ... so much to celebrate!!!
On this day in 1985 (in the U.S.), Back To The Future roared onto silver screens, ushering in an all-new Science Fiction and Fantasy franchise for fans. Written (in part) and directed by Robert Zemeckis, the film starred Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Lea Thompson, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Marty McFly, a typical American teenager of the Eighties, is accidentally sent back to 1955 in a plutonium-powered DeLorean "time machine" invented by a slightly mad scientist. During his often hysterical, always amazing trip back in time, Marty must make certain his teenage parents-to-be meet and fall in love - so he can get back to the future."
For the record:
Since its theatrical debut, Back To The Future has established itself as one of Science Fiction's best comedies ... and it continues to earn praise decades after.
-- EZ
On this day in 1985 (in the U.S.), Back To The Future roared onto silver screens, ushering in an all-new Science Fiction and Fantasy franchise for fans. Written (in part) and directed by Robert Zemeckis, the film starred Michael J. Fox, Christopher Lloyd, Lea Thompson, and others.
According to our friends at IMDB.com, here's the plot summary:
"Marty McFly, a typical American teenager of the Eighties, is accidentally sent back to 1955 in a plutonium-powered DeLorean "time machine" invented by a slightly mad scientist. During his often hysterical, always amazing trip back in time, Marty must make certain his teenage parents-to-be meet and fall in love - so he can get back to the future."
For the record:
Since its theatrical debut, Back To The Future has established itself as one of Science Fiction's best comedies ... and it continues to earn praise decades after.
- At the 1986 Academy Awards, the film took home top honors in the category of 'Best Effects - Sound Effects Editing' while missing out on the gold in the categories of 'Best Sound,' 'Best Music - Original Song,' and 'Best Writing - Screenplay Written Directly For The Screen.'
- The 1986 Saturn Awards christened the flick with an incredible nine nominations, but the movers and shakers only went home with trophies in the categories of 'Best Special Effects,' 'Best Actor,' and 'Best Science Fiction Film.'
- Lastly, it won the 1986 Hugo Award for 'Best Dramatic Presentation.'
-- EZ
- Published on
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A group of survivors of the rage virus live on a small island. When one of the group leaves the island on a mission into the mainland, he discovers secrets, wonders, and horrors that have mutated not only the infected but other survivors.”
While I could be wrong on this point, 2002’s 28 Days Later was one of the first zombie films to truly capitalize on the traditional walkers manifesting opposite of the way viewers have grown accustomed to seeing them in film and television. Instead of presenting these threats as the slow-moving, mildly-stumbling variety, these rabid carnivores raced to and fro as if infected equally with some adrenaline high, never stopping, never faltering, never slowing their pace in their pursuit of blood and brains. Suitably, their affliction was called – I believe – the Rage Virus; and the suffers certainly seemed perpetually amped up on rage, indeed.
Structurally, the film was equally a bit of an odd duck. While it began as do a great many zombie projects (in fact, many have cited the somewhat obvious similarities between its opening and that of AMC’s pilot episode of The Walking Dead), the story then descended into the somewhat usual chaos – survivors struggling to both stay alive, remain uneaten, and avoid infection – while setting up its somewhat depressing second half wherein our protagonists learn that life as we know it even amongst the civilized is well over. 2005’s War Of The Worlds – starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg – took the same approach (I’m told its vastly similar to events transpiring in the H.G. Wells novel, but I’ve never confirmed that) with the hero essentially escaping the clutches of Martian overlords only to find himself basically locked in a bunker with a psychotic man who has lost all touch with humanity. The moral of both stories reminds us that civility always remains at risk regardless of circumstance, so be careful what you wish for as it may still inadvertently cost you your very own life.
Now, 2007’s 28 Weeks Later is the kind of sequel audiences get when the original creators of the franchise – Danny Boyle and Alex Garland – step away from the property and leave it in the hands of others. (Yes, I’m well aware that both were involved as producers, but for all I know that could’ve been a contractual agreement and little else.) While it obviously picked up the events transpiring from the Rage Virus somewhat down the road a bit, there was respectably little changes to the world and its people. The project managed to deliver the visceral thrills we’ve come to expect from a good Horror flick; and yet I just found no characters and circumstances truly interesting enough to care about them and their plight. When you begin with the supposition that nothing is going to work out as planned and reach that exact destination, it’s difficult to appreciate the sights and sounds as being anything greater than just that: sights and sounds. Sure, some of it was good, but it just wasn’t all that relevant.
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A group of survivors of the rage virus live on a small island. When one of the group leaves the island on a mission into the mainland, he discovers secrets, wonders, and horrors that have mutated not only the infected but other survivors.”
While I could be wrong on this point, 2002’s 28 Days Later was one of the first zombie films to truly capitalize on the traditional walkers manifesting opposite of the way viewers have grown accustomed to seeing them in film and television. Instead of presenting these threats as the slow-moving, mildly-stumbling variety, these rabid carnivores raced to and fro as if infected equally with some adrenaline high, never stopping, never faltering, never slowing their pace in their pursuit of blood and brains. Suitably, their affliction was called – I believe – the Rage Virus; and the suffers certainly seemed perpetually amped up on rage, indeed.
