As for the aptly titled Dread, well . . .
I took the liberty of adding notes to the synopsis found on the Dread myspace page.
"A slacker [douchebag] is warned by a mystic to repent his womanizing ways [there's no way anyone has fucked this guy] before his lifeline [and our attention] fades into oblivion. Two mysteriously conjured [see: never really explained] demons appear and systematically take out his friends one by one [thank god]...until he alone remains as the demons come for him! "Dread"..."the Wrongs you do, Come back to You!"
The cast is composed of people who I assume are from the greater Akron-area, as well as a guest-spot by veteran actor William "Wow, He's Still Alive" Hinzman. He can best be remembered as the first zombie in George Romero's Night of the Living Dead. (I'll bet my waning 401k on Billy never imagining that by running after that car and displaying the mechanical ability to pick up a rock and break a window, he'd trigger a decade’s long discussion on why his zombie bore such human characteristics, while all other zombies until Two Weeks Notice were lethargic. Then he'd wonder why these kids have no lives.) The performances are what we've come to expect from most Type B-flicks, with a majority of the cast operating in that limbo between actor(slash)friend. Though, the lead is miscast. The actor whose name escapes me (and I'm too lazy to look up) comes off as that kid in school who was held back, but was too big to ever catch any shit for it. As is the case with any movie, you have to care about who you're following. In this case, it's not really possible. The bully is a static niche character, unless we explore why he's gruff. This movie doesn't. We just watch as this flat character barks threats. At no point does he offer any redeeming value that makes me care if his lifeline fades or not.
The script is light. I'd imagine there was 45-minutes of story stretched into a full-length. The dialogue is disjointed, and too many scenes have no meaning or purpose. It's never quite clear what is going on and had it not been for the synopsis, I'd have been completely lost. From a technical stand-point, Dread is something the creators should be proud of. The shots are framed well, and the camera movements are fluid. It seems that too often, people use a low-budget to defend shoddy craftsmanship. Van Schotten proves otherwise. With the quality of equipment available to even to the most strained budget, there's no reason the product should look like crap. This director has an eye. Some of the shots are so good, that I think Van Schotten wanted to hang on them a little too long.
Akira Kurosawa's Ran is hailed by many as his masterwork. For me, it's his most overly-praised, unnecessarily long movie. Shots seem to go on for no reason other than their still being film left in the camera. I bring this up not to sound like an iconoclast, but to point out that I can be something of an impatient movie-goer. At the same time, I can appreciate the subtlety of a quiet moment. To my credit, I consider The Brown Bunny (which could best be described as the 90-minute highlight reel of a man's lonely drive cross-country) to be one of the best movies to came out in '03. In one movie the long take was necessary to convey this man's alienation. In the other, I think the director fell asleep. I'm not into video games for a similar reason. If I need to get a weapon from another room, the process of having to trek across a gamescape, up the stairs, select the open door button after having lined myself up perfectly with the door frame, enter the new room, shuffle through the camera angles until I find one that allows me to see the layout, then open the drawer is as tedious as it is frustrating.
Dread borrows from video game physics. If a character decides to do something, we're not going to cut away to that action. No way, not in this show. Instead, we're going to track that character through the entire process. The gang decides to ride their All-Terrain Vehicles. Instead of one character suggesting it, then cutting to them atop their ATV's, we follow them as they hitch the craft to their truck. Drive out to the path. Unhitch the units. Then simply watch as they ride for several minutes. The lead goes to the liquor store. We're going to get in the car, watch as he turns up the radio, and follow the car across a country road straight to the parking lot. And the movie is littered with drawn-out sequences like this. In some scenes, the camera is rolling as if by accident. Most people at some point in school had to write a how-to paper on making a peanut-butter sandwich. The gag was that few noted the peanut-butter had to be removed from the jar, leaving the teacher to place the container atop a slice of bread. This lesson must have struck a chord with the director, as there isn't a single entrance or scene change that doesn't go unexplained. This is the perfect movie for elderly people who never quite understood how a movie transitions from one moment to the next.
My suggestions to the people behind this movie: Be economical in your future productions. In this genre, brevity and succinctness are the name of the game. Your audience came to get punched in the stomach, not watch a nicely photographed field for three minutes. And give me someone/thing to care about.
By the way, though sparse, the gore looks good. Though the demons could have used a little more envisioning and less Hot Topic-attire.
I'd say more, but it's time to go to lunch, and the filmmakers know where I live.
|
