It's Not A Case Of Doing, What's Right, It's Just The Way I Feel That Matters, Tell Me I'm Wrong, I Don't Really Care
--"Play For Today", The Cure
Yesterday, after I saw Whispertown2000 in Los Angeles, I met up with my friend Kerri Ray to test out my brand-spanking new membership to the Arclight. I'd been wanting to see a movie I'd first heard about on HSX called Hard Candy that, from the outset, intrigued me because it supposedly dealt with the rampant problem of internet predators. However, instead of presenting the tale straight up as a cautionary tale about a young, innocent girl getting lured into a trap set by some nefarious older man, it turns the tables by imagining a case of the predator actually becoming the prey. I've always liked movies like Death And The Maiden where you don't know where your sympathies should lay or, indeed, if you can believe what each of the characters are telling you. Hard Candy keeps the audience interested by presenting its story very much along these lines.
When the audience first meets Hayley, all of fourteen and "obviously" in over her head, she is agreeing to meet up with 32-year-old Jeff at the local diner. It's a testament to both the writing (playwright-turned-screenwriter Brian Nelson first screenplay) and the acting by both Patrick Wilson (Jeff) and Ellen Page (Hayley) that the transition between their awkwardness at first meeting up to her actually asking to go home with him doesn't seem contrived or the least bit unbelievable. Hayley's character's motivation seems to be a mixture of defiance and naivete, while Jeff seems to be manipulating the machinations rather subtly, providing Hayley with a dozen different opportunities to back out, while at the same time casually mentioning a dozen other reasons not to. In fact, for the first ten minutes back at the house one honestly believes that the film has nothing more to offer than the same old tale of young girl being seduced by a deceitful older man. From him not stopping her from drinking screwdriver after screwdriver to him showing her his photography studio and suggesting she might make a good model for him, one thinks the story is headed to a certain place rather quickly.
It's not until Jeff passes out and wakes up, hands and legs tied to a chair, that the real game of cat and mouse begins. You see, Hayley has an agenda that goes beyond merely turning a mere pedophile into the police. Hayley's out for revenge and it's how this revenge tale plays out the makes the movie both exciting and dangerous. On reading one site's review of the film, I happen to agree with the sentiment that there is a certain hazard in positioning Jeff as the victim in the film. He obviously is no saint and the lengths to which Hayley goes to exact her revenge is notoriously over-the-top. Again, it is only by the acting and the manner in which the exact sequence of events is plotted, that the story maintains believability. With films like this I'm tempted to see for myself the inconsistencies, the plot holes, the dialogue flaws, but, all in all, I kept right on waiting to see them. Not only does Hayley sound and act like a fourteen-year-old, albeit an "honor student", but I found the fact that the film makes Jeff sound and act like an internet predator with the guile and intelligence not to ever get caught the real trick. In truth, this film unfolds more like a play would, with dialogue between the two characters in a confined space making the bulk of the movie. Yes, it does have action set pieces, and, yes, it does seem to fall a bit flat with its last fifteen minutes, but I wholeheartedly believed in both of the characters and I wholeheartedly believed that not only was this scenario plausible, but I actually found myself asking my friend if she thought the film was sparked by a true incident.
I especially identified with the idea that this girl was so driven by thoughts of revenge that she would go to such lengths to entrap the guy. Not only is it revealed she was manipulating him the entire time they were chatting on-line, but it turns out she has been the one stalking him, finding out when his neighbors would be away or occupied to pick the perfect time to lay her trap as well as doing her homework about whether or not he is, in fact, guilty of what she thinks he's guilty of. I won't ruin the movie by telling you one way or another if he's a bad guy or if he even committed the act or acts she accuses him of. One of the strengths of the film is that your loyalty to both characters gets tested as you learn more of the whole story... just like any film which utilizes suspense should do. I don't think there's any good guy or girl nor any evil guy or girl for most of the movie. It's only in the last few minutes of the film as one of the characters meets his or her demise that you are let in on the last twist of who's more at fault and who's more sadistic and cruel. But up until then, the movie is a very good exercise in playing against the audience's instincts and spoiling all traditional values of what makes an individual a monster.
it’s not a case of share and share alike
I take what I require
I left the theater very satisfied that I'd been privy to an original piece of filmmaking and, upon further thought, I think it's because the film speaks to the nature of compulsion. What makes a person commit evil deeds and what justification, if any, makes them, if not defensible, at the very least excusable? By presenting this subject from an untraditional point-of-view the film succeeds momentarily in making the audience believe that the line between reasonable punishment for a crime and inhumane often begins and ends with what one can get away with.