Structurally, the film was equally a bit of an odd duck. While it began as do a great many zombie projects (in fact, many have cited the somewhat obvious similarities between its opening and that of AMC’s pilot episode of The Walking Dead), the story then descended into the somewhat usual chaos – survivors struggling to both stay alive, remain uneaten, and avoid infection – while setting up its somewhat depressing second half wherein our protagonists learn that life as we know it even amongst the civilized is well over. 2005’s War Of The Worlds – starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg – took the same approach (I’m told its vastly similar to events transpiring in the H.G. Wells novel, but I’ve never confirmed that) with the hero essentially escaping the clutches of Martian overlords only to find himself basically locked in a bunker with a psychotic man who has lost all touch with humanity. The moral of both stories reminds us that civility always remains at risk regardless of circumstance, so be careful what you wish for as it may still inadvertently cost you your very own life.
Now, 2007’s 28 Weeks Later is the kind of sequel audiences get when the original creators of the franchise – Danny Boyle and Alex Garland – step away from the property and leave it in the hands of others. (Yes, I’m well aware that both were involved as producers, but for all I know that could’ve been a contractual agreement and little else.) While it obviously picked up the events transpiring from the Rage Virus somewhat down the road a bit, there was respectably little changes to the world and its people. The project managed to deliver the visceral thrills we’ve come to expect from a good Horror flick; and yet I just found no characters and circumstances truly interesting enough to care about them and their plight. When you begin with the supposition that nothing is going to work out as planned and reach that exact destination, it’s difficult to appreciate the sights and sounds as being anything greater than just that: sights and sounds. Sure, some of it was good, but it just wasn’t all that relevant.
All of this now brings us to 28 Years Later, the project which thankfully brought Boyle and Garland back to the world fully that they created; and – for better or for worse – they’ve expanding on this cinematic universe not so much by going bigger and bolder but, rather, going smaller, closer, and more intimate.
The world outside of merry old England and the island of Lindisfarne has largely returned to normal, but life, too, goes on within the Quarantine Zone. Largely cordoned off from the rest of mankind by the sea as well as any manmade structures, these people have done the best they can to put their little corner of civilization back together, establishing an old-fashioned commune on the island that assures them a good degree of safety from the remaining infected. But as they’re still putting society back in order, there are rules that much be followed – as well as roles that must be filled – and there is zero tolerance for anyone ‘bucking the system’ for their own personal benefit.
Spike (played by newcomer Alfie Williams) is a young lad just entering his teenage years; and, as such, he is being asked to step into a role of greater responsibility within the village. Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) has been training the boy on how to hunt and scavenge on the nearby mainland, instructing him on how to both track and hunt anything – and that does mean anything, zombies included – that comes into their sight while foraging for scraps. The trouble at home, however, is that Isla (Jodie Comer) – Spike’s mother – has grown increasingly ill; and the lad sees her condition both as requiring him to instead serve as the dutiful son as well as a potential protector of their family. Naturally, this has the boy questioning just what he can do in the community as he’s unwilling to sacrifice the love he holds dear for his mom.
Without spoiling the lion’s share of 28 Years Later’s first half, the tale rather expertly takes viewers through Spike’s grand introduction to the world at large. He and Jamie travel to the mainland, get caught up in a respectable degree of chaos, and must fight against the elements to make it back to the island. Of course, it’s handled in such a way as to suggest that he’s maturing in the process, but circumstances evolve which puts him (and us) at odds with such growth, suggesting that perhaps he is not yet the man society needs him to be. What we learn, however, is that he’s still precisely where his heart and duty require as Isla’s failing health forces him to step into those adult shoes more comfortably (and nobly) than hunting and killing ever could. Together, mother and son set out on a journey seeking a cure for what she’s suffering, allowing the two to share in a kinda/sorta vision quest exploring what life and love might look like well after the Zombie Apocalypse turns the world to … well … complete and utter sh#t.
The world outside of merry old England and the island of Lindisfarne has largely returned to normal, but life, too, goes on within the Quarantine Zone. Largely cordoned off from the rest of mankind by the sea as well as any manmade structures, these people have done the best they can to put their little corner of civilization back together, establishing an old-fashioned commune on the island that assures them a good degree of safety from the remaining infected. But as they’re still putting society back in order, there are rules that much be followed – as well as roles that must be filled – and there is zero tolerance for anyone ‘bucking the system’ for their own personal benefit.
Spike (played by newcomer Alfie Williams) is a young lad just entering his teenage years; and, as such, he is being asked to step into a role of greater responsibility within the village. Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) has been training the boy on how to hunt and scavenge on the nearby mainland, instructing him on how to both track and hunt anything – and that does mean anything, zombies included – that comes into their sight while foraging for scraps. The trouble at home, however, is that Isla (Jodie Comer) – Spike’s mother – has grown increasingly ill; and the lad sees her condition both as requiring him to instead serve as the dutiful son as well as a potential protector of their family. Naturally, this has the boy questioning just what he can do in the community as he’s unwilling to sacrifice the love he holds dear for his mom.
Without spoiling the lion’s share of 28 Years Later’s first half, the tale rather expertly takes viewers through Spike’s grand introduction to the world at large. He and Jamie travel to the mainland, get caught up in a respectable degree of chaos, and must fight against the elements to make it back to the island. Of course, it’s handled in such a way as to suggest that he’s maturing in the process, but circumstances evolve which puts him (and us) at odds with such growth, suggesting that perhaps he is not yet the man society needs him to be. What we learn, however, is that he’s still precisely where his heart and duty require as Isla’s failing health forces him to step into those adult shoes more comfortably (and nobly) than hunting and killing ever could. Together, mother and son set out on a journey seeking a cure for what she’s suffering, allowing the two to share in a kinda/sorta vision quest exploring what life and love might look like well after the Zombie Apocalypse turns the world to … well … complete and utter sh#t.
