An unexpected horror treat, this is one interesting little slasher that zigs then zags, and proves Bill Engvall's a scary bastard.
Saw VI. 2009. Directed by Kevin Greutert. Screenplay by Marcus Dunstan & Patrick Melton.
Starring Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor, Mark Rolston, Betsy Russell, Shawnee Smith, Peter Outerbridge, Athena Karkanis, Samantha Lemole, Tanedra Howard, Marty Moreau, Shawn Ahmed, Janelle Hutchison, Gerry Mendicino, Caroline Cave, and George Newbern.
Rated R. 90 minutes.
In this Saw outing, Kevin Greutert takes up the reigns of the series. He’s primarily been an editor, having worked on every entry in the Saw series up until now (those duties were taken over by Andrew Coutts). With another screenplay from writing team Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton, Greutert attempts to somehow extend the legacy of Jigsaw a.k.a John Kramer into another film.
Luckily, this one cuts back down to a 90 minute runtime, something other entries might have benefited from as well. Problem is, no matter how lean and quick things get there seems to be a progressive drop into full on gore for gore’s sake, which began a couple sequels ago. Even worse, the screenplay does not match up to what they’re attempting to do. There are good things here in Saw VI, but not enough of the original atmosphere and tone of the series remains for me to feel like this movie belongs anywhere near the top few.
With a couple interesting traps and a fun, plausible step in the story of Jigsaw, there’s enough to watch through once. But unlike the first and third entries of the Saw series, I can’t see myself putting this on again (this was my 2nd viewing and twice was too much). Going for too many characters, too many switches between subplots, I feel like this sixth entry of the franchise doesn’t do much except try to come up with more elaborate traps in which to toss more fodder characters for murder’s sake. Maybe enough for some? Not for my liking. There are gore films I enjoy, but this one doesn’t even go for scary, not really so much CREEPY either; it aims only for disgust and shock horror, nothing else.
Saw VI shows us what happens after the previous film, when Agent Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) makes it out of the house of horrors where Agent Strahm was crushed to death. Now the noose is slowly slipping around his neck, as the other law enforcement agents around him close in on the Jigsaw Apprentice; to Hoffman’s surprise, Agent Lindsey Perez (Athena Karkanis) is still alive after suffering terrible injuries in Saw IV. We get further flashbacks of Hoffman with Jigsaw a.k.a John Kramer (Tobin Bell) and his wife Jill (Betsy Russell), as well as Amanda Young (Shawnee Smith) who was the other apprentice to Kramer.
At the same time, a health insurance executive named William Easton (Peter Outerbridge) finds himself in the clutches of a new Jigsaw game – having been the one to effectively sentence Kramer to death, not providing him coverage for an experimental treatment to help his cancer. Facing most of the people he knows and loves, the few they are, locked into a whole crop of terrifying traps, he must face the gauntlet or watch them all, as well as himself, die.
Immediately something I did enjoy was the first trap involving this film’s main character, the seedy insurance agent. Reason being is that, while gruesome, the graphic nature of that entire scene opted not to be too extreme – the most we get is a splash of blood, really. And that’s fine. Because sometimes, less is more. Particularly when the series has strayed wildly into the area of so-called “torture porn” (fucking hate that dumb label though). Giving us a creepy trap which works effectively without needing to go for complete blood and gore is something rare at the tail end of the Saw series, so I’ve got to give them props for that in terms of writing and production design, all around stellar job on this sequence.
Furthermore, while I do think stretching a series out is not always a great idea, there’s something genuine which strikes me about the plot and story of Saw VI, as a logical progression in the overall tale of Jigsaw. Bringing in the whole insurance angle is not far fetched. And though you can certainly still ask why bother to extend the series, I don’t think there’s much use in trying to tear down the logic behind the story. Not saying everything in the plot is plausible, not whatsoever, merely that I think the story of the insurance agent coming into play is sensible, as Jigsaw would’ve no doubt found their practices enough to warrant ending up in a trap. Which, of course, they do.