Yours Swimmingly,
mojo shivers
Yesterday, after I saw Whispertown2000 in Los Angeles, I met up with my friend Kerri Ray to test out my brand-spanking new membership to the Arclight. I'd been wanting to see a movie I'd first heard about on HSX called Hard Candy that, from the outset, intrigued me because it supposedly dealt with the rampant problem of internet predators. However, instead of presenting the tale straight up as a cautionary tale about a young, innocent girl getting lured into a trap set by some nefarious older man, it turns the tables by imagining a case of the predator actually becoming the prey. I've always liked movies like Death And The Maiden where you don't know where your sympathies should lay or, indeed, if you can believe what each of the characters are telling you. Hard Candy keeps the audience interested by presenting its story very much along these lines.When the audience first meets Hayley, all of fourteen and "obviously" in over her head, she is agreeing to meet up with 32-year-old Jeff at the local diner. It's a testament to both the writing (playwright-turned-screenwriter Brian Nelson first screenplay) and the acting by both Patrick Wilson (Jeff) and Ellen Page (Hayley) that the transition between their awkwardness at first meeting up to her actually asking to go home with him doesn't seem contrived or the least bit unbelievable. Hayley's character's motivation seems to be a mixture of defiance and naivete, while Jeff seems to be manipulating the machinations rather subtly, providing Hayley with a dozen different opportunities to back out, while at the same time casually mentioning a dozen other reasons not to. In fact, for the first ten minutes back at the house one honestly believes that the film has nothing more to offer than the same old tale of young girl being seduced by a deceitful older man. From him not stopping her from drinking screwdriver after screwdriver to him showing her his photography studio and suggesting she might make a good model for him, one thinks the story is headed to a certain place rather quickly.
It's not until Jeff passes out and wakes up, hands and legs tied to a chair, that the real game of cat and mouse begins. You see, Hayley has an agenda that goes beyond merely turning a mere pedophile into the police. Hayley's out for revenge and it's how this revenge tale plays out the makes the movie both exciting and dangerous. On reading one site's review of the film, I happen to agree with the sentiment that there is a certain hazard in positioning Jeff as the victim in the film. He obviously is no saint and the lengths to which Hayley goes to exact her revenge is notoriously over-the-top. Again, it is only by the acting and the manner in which the exact sequence of events is plotted, that the story maintains believability. With films like this I'm tempted to see for myself the inconsistencies, the plot holes, the dialogue flaws, but, all in all, I kept right on waiting to see them. Not only does Hayley sound and act like a fourteen-year-old, albeit an "honor student", but I found the fact that the film makes Jeff sound and act like an internet predator with the guile and intelligence not to ever get caught the real trick. In truth, this film unfolds more like a play would, with dialogue between the two characters in a confined space making the bulk of the movie. Yes, it does have action set pieces, and, yes, it does seem to fall a bit flat with its last fifteen minutes, but I wholeheartedly believed in both of the characters and I wholeheartedly believed that not only was this scenario plausible, but I actually found myself asking my friend if she thought the film was sparked by a true incident.
I especially identified with the idea that this girl was so driven by thoughts of revenge that she would go to such lengths to entrap the guy. Not only is it revealed she was manipulating him the entire time they were chatting on-line, but it turns out she has been the one stalking him, finding out when his neighbors would be away or occupied to pick the perfect time to lay her trap as well as doing her homework about whether or not he is, in fact, guilty of what she thinks he's guilty of. I won't ruin the movie by telling you one way or another if he's a bad guy or if he even committed the act or acts she accuses him of. One of the strengths of the film is that your loyalty to both characters gets tested as you learn more of the whole story... just like any film which utilizes suspense should do. I don't think there's any good guy or girl nor any evil guy or girl for most of the movie. It's only in the last few minutes of the film as one of the characters meets his or her demise that you are let in on the last twist of who's more at fault and who's more sadistic and cruel. But up until then, the movie is a very good exercise in playing against the audience's instincts and spoiling all traditional values of what makes an individual a monster.
it’s not a case of share and share alike
I take what I require
I left the theater very satisfied that I'd been privy to an original piece of filmmaking and, upon further thought, I think it's because the film speaks to the nature of compulsion. What makes a person commit evil deeds and what justification, if any, makes them, if not defensible, at the very least excusable? By presenting this subject from an untraditional point-of-view the film succeeds momentarily in making the audience believe that the line between reasonable punishment for a crime and inhumane often begins and ends with what one can get away with.
Yours Swimmingly,
mojo shivers
posted by mojo shivers @ 11:31 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home