If it hasn’t become clear yet, then allow me to say it succinctly: 28 Years Later is far from the traditional Horror flick but less yet one more theatrical adventure amongst the walking dead. This is a story with heart and soul – something which I suspect a great many of viewers went in not expecting – and the trouble with the infected truly serve ‘second fiddle’ to the main plotline of losing adolescence while finding one’s purpose in life. What Spike learns isn’t exactly the kind of thing we look for in the traditional chiller, and yet Garland’s script has crafted a (mostly) plausible maturation tale that works (mostly) every time it’s tried. Some may disagree with the film’s inevitably simplicity, and some might even argue that it was all a bit too easy for the boy to haul his semi-conscious mother across a wooded wasteland in pursuit of nothing more than affordable healthcare. Those nitpicks can’t change the fact that, mechanically, all of this comes together the way it should.
Also, I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that 28 Years Later’s second half has the great Ralph Fiennes in the role of Dr. Kelson – the healer being sought – turning in what looks like an effortless performance. When the rest of mankind fled, Kelson stayed. Where the rest of humanity chose to ignore, the physician remained true to his medical oath; and he stayed committed to (in an admittedly bizarre fashion) seeing such end-of-life care be administered regardless of race, color, creed, gender, political affiliation, or infection status. The actor really turns in a bravura performance, so much so that it likely helps smooth out a few of the wrinkles in a mildly predictable turn of events; and the film is vastly better for his participation in it than it likely would’ve been otherwise.
Nothing escapes completely unharmed here, and the same could be said for the film as a whole. Once Spike has learned his lesson and accepted what he personally believes his fate should be, he opts to remain in the wilderness, refusing to return to the safety and comfort of the island. (I’ll not say that I agree with his choice, nor do I understand it perfectly, but it is what it is.) Rather than properly end his story at this juncture, producers tacked on a curious closing scene that has the young man running into another group of survivors, some track-suit-wearing Irishmen (and women) who rather irreverently dispatch a band of zombies hellbent on chowing down on Spike. From what I’ve read, this was attached entirely to set up a forthcoming sequel – 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple – set to hit theaters in 2026.
Yes, this closing kinda/sorta cheapens the picture as a whole. Yes, I think it would’ve been better simply closing out Spike’s awakening entirely on its own. But, as a critic, I don’t make those decisions; and I can only hope what is yet to be explored will be handled with as much reverence as this chapter was. Otherwise … yeah, it smacks of an unnecessary cash grab.
Also, I’d be remiss if I failed to mention that 28 Years Later’s second half has the great Ralph Fiennes in the role of Dr. Kelson – the healer being sought – turning in what looks like an effortless performance. When the rest of mankind fled, Kelson stayed. Where the rest of humanity chose to ignore, the physician remained true to his medical oath; and he stayed committed to (in an admittedly bizarre fashion) seeing such end-of-life care be administered regardless of race, color, creed, gender, political affiliation, or infection status. The actor really turns in a bravura performance, so much so that it likely helps smooth out a few of the wrinkles in a mildly predictable turn of events; and the film is vastly better for his participation in it than it likely would’ve been otherwise.
Nothing escapes completely unharmed here, and the same could be said for the film as a whole. Once Spike has learned his lesson and accepted what he personally believes his fate should be, he opts to remain in the wilderness, refusing to return to the safety and comfort of the island. (I’ll not say that I agree with his choice, nor do I understand it perfectly, but it is what it is.) Rather than properly end his story at this juncture, producers tacked on a curious closing scene that has the young man running into another group of survivors, some track-suit-wearing Irishmen (and women) who rather irreverently dispatch a band of zombies hellbent on chowing down on Spike. From what I’ve read, this was attached entirely to set up a forthcoming sequel – 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple – set to hit theaters in 2026.
Yes, this closing kinda/sorta cheapens the picture as a whole. Yes, I think it would’ve been better simply closing out Spike’s awakening entirely on its own. But, as a critic, I don’t make those decisions; and I can only hope what is yet to be explored will be handled with as much reverence as this chapter was. Otherwise … yeah, it smacks of an unnecessary cash grab.
28 Years Later (2025) was produced by TSG Entertainment, DNA Films, British Film Institute (BFI), Danny Boyle, and Decibel Films. The film is presently available in various countries around the world on its initial theatrical run. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I’d still concede that the feature is honestly a bit of a mixed bag: some of the cinematography is expressive and brilliant while other bits are a bit underwhelming and, sometimes, maybe even confusing. Also, there are a few sequences wherein the editing choices were a bit curious, never quite settling on a scene long enough for me to determine what I’m supposed to be looking at. A great deal of hubbub has been made about the flick being shot entirely on iPhones … and, sadly, yeah, a few spots look like they were shot on an iPhone. True ‘dat.
Highly Recommended.
Unfortunately, I think one’s opinion of 28 Years Later (2025) is fundamentally going to boil down to what one expects from a zombie picture. If it’s chiefly “kills and gore aplenty,” then you’re liable to be a bit disappointed. However, if you’re looking for a quirky coming-of-age story about a young boy on the cusp of adolescence trying to find the right moral path in a world where morality is fungible, then you’re come to the right place. Now, I do have some quibbles with the way it was rather effortless for young Spike to accomplish so much with so little time and (authentic) training; but still I think the film excels in finding small ways to tug at the heart of the audience without bolstering its prospects with gnashing teeth chewing their bloody way into our bloody chests.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to absolutely no one for my review of 28 Years Later (2025) as I viewed the film theatrically with the purchase of my own ticket.
-- EZ
Highly Recommended.