To be honest, an aspect of this screenplay I could’ve done without is so much of John Kramer’s (Tobin Bell) wife. I know she’s part of the story, I know it needs to be sorted out, yet so much of it feels like it’s mashed in, tacked on for good measure. Again, the whole insurance agent plot is something I find pretty good, but all the stuff with John and Jill (Betsy Russell), even the stuff with Agent Hoffman (Costas Mandylor), it all feels INCREDIBLY TIRED. Mostly, I feel like they should’ve just kept the main focus on Jigsaw instead of involving so many other characters around him. Once more, I know the writers can’t simply ignore characters and start leaving them out, but at the same time this already trim 90 minutes could’ve probably been trimmed a couple minutes more for scraps.
There are some incredibly tense bits, for instance the STEAM TRAP involving William Easton (Peter Outerbridge) and his attorney Debbie (Caroline Cave), which I found pretty wild. It had me on edge watching Debbie trying to make it through that rough cage maze with the steam. Nasty. But then that tension gets ruined with too much switching back and forth between the traps and those characters involved, as well as showing bits with Jigsaw, Jill, Agent Hoffman, even Amanda Young (Shawnee Smith) is back for more action with new scenes for the first time since Saw II. There’s simply too many different things happening. Nobody can tell me I have a bad attention span or anything like that – check out the movies I love, and the sheer number of films I’ve seen over my 30 years on earth. There’s just TOO MUCH HAPPENING, not in a good way. Far too many characters for this 90 minute film to tackle; they’re just not needed, I don’t think. There’s no reason each and every last character here was essential to the film, not in any way. It’s a mess, in terms of how the screenplay flows, and throughout the film this throws the pace off to a point where it’s hard to recover. While I’m sure the back and forth between plots is meant to be intriguing, and also intense, when in reality it only serves to make this a jumbled sequel in the franchise rather than something well crafted and properly intense.
Definitely one of the worst in this series, Saw VI is at best a 2 star film. There’s too much being thrown about in the screenplay by Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton, both of whom I do enjoy I have to say, for this movie to find a pace where it fits correctly. Instead, this movie sort of bounces all over the place from one scene to the next – very intense at times, others it’s sluggish and drags itself about with heavy handedness but under the guise of being full of mystery.
If you’re looking for a better entry in the series, I always suggest the first film and the third as my top choices. The second is decent, but those are honestly solid horror movies. Interesting, tense, and horrific stuff. This is just an excuse to try and make more money. Sadly, another franchise which has spiralled into the darkness in the worst sense.
Saw V. 2008. Directed by David Hackl. Screenplay by Marcus Dunstan & Patrick Melton.
Starring Tobin Bell, Costas Mandylor, Scott Patterson, Betsy Russell, Julie Benz, Meagan Good, Mark Rolston, Carlo Rota, Greg Bryk, Laura Gordon, Joris Jarsky, and Mike Butters. Twisted Pictures. Rated R. 92 minutes.
From this sequel on, I believe the Saw series loses its way in terrible fashion. This one in particular is about on par with the second film in the series, as they have their flaws. After Saw V, things get really bad.
That being said I do think there are a few things to admire about this film. For one, I think some of the traps in this one were, yes, brutal but also held a sort of creepily admirable quality. The stunts of the film themselves are enough to impress me – Scott Patterson did in fact do the water tank scene himself. I also like how there’s nothing silly in the way of some later films in the Halloween, A Nightmare on Elm Street, Friday the 13th, and other similar franchises, in the sense Jigsaw is dead; no changing that fact. There’s no resurrecting him, but instead his apprentices and, in a sense, victims go on to further his dark legacy.
What Saw V has going for it is more continuity in the story of Jigsaw, his apprentices, and some of what got introduced in the previous film. Going against it is less and less of the gritty, ultra grim style the first and third films had, which became to slip away again in Saw IV. What we’re left with is a decent horror movie with an interesting story, but too much concern once more for shock horror above character development/logic, atmosphere, and solid tension.
Saw V sees five strangers – or are they? – trapped in a massive game set in place by Jigsaw a.k.a John Kramer (Tobin Bell). Told to ignore their instincts, each of them strive to fight against one another in a brutal, vicious competition.