Unfortunately, I think one’s opinion of 28 Years Later (2025) is fundamentally going to boil down to what one expects from a zombie picture. If it’s chiefly “kills and gore aplenty,” then you’re liable to be a bit disappointed. However, if you’re looking for a quirky coming-of-age story about a young boy on the cusp of adolescence trying to find the right moral path in a world where morality is fungible, then you’re come to the right place. Now, I do have some quibbles with the way it was rather effortless for young Spike to accomplish so much with so little time and (authentic) training; but still I think the film excels in finding small ways to tug at the heart of the audience without bolstering its prospects with gnashing teeth chewing their bloody way into our bloody chests.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to absolutely no one for my review of 28 Years Later (2025) as I viewed the film theatrically with the purchase of my own ticket.
-- EZ
- Published on
Truth be told, I wasn't a big fan of the 1987 incarnation of The Running Man.
Honestly, the best I could really say is that I didn't dislike it. I appreciated its high camp sensibilities -- which it most definitely had -- and I think it arguably had a great cast that helped to put Arnold 'Screw Your Freedoms' Schwarzenegger through the paces. Based on the novel by Stephen King, the film was directed by actor-turned-director Paul Michael Glaser; and it definitely imbued the proper social satire on a world wherein only the best of us were forced to run for our lives. Such a premise gets kicked around in various iterations in Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror, so much so that I guess -- what with today's climate -- that it'll always be a subject ripe for do-overs.
Frankly, I didn't expect all that much from a second coming of the intellectual property; and yet the theatrical trailer for 2025's The Running Man dropped this morning ... which looks suprisingly fun. Yes, there's more than a fair share of predictability to the concept -- as I said, it isn't as if this kind of thing hasn't been done before -- but with Glen Powell emerging as a potential contender for the next big box office sensation (walking firmly in Tom Cruise's footsteps) this could be a hit in the making.
As always, I'll let the readership make up their own mind on that subject.
The trailer is below.
You know you love to watch.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
Honestly, the best I could really say is that I didn't dislike it. I appreciated its high camp sensibilities -- which it most definitely had -- and I think it arguably had a great cast that helped to put Arnold 'Screw Your Freedoms' Schwarzenegger through the paces. Based on the novel by Stephen King, the film was directed by actor-turned-director Paul Michael Glaser; and it definitely imbued the proper social satire on a world wherein only the best of us were forced to run for our lives. Such a premise gets kicked around in various iterations in Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror, so much so that I guess -- what with today's climate -- that it'll always be a subject ripe for do-overs.
Frankly, I didn't expect all that much from a second coming of the intellectual property; and yet the theatrical trailer for 2025's The Running Man dropped this morning ... which looks suprisingly fun. Yes, there's more than a fair share of predictability to the concept -- as I said, it isn't as if this kind of thing hasn't been done before -- but with Glen Powell emerging as a potential contender for the next big box office sensation (walking firmly in Tom Cruise's footsteps) this could be a hit in the making.
As always, I'll let the readership make up their own mind on that subject.
The trailer is below.
You know you love to watch.
As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!
-- EZ
- Published on
Here’s the thing, folks …
Honestly, there was a time when filmmakers lived to tell stories about p-e-o-p-l-e. For the most part, these various and asunder characters were relatable or – at the very least – recognizable to a great portion of the viewing audience; and whatever emotional highs and lows they endured resonated with watchers in ways that made us laugh, sometimes made us cry, and even – believe it or not – made us cheer. I couldn’t say when exactly but somewhere along the way these storytellers – for reasons I won’t pretend to understand – decided that enough was enough: instead of weaving magical theatrical spells about these various souls they invested more intensely in the stories themselves. In their eyes, the players didn’t matter as much as the journeys you put them through; and – in the course of this ‘reinvention’ – what slowly bubbled to the surface was glaring evidence of that age old adage that there are only seven stories.
Have you heard that one?
As it goes, someone sometime far smarter than I came up with the concept of there only being seven different stories that any storyteller could functional tell. (Google it, if you’re inclined: I won’t do any deep dive on the idea because that’s not the point I’m making.) Basically, the idea is that there are abstractly only a handful of variations on a theme; so scriptwriters, authors, and anyone with a pen figured that the people in these plays weren’t as important as the premise. (You know what there is an infinite number of? Characters.) Rather than expend serious effort on crafting men and women of interest, these faces were given second-class status to the stories they inhabited. While no one in the entertainment likes to admit it, the end result is that they’ve been delivering an endless number of rehashes, which is why nothing seems all that original any more.
It's precisely because of the existence of this phenomenon that I’ll praise a flick like The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) every opportunity I get. Unlike the usual drivel that studios and independents have been subjecting mankind to for decades, this picture damn near requires an investment on the part of the viewer in the c-h-a-r-a-c-t-e-r-s. They’ll make you laugh (again). They might even make you cry (again). They’ll warm your heart (the way good people were supposed to); and – you know what? – they might even make you occasionally cringe over their respective failures. Dare I say that we’ve all known someone that these personalities remind of us; and it’s this slowly creeping resonance that pulls you in, captures your attention, and maybe makes you – like it did me – wish for a time when we could go back and enjoy stories about people again as opposed to people participating in a story.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
Honestly, there was a time when filmmakers lived to tell stories about p-e-o-p-l-e. For the most part, these various and asunder characters were relatable or – at the very least – recognizable to a great portion of the viewing audience; and whatever emotional highs and lows they endured resonated with watchers in ways that made us laugh, sometimes made us cry, and even – believe it or not – made us cheer. I couldn’t say when exactly but somewhere along the way these storytellers – for reasons I won’t pretend to understand – decided that enough was enough: instead of weaving magical theatrical spells about these various souls they invested more intensely in the stories themselves. In their eyes, the players didn’t matter as much as the journeys you put them through; and – in the course of this ‘reinvention’ – what slowly bubbled to the surface was glaring evidence of that age old adage that there are only seven stories.
Have you heard that one?
As it goes, someone sometime far smarter than I came up with the concept of there only being seven different stories that any storyteller could functional tell. (Google it, if you’re inclined: I won’t do any deep dive on the idea because that’s not the point I’m making.) Basically, the idea is that there are abstractly only a handful of variations on a theme; so scriptwriters, authors, and anyone with a pen figured that the people in these plays weren’t as important as the premise. (You know what there is an infinite number of? Characters.) Rather than expend serious effort on crafting men and women of interest, these faces were given second-class status to the stories they inhabited. While no one in the entertainment likes to admit it, the end result is that they’ve been delivering an endless number of rehashes, which is why nothing seems all that original any more.
It's precisely because of the existence of this phenomenon that I’ll praise a flick like The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) every opportunity I get. Unlike the usual drivel that studios and independents have been subjecting mankind to for decades, this picture damn near requires an investment on the part of the viewer in the c-h-a-r-a-c-t-e-r-s. They’ll make you laugh (again). They might even make you cry (again). They’ll warm your heart (the way good people were supposed to); and – you know what? – they might even make you occasionally cringe over their respective failures. Dare I say that we’ve all known someone that these personalities remind of us; and it’s this slowly creeping resonance that pulls you in, captures your attention, and maybe makes you – like it did me – wish for a time when we could go back and enjoy stories about people again as opposed to people participating in a story.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“An eccentric lottery winner who lives alone on a remote island tries to make his fantasies come true by getting his favorite musicians to perform at his home.”
I’ve an admitted fondness for films about knuckleheads mostly because I figure myself to be one; and Wallis Island features one of the best roles of the lovable doofus in years.
Charles Heath (played by Tim Key) won the national lottery not once but twice; and one might think that the resulting world tour he and his wife took after winning might have given him a bit more … erm … self-awareness. He isn’t a bad bloke by any stretch of the imagination, but he’s a bit curiously aloof, often speaking in either dated euphemisms or mildly inaccurate slang to express his personal adulation instead of an accurate stating of fact. He’s a goofball – once without an ounce of arrogance – and he’s chosen to live out his life on his terms, residing in a rather simple dwelling on an island populated by … well … let’s say “less than one hundred.” (That’ll make perfect sense once you see the flick.)
Five years after the unfortunate death of his wife, Charles decides he wants to do something grand to both celebrate her memory as well as the time they spent together; so he hatches the plan to get their favorite folk group – McGwyer Mortimer – back together for a last big concert. However, the truth is that Herb McGwyer (Tom Basden) and Nell Mortimer (Carey Mulligan) broke up under the strain of a failed partnership and drastically went their separate ways, meaning that a reunion will require a bit of helpful misdirection on the part of their host. Because Charles already suffers from the ability to kinda/sorta only say as little as is required, he’s a natural for this kind of matchmaking even though it obviously comes with sufficient risk. But he has the money to arrange for such a private affair, and since both McGwyer and Mortimer find themselves in need of cash it’s a match made in movie magic … or thereabouts.
The beauty of Island’s script is that it’s an exceedingly slim cast in which all of the lead players had some skin in the game. Key and Basden wrote the script, and they – along with Mulligan – are all credited here as executive producers. Clearly, it was a labor of love to translate their short film (of the same story) instead something much more intricate and involved; and the end result is as humorous as it is heartfelt with each player’s respective idiosyncrasies somehow bubbling to the surface and telling audiences something interesting about the human condition. We’re all imperfect; and – though we’re trying to make the best of these trips around the sun – we’re prone to mistakes. How we resolve them is as important as our messing up in the first place; and Island’s narrative reminds us always to never take ourselves so seriously that we miss out on simply living every moment to its fullest.
“An eccentric lottery winner who lives alone on a remote island tries to make his fantasies come true by getting his favorite musicians to perform at his home.”
I’ve an admitted fondness for films about knuckleheads mostly because I figure myself to be one; and Wallis Island features one of the best roles of the lovable doofus in years.
Charles Heath (played by Tim Key) won the national lottery not once but twice; and one might think that the resulting world tour he and his wife took after winning might have given him a bit more … erm … self-awareness. He isn’t a bad bloke by any stretch of the imagination, but he’s a bit curiously aloof, often speaking in either dated euphemisms or mildly inaccurate slang to express his personal adulation instead of an accurate stating of fact. He’s a goofball – once without an ounce of arrogance – and he’s chosen to live out his life on his terms, residing in a rather simple dwelling on an island populated by … well … let’s say “less than one hundred.” (That’ll make perfect sense once you see the flick.)
Five years after the unfortunate death of his wife, Charles decides he wants to do something grand to both celebrate her memory as well as the time they spent together; so he hatches the plan to get their favorite folk group – McGwyer Mortimer – back together for a last big concert. However, the truth is that Herb McGwyer (Tom Basden) and Nell Mortimer (Carey Mulligan) broke up under the strain of a failed partnership and drastically went their separate ways, meaning that a reunion will require a bit of helpful misdirection on the part of their host. Because Charles already suffers from the ability to kinda/sorta only say as little as is required, he’s a natural for this kind of matchmaking even though it obviously comes with sufficient risk. But he has the money to arrange for such a private affair, and since both McGwyer and Mortimer find themselves in need of cash it’s a match made in movie magic … or thereabouts.