At the same time, Agent Strahm (Scott Patterson) makes it out alive from the building where Jigsaw enacted one of his games, as well as the place where he would end up dying. Lieutenant Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) has also come away, mostly unscathed, and so Strahm – beaten and now scarred by the deadly game – tries to prove Hoffman is an apprentice to the Jigsaw Killer.
What unfolds is the story of Hoffman’s history with Jigsaw, as well as the pursuit of Strahm to find the truth and stop all the senseless killing once and for all.
How did Mark Hoffman manage to make traps on his own? How did he make the first pendulum trap to mirror Jigsaw? He’s not an engineer, I can’t imagine his police expertise would lead him to have the ability to construct such elaborate pieces of machinery. Maybe I missed something? Doubt that, I actually rewatched this and learned a couple small details I’d missed before now. I don’t think I’ve missed an explanation on how Hoffman managed to do that initially. Seems like a bit of a gaping hole in character logic. This is one thing that really threw me off, as soon as it came into my brain. I mean, can anybody explain this? We’re never given anything in the way of backstory on how Hoffman actually managed to construct the trap he used on the man who killed his sister. I was always onboard with the traps because Jigsaw was an engineer – even as he got weaker, he had an apprentice to help him put things together, construct it for him. But before Hoffman met Jigsaw/was kidnapped by him, there’s no way he could have come up with the whole pendulum trap on his own. It’s too complex for a layman to simply draw up on a piece of paper then put together by themselves.
Personally I enjoy the whole thing going on with Hoffman, though, I think the script is lacking in regards to a couple aspects, such as how he managed to initially come up with his pendulum trap without any engineering knowledge that I’m aware of. Having Strahm investigate Hoffman, going back to some of the Jigsaw crimes like bits from the first one (remember the barbed wire trap with the near naked guy stuck in the middle?), it’s a lot of fun and also exciting.
What I think hinders this fifth film most is the scenario of the five people trapped in the latest game. Even in the second movie, which I wasn’t huge on, I still thought the big game with all those people trapped in the house was intriguing. Here, there’s even less intrigue, as the cerebral is completely gone. Even the visceral aspects of Saw V don’t come off in the way other horror movies allow the blood and gore to work, effectively scaring people instead of going all for the shock factor; tension, suspense, building things up can take a gory scene and make it work on a higher level than just a scene to show of special effects. This survival of the fittest competition these people have to endure is just TORTURE NONSENSE! Here is where the “torture porn” aspects of the Saw series really take things over wholesale and go running. Sad too because these movies have plenty of potential for being horror mystery movies with a bit of brains, instead they start descending quicker and quicker with every film into mostly torture for the sake of torture.
While I enjoyed Saw IV enough, with the whole angle of Rigg being forced to step into Jigsaw’s shoes in a sense and the script with its interesting twist, plus the exciting finale, there’s not much here to enjoy in that vein. I’m not overly impressed with the script, as much of it is wasted on the group of people trapped together trying desperately to survive; this was tiresome, as there’s barely enough time for characterization when the bulk of the story has to do with Hoffman/Strahm, and there’s also the fact it was mostly shock and awe trying to get to us instead of any effective technique in order to creep us out with confidence.
All around, I find Saw V to be tedious. There’s enough here to give this a 2.5 rating, but no way I can even fathom giving it more. There are decent effects at times, however, most of the traps are beyond uninspired, the torture is fetishized even worse than it ever has been in the series, and the script is pretty damn lazy.
I actually own all the Saw films up to and including this one. While I’m only a real big fan of the first and the third film, finding the fourth half decent, there’s something about the series I enjoy enough to keep watching. However, past this one the last two movies are real bad. Things just devolve into a mess and by the seventh Saw it’s similar to how later Jason Voorhees efforts looked: laughable, contrived, too silly to take seriously on any level. I’ll watch them over again, simply for review purposes. If you haven’t seen the last two, you could honestly skip them over; some might say that about a lot of this series. Either way, you’ll see some nasty stuff, whether or not it’s scary is a whole other can of worms.