The beauty of Island’s script is that it’s an exceedingly slim cast in which all of the lead players had some skin in the game. Key and Basden wrote the script, and they – along with Mulligan – are all credited here as executive producers. Clearly, it was a labor of love to translate their short film (of the same story) instead something much more intricate and involved; and the end result is as humorous as it is heartfelt with each player’s respective idiosyncrasies somehow bubbling to the surface and telling audiences something interesting about the human condition. We’re all imperfect; and – though we’re trying to make the best of these trips around the sun – we’re prone to mistakes. How we resolve them is as important as our messing up in the first place; and Island’s narrative reminds us always to never take ourselves so seriously that we miss out on simply living every moment to its fullest.
Additionally, this might be one of the better ensembles I’ve had the good fortune to watch because the principles were so invested. As they’ve obviously spent a great deal of time with these characters, the players should be commended for bringing them to life so vividly in moments big and small. Basden is wonderfully dour and equally self-absorbed in ways too many to count, and Mulligan projects the kind of curious spontaneity we’re probably all imbued with as children but somehow lose in the process of growing up. Key is the catalyst pushing these two back together – at least, so far as that can happen at this point in their lives – and he provides an incredible number of laughs with his verbal and behavioral quirks which likely remind each of us of a time when we likely did something as unintentionally inane.
The result? It’s all magic. Sheer movie magic. And it’s the likes of which I wish we saw more of these days.
The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) was produced by Focus Features, Baby Cow Productions, Moxie Pictures, and BBC Studios. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Allied Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights and sounds to be exceptional from start to finish: there are a few sequences wherein the audio seemed a bit muddled, but it could be just my untrained ear handling a mild accent here and there. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Alas, not a one. A big, big miss, if you ask me. I would’ve loved to spend more time in this universe … but I did purchase the soundtrack from iTunes, so there’s that.
Highest Recommendation Possible.
For clarity’s sake, this isn’t a genre picture in any regard; and, yet, I’ll easily chalk up The Ballad Of Wallis Island as one of my personal favorites for 2025 thus far. It’s funny. It’s touching. It’s moving. It’s relatable. It reminds me of what drew me to watching films about characters in the first place, what with its spot on and nuanced performances across the board along with a story that never – NEVER – surpasses the importance of understanding the people caught up in this delicate web called life. Thankfully, it chucks the formulaic ending out the window but still manages to deliver a message that happiness remains elusive only if you’re looking for it in the wrong place.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
The result? It’s all magic. Sheer movie magic. And it’s the likes of which I wish we saw more of these days.
The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) was produced by Focus Features, Baby Cow Productions, Moxie Pictures, and BBC Studios. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Allied Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? While I’m no trained video expert, I found the provided sights and sounds to be exceptional from start to finish: there are a few sequences wherein the audio seemed a bit muddled, but it could be just my untrained ear handling a mild accent here and there. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Alas, not a one. A big, big miss, if you ask me. I would’ve loved to spend more time in this universe … but I did purchase the soundtrack from iTunes, so there’s that.
Highest Recommendation Possible.
For clarity’s sake, this isn’t a genre picture in any regard; and, yet, I’ll easily chalk up The Ballad Of Wallis Island as one of my personal favorites for 2025 thus far. It’s funny. It’s touching. It’s moving. It’s relatable. It reminds me of what drew me to watching films about characters in the first place, what with its spot on and nuanced performances across the board along with a story that never – NEVER – surpasses the importance of understanding the people caught up in this delicate web called life. Thankfully, it chucks the formulaic ending out the window but still manages to deliver a message that happiness remains elusive only if you’re looking for it in the wrong place.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of The Ballad Of Wallis Island (2025) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
- Published on
Sometimes the secret to enjoying an older film is to simply appreciate what the storytellers were able to accomplish with greater restrictions placed upon them by society and the movie industry of their day.
Now, that shouldn’t replace the requirements that producers, directors, and screenwriters still manage to deliver a finished product that excels. My point is that something that’s been done before – like the big screen police procedural – isn’t always easy to perfect because there have been so many of them. The 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s saw a great deal of them brought to life as the requisite formula evolved to include more grittiness as standards relaxed; and quite a few of them continue to score points deservedly and win fans decades later. Granted, not all of them have aged as well as others; and this is why it’s sometimes important to remember what was accomplished against stricter scrutiny as the end product could’ve been a bit visionary for its time and place.
Such could be said of 1962’s Experiment In Terror.
While it’s largely regarded as a bit of an ‘odd duck’ in director Blake Edwards’ catalogue (FYI: he was chiefly known for comedies, and this crime/thriller is completely void of laughs), the title might still be forgotten when compared to so many tighter stories that came out of the same era much less the more kinetic and riveting ones that emerged in the 1970’s. Still, there are some ingredients that Edwards arguably got right in this tense melodrama between a master criminal and the smart women he puts through the paces; and I’ll try to highlight those as everything else squeezed into the overlong script feels a bit too routine in comparison.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A man with an asthmatic voice telephones and assaults clerk Kelly Sherwood at home and coerces her into helping him steal a large sum from her bank.”
Now, that shouldn’t replace the requirements that producers, directors, and screenwriters still manage to deliver a finished product that excels. My point is that something that’s been done before – like the big screen police procedural – isn’t always easy to perfect because there have been so many of them. The 1950’s, 1960’s, and 1970’s saw a great deal of them brought to life as the requisite formula evolved to include more grittiness as standards relaxed; and quite a few of them continue to score points deservedly and win fans decades later. Granted, not all of them have aged as well as others; and this is why it’s sometimes important to remember what was accomplished against stricter scrutiny as the end product could’ve been a bit visionary for its time and place.
Such could be said of 1962’s Experiment In Terror.
While it’s largely regarded as a bit of an ‘odd duck’ in director Blake Edwards’ catalogue (FYI: he was chiefly known for comedies, and this crime/thriller is completely void of laughs), the title might still be forgotten when compared to so many tighter stories that came out of the same era much less the more kinetic and riveting ones that emerged in the 1970’s. Still, there are some ingredients that Edwards arguably got right in this tense melodrama between a master criminal and the smart women he puts through the paces; and I’ll try to highlight those as everything else squeezed into the overlong script feels a bit too routine in comparison.
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters. If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment. If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A man with an asthmatic voice telephones and assaults clerk Kelly Sherwood at home and coerces her into helping him steal a large sum from her bank.”
A quick glance at box office information regarding Experiment In Terror shows that while the picture wasn’t a financial failure it really only performed middlingly, a curious assessment given my particular impression with the feature. It – as a whole – really only hits the middle of the road. Though critically praised online and at movie websites like IMDB.com, Metacritic.com, and Rotten Tomatoes, it just never quite soars the way I expected it except in small ways that deserves some greater reflection. Essentially, Experiment is a bit of a caper story, the kind where an architect plots out what he believes to be a perfect crime; but would there really be all that much to tell if it all went off without a hitch?
Garland Humphrey ‘Red’ Lynch (as played by Ross Martin) has devised a means to pull off a bank heist while keeping his hands surprisingly free of such dirty work. Through observation and research, he learns the identities of bank tellers and then goes about the business of studying their lives – along with associated friends and acquaintances – to learn wherein there could be a relationship worthy of exploiting. By doing so, he’s mastered the art of finding an accomplice he can require to steal whatever sum he needs, promising to reward the thief with a small pay-off for the time and effort to make it all a reality. Yes, it requires a bit of thuggery to get the good-hearted man or woman to cooperate, but Red is certainly up for that task, proving that he’s good for more than merely planning.
Enter Kelly Sherwood (Lee Remick), that noble girl-next-door lady who spends her days as a teller so that she can make enough money to keep a house over her head for her and her kid sister, Toby (Stefanie Powers). Red corners her one evening in her garage and threatens Toby’s life unless the lady is willing to – upon his demand – walk out of the bank with a cool $100,000 to purchase their freedom and safety. Naturally, there would be a heavy price to pay if Kelly went to the authorities, and he proves only moments later that he’s keeping an eye on the two of them to avoid any such eventuality. Indeed, Kelly quickly realizes she’s no other choice but to do as the man commands … or else.
Normally, that would be enough of a set-up to weave a reasonably interesting yarn, but Experiment – as based on the novel by Gordon and Mildred Gordon – ratchets up the tension by involving Federal Bureau of Investigation agent John Ripley (Glenn Ford) and his crack squad of do-gooders. They figure out a workaround to avoid their being spied by Lynch, and this opens the door for a variety of sequences in which Experiment turns into a rather predictable procedural wherein law enforcement officers go about the task of uncovering Red’s identity as well as tie-ins to previous robberies and maybe even the suggestion of motivation for why he needs such a sum as quickly as he does. While good, this isn’t the kind of thing that hasn’t been done before (and better, frankly), but Ford arguably makes the most of the effort, carrying the picture through a great deal of standardized moments.
Chiefly, I can’t help but wonder if some of the film’s pacing problems might be owed to the source material. Adaptations can be a difficult prospect, especially when the authors are also contracted to pen the resulting screenplay (as was the case here); and their affinity for retaining what they felt were strong points of a novel perhaps could’ve used the perspective of a potential rewrite. What works in a book doesn’t always translate well to the screen; and the resulting slow pace here suggests that the Gordons may’ve been too enamored with the book’s structure instead of properly revising it for film. Being unfamiliar with their book, I can’t say for certain; and yet I’m willing to bet money the parallels probably rack up fairly quickly. A trim here and there might’ve made this one memorable beyond its best bits, but – as is often the case – we’ll never know for sure.
Garland Humphrey ‘Red’ Lynch (as played by Ross Martin) has devised a means to pull off a bank heist while keeping his hands surprisingly free of such dirty work. Through observation and research, he learns the identities of bank tellers and then goes about the business of studying their lives – along with associated friends and acquaintances – to learn wherein there could be a relationship worthy of exploiting. By doing so, he’s mastered the art of finding an accomplice he can require to steal whatever sum he needs, promising to reward the thief with a small pay-off for the time and effort to make it all a reality. Yes, it requires a bit of thuggery to get the good-hearted man or woman to cooperate, but Red is certainly up for that task, proving that he’s good for more than merely planning.
Enter Kelly Sherwood (Lee Remick), that noble girl-next-door lady who spends her days as a teller so that she can make enough money to keep a house over her head for her and her kid sister, Toby (Stefanie Powers). Red corners her one evening in her garage and threatens Toby’s life unless the lady is willing to – upon his demand – walk out of the bank with a cool $100,000 to purchase their freedom and safety. Naturally, there would be a heavy price to pay if Kelly went to the authorities, and he proves only moments later that he’s keeping an eye on the two of them to avoid any such eventuality. Indeed, Kelly quickly realizes she’s no other choice but to do as the man commands … or else.