Saw IV. 2007. Directed by Darren Lynn Bousman. Screenplay by Marcus Dunstan & Patrick Melton.
Starring Tobin Bell, Costa Mandylor, Scott Patterson, Betsy Russell, Lyriq Bent, Athen Karkanis, Louis Ferreira, Simon Reynolds, Donnie Wahlberg, Angus Macfadyen, Shawnee Smith, Bahar Soomekh, and Dina Meyer. Twisted Pictures.
Rated. R. 93 minutes.
With Saw IV we’re experiencing a new era past the first three films, in the sense Leigh Whannell is no longer writing the screenplays. After James Wan departed following the first film, Whannell was sort of the anchor which kept things slightly grounded. Not to say things didn’t get a bit too much, or a little too forcibly wild at times, but I firmly believe Whannell writing the screenplays especially for the first and third film kept Saw in a space where I was enjoying things on a reasonable level. I do like this fourth film a bit, not near as much as the first and not quite as much as the third, however – I do find enjoyment in it. Darren Lynn Bousman’s writing in Saw II didn’t match up with his abilities as a director, which I think are pretty good. Moving over to solely working as director for the third, Bousman is back again directing here. Without Whannell, the writers of 2005 indie action/horror/comedy Feast – Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton – take over duties in an effort to try bridging the first trilogy of this series with this film, and the ones inevitably to come afterward.
Also, in an almost symbolic way Jigsaw himself has died and gone along with Whannell. At the same time, he still looms large over the franchise. No matter whether he’s alive or dead, John Kramer’s legacy affects everyone and anyone involved in the case.
So though I don’t think it’s as good as the entry preceding it, Saw IV has interesting things going on with character, the traps and situations are more interesting than certain stuff in the second film, and I thought the script did a decent job keeping up with the way Whannell had been especially during Saw III. By no means a perfect or great horror, there are some surprises as well as lots of horror to unsettle the viewer.
Saw IV begins as Jigsaw a.k.a John Kramer (Tobin Bell) lays cold and dead on a hospital gurney. A coroner opens him up, only to find a wax covered object in his stomach: a tape. Lieutenant Mark Hoffman (Costas Mandylor) is called in to listen to the tape, discovering Jigsaw’s games are not yet over.
As Agent Lindsey Perez (Athena Karkanis) and Agent Peter Strahm (Scott Patterson) are brought in on the case after the discovery of Detective Allison Kerry (Dina Meyer) dead, due to events from the previous film, we discover they may know more than they’re letting on. Supposedly, two more cops are in danger, however, they don’t know exactly which two.
Soon, it turns out Detective Eric Matthews (Donnie Wahlberg) is still alive in the clutches of someone carrying on the work of Jigsaw. And eventually Lieutenant Hoffman finds himself in the same predicament.
Being framed to look like he’s carrying on Jigsaw’s life legacy, Lieutenant Daniel Rigg (Lyriq Bent) has to go on the run while also trying to figure out who is doing all this to him and his friends in the police department. When Jill Tuck (Betsy Russell), John Kramer’s former wife, is called in for questioning, everything becomes a little more clear.
Except that nothing is ever clear when Jigsaw is involved; dead or alive.
Part of why I really do enjoy this fourth film in the series is because we get more about the past of John Kramer. Not merely confined to Jigsaw and his relationship with Amanda Young, Saw IV involves John’s past, his wife and unborn child, everything which pushed him further into the darkness of his alter ego as Jigsaw.
The whole story of how his then wife Jill (Russell) ran a drug rehabilitation clinic of some sort was very interesting. I always enjoyed the way Kramer himself was an engineer, helping to explain the traps and all that, but adding this whole angle in is pretty good. When Jill ends up miscarrying her child after an encounter with one of the addicts, I was actually devastated for Jigsaw. You can clearly see how the events of his later life absolutely decimated him and his positivity, any kind of nice outlook on life. However, it’s obvious most people who suffer personal atrocities don’t go on to be savage killers like him. This is simply a real interesting way to put the hooks in and make you feel a bit of emotion for John Kramer. He becomes – even for the slightest, most brief moment in time – a sympathetic killer. Doesn’t last long, but still, there’s a second where you feel deeply for him and the never ending tragedies of his life.