Normally, that would be enough of a set-up to weave a reasonably interesting yarn, but Experiment – as based on the novel by Gordon and Mildred Gordon – ratchets up the tension by involving Federal Bureau of Investigation agent John Ripley (Glenn Ford) and his crack squad of do-gooders. They figure out a workaround to avoid their being spied by Lynch, and this opens the door for a variety of sequences in which Experiment turns into a rather predictable procedural wherein law enforcement officers go about the task of uncovering Red’s identity as well as tie-ins to previous robberies and maybe even the suggestion of motivation for why he needs such a sum as quickly as he does. While good, this isn’t the kind of thing that hasn’t been done before (and better, frankly), but Ford arguably makes the most of the effort, carrying the picture through a great deal of standardized moments.
Chiefly, I can’t help but wonder if some of the film’s pacing problems might be owed to the source material. Adaptations can be a difficult prospect, especially when the authors are also contracted to pen the resulting screenplay (as was the case here); and their affinity for retaining what they felt were strong points of a novel perhaps could’ve used the perspective of a potential rewrite. What works in a book doesn’t always translate well to the screen; and the resulting slow pace here suggests that the Gordons may’ve been too enamored with the book’s structure instead of properly revising it for film. Being unfamiliar with their book, I can’t say for certain; and yet I’m willing to bet money the parallels probably rack up fairly quickly. A trim here and there might’ve made this one memorable beyond its best bits, but – as is often the case – we’ll never know for sure.
For what’s it’s worth, Experiment’s best bits are those that stick to the high crime atmosphere so eloquently set up in the film’s opening.
While I’d never describe the script as tight in any estimation, the sequences between Lynch and Sherwood simmer with palpable tension; and – as the plot develops – the two continue pressing one another’s button deliciously as their circumstances evolve. Martin makes for an impressive screen heavy – while he plays the part of the villain with a measure of expectedness, it’s still convincing enough to carry the picture through its many, many, many quiet moments – and Remick is the kind of gal audiences root for even though we’re all too aware that she likely doesn’t have the stuff to stand toe-to-toe with her antagonist. Sadly, the film spends far too much time in police procedural stuff that just isn’t that interesting; and there’s a late-breaking motivation subplot that kinda/sorta suggests maybe we should all feel sorry for Lynch. Could he be a bad guy doing the wrong thing for the right reason? Well, if you stand for justice, you don’t really care for such social politicking; and I think a better flick could’ve emerged if that premise had been culled in the editing room.
Experiment In Terror (1962) was produced by Geoffrey-Kate Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Sony via Allied Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? Wowza. While I’m no trained video expert, this black-and-white production looks exceptionally noirish from start to finish: there’s a bit of grain in some sequences, but methinks that’s largely owed to the fact that so much of the dark rendered in close-ups can and will show a bit of dissolution over the years. Still, the cinematography is to be commended. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Alas, this release hasn’t a one, and that’s a big miss for this old school film junkie.
Recommended, but …
I’d be remiss if I failed to admit that I found a good portion of Experiment In Terror not only dated but a bit of a narrative slog. Sadly, we’ve seen police procedurals hundreds if not thousands of times; and when your finished product both feels and works like so many of those the freshness of the better moments have to perform on another level, which doesn’t quite happen here. The crime scenes – the opening, the telephone calls between the perpetrator and those he’s manipulating, the big crowd showdown, etc. – are exceptional. But the stuff in between? Well … we’ve been there and done that all too often, so this one could’ve used a bit of polish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Experiment In Terror (1962) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ
While I’d never describe the script as tight in any estimation, the sequences between Lynch and Sherwood simmer with palpable tension; and – as the plot develops – the two continue pressing one another’s button deliciously as their circumstances evolve. Martin makes for an impressive screen heavy – while he plays the part of the villain with a measure of expectedness, it’s still convincing enough to carry the picture through its many, many, many quiet moments – and Remick is the kind of gal audiences root for even though we’re all too aware that she likely doesn’t have the stuff to stand toe-to-toe with her antagonist. Sadly, the film spends far too much time in police procedural stuff that just isn’t that interesting; and there’s a late-breaking motivation subplot that kinda/sorta suggests maybe we should all feel sorry for Lynch. Could he be a bad guy doing the wrong thing for the right reason? Well, if you stand for justice, you don’t really care for such social politicking; and I think a better flick could’ve emerged if that premise had been culled in the editing room.
Experiment In Terror (1962) was produced by Geoffrey-Kate Productions. DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Sony via Allied Vaughn. As for the technical specifications? Wowza. While I’m no trained video expert, this black-and-white production looks exceptionally noirish from start to finish: there’s a bit of grain in some sequences, but methinks that’s largely owed to the fact that so much of the dark rendered in close-ups can and will show a bit of dissolution over the years. Still, the cinematography is to be commended. Lastly, if you’re looking for special features? Alas, this release hasn’t a one, and that’s a big miss for this old school film junkie.
Recommended, but …
I’d be remiss if I failed to admit that I found a good portion of Experiment In Terror not only dated but a bit of a narrative slog. Sadly, we’ve seen police procedurals hundreds if not thousands of times; and when your finished product both feels and works like so many of those the freshness of the better moments have to perform on another level, which doesn’t quite happen here. The crime scenes – the opening, the telephone calls between the perpetrator and those he’s manipulating, the big crowd showdown, etc. – are exceptional. But the stuff in between? Well … we’ve been there and done that all too often, so this one could’ve used a bit of polish.
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Allied Vaughn provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Experiment In Terror (1962) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review. Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.
-- EZ