Another interesting aspect of this film is how another character, like Jeff in the previous Saw III, is being forced into, essentially, playing the Jigsaw killer. Here we’re watching Lieutenant Daniel Rigg (Bent) being made to play the game, putting others – such as a rapist who got out on technicalities – into a life or death situation. While Jigsaw says he’s not a killer, he is because otherwise those people would not be in a trap; they might end up dying down the road, or who knows, but Jigsaw puts them in that position willingly. Therefore, a killer. In this same sense, Rigg (and Jeff before him) are also having to play God. Jigsaw is forcing them to be who he has become, the man he was forced to be.
One thing this film lacks, which I thought Saw III tried to replicate so well from the first film, is the same atmosphere and tone of those previous entries. There’s still an expertly dark, gritty tone throughout the film. However, I don’t feel as if the entire aesthetic holds up to what Saw and Saw III were doing so well. Everything here sort of looks aesthetically the same throughout the entire film. In opposition, the other two entries I mentioned sort of go for very different looks and feels during the different segments of the film. Not that there’s anything wrong with using one solitary style the whole way through – most times I commend a film for that, if done appropriately. I think it’s an aspect which is genuinely lacking here because of how well it served the other two films using that technique.
I still do enjoy the visual look of Saw IV, it simply doesn’t pack the interesting and also gritty punch as the first and the third, and to a lesser extent the second film, as well. What I do love about the aesthetic in this film is the return of Charlie Clouser as composer. His music fits the Saw series extremely well, very fitting. At times it’s like machinery, beating and chugging along with the intensity of certain times. In other moments, Clouser gives us the subtle and creepy electronic, iconic sound of the series music, that haunted, floating riff we hear over and over. There are many instances where his music draws us in – for instance, when John Kramer (Tobin Bell) uses his first trap with the knives on Cecil (Billy Otis), the one who caused his wife to miscarry, there’s this wonderful buildup in the score; it starts with bits of the little electronic riff, then pounds harder with percussion, steady drums, and heavy guitars. Really amps up the weight of this scene as it sort of runs away like a train with its intensity.
A few of the traps were impressive, mainly the first one we see with the two men on either side of a chain – one with his eyes sewn shut, the other his mouth. I thought that one was a fairly nasty and exciting trap to start with, as well as the fact the film didn’t open cold into a torture scene; we get a bit of a lead in, then after a few minutes there we have it.
What impressed me more than the obligatory Saw traps expected from each entry in the series was the end and its twist. Honestly, when I first saw this movie I’d not expected where things headed during the finale. Naturally, I was leery about completely resigning myself to one theory on what might be happening because this is a tricky series overall in terms of the writing.
But when the kicker comes, just after the final 15 minutes start to wind down, I was FLOORED! Really incredible writing and they went to such painstaking lengths to sort of sew everything together, as well as provide an amazing degree of continuity. For all its faults, the script for Saw IV has got some SERIOUS chops, honestly. Not all perfect, nowhere near, but there’s some inspired writing here and you really cannot deny that, at least not fully. I think the twists they incorporated here make up for the pieces of the film which aren’t up to the highest standards. Awesome, awesome ending and it’s up there as probably my second favourite to the ending of the first Saw film.
Definitely think this film is worth a 3.5 out of 5 star rating. This is the last of the Saw films I find truly worth it, and I didn’t like the second one really, so as it stands the first, third, and fourth entries are pretty much the only ones I’m a fan of in the end.
I love how the writers worked well with bridging things together after Leigh Whannell left the series. Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton definitely have the ability to write some decent horror. Not everything they do is solid, but who does perfect work all the time? They really got a kick-off with this film and have started to carve out good careers on their own away from Saw. Check this one out and I think if you give it a shot, instead of merely passing it off as “torture porn”, you’ll be pleasantly surprised by how the continuity stretches out from the first three films of the series into this one, as well as the fact the finale is pretty exciting.
The Collector. 2009. Directed by Marcus Dunstan. Screenplay by Marcus Dunstan & Patrick Melton.
Starring Josh Stewart, Andrea Roth, Michael Reilly Burke, and Juan Fernández. Fortress Features. Rated 18A. 90 minutes.
It’s only natural to see why people try to say that this movie is a Saw knock-off.
First of all, anything involving traps now will forever be likened to saw. Reviews like to use the (idiotic) term someone coined, “torture porn”, to try and describe similar films.
Second, The Collector is directed by Marcus Dunstan, as well as the fact that its screenplay was written by Dunstan and Patrick Melton – both of whom did a couple Saw films. In fact, this was intended to be a sort of prequel, or who knows what kinda-quel, but I assume the producers wanted nothing to do with it.
Now, we’ve got The Collector. I don’t think it’s “torture porn”, nor would you ever catch me using that god damn ridiculous made-up term. I know what the people using it are getting at, but I think it’s a) the cheap way of saying what you don’t have the better words to say, and b) nonsense because some horror movies are just more brutal and depraved than others. Yes, some horror just goes either over-the-top or too vicious to the points where you’re thinking to yourself, “Okay let’s get the rest of this over with…”. However, there’s other horror, the real effective stuff, the fun stuff even, that uses it in the right sort of way.
I find The Collector is in the latter section of horror films – it’s brutal, but a hell of a lot of fun. In a twisted way.
The movie opens with Larry and Gena Wharton coming home from a night out. They’re laughing, seemingly they’ve had a few drinks and a bit of fun. Upstairs, the older couple find an antique-looking trunk. Inside… horror. Then from out of nowhere, they are attacked from behind.
Cut to Arkin O’Brien (Josh Stewart): ex-con working as a handyman in the home of the rich Chase family – Michael and Victoria (Michael Reilly Burke/Andrea Roth), along with their daughters Hannah and Jill (Karley Scott Collins/Madeline Zima). Unfortunately for Arkin, his wife Lisa (Daniella Alonso) owes a debt and the sharks are asking for their money – they need it tonight, she says. Arkin’s wage as handyman, even for such a rich family, does not cut it.
Turns out, though, Arkin has been casing the place. There’s a ruby worth a ton of money inside the Chase house. Arkin rushes the job and heads out to the house that night in order to rob them. There, he discovers a masked man – The Collector (Juan Fernández) has rigged the place with traps and other horrors. In the main bedroom, Arkin discovers an antique style trunk, and inside: Larry Wharton. The older man is in bad shape, he warns Arkin that “he always takes one“. The family is all either incapacitated, or eventually killed. Arkin tries to save who he can, but The Collector has so many surprises in store for him.
Immediately, there is a tone to the film I thought worked extremely well in making things creepy. For me, it was a combination of the look and feel of the scenes and the score.
Dunstan uses a great colour scheme that makes it feel like an old school genre picture. There’s this green-ish/yellow v. blue thing going on at times (as you can see in some of the pictures I’ve included), and I liked how it made things look. Not only that, there’s almost a grainy layer over the camera’s lens in a lot, if not all, of the scenes. I like it, Reminds me of the look David Fincher chose to go with for Se7en. Together with the choice of that green/yellow and blue pattern, almost muted and blurry colouring, the grain of the film makes things look dark and gritty. Super fitting for the way things play out.
Now – the score. I would say, for this movie, the score works perfectly. I knew of Jerome Dillon before now, simply because I’m Trent Reznor’s biggest fan (maybe not realistically I just love his music and have for 20 years). Dillon did amazing work with Nine Inch Nails – my favourite being on And All That Could Have Been and With Teeth. Dillon’s use of an industrial sound flows well in combination with Dunstan and his gritty visual style.
One of my favourite moments of the film, in terms of music + directing, is when there’s softer, friendlier sounding music playing while Dunstan gives us a montage of shots showing The Collector’s carnage, the blood, the fury he has unleashed throughout the house; something about the juxtaposition of that sweet sound, soft guitar riff and vocals, against the terror and the bodies – it works horror movie magic!
A lot of good moments work effectively with the music – and not in the way certain horror movies, like the 2012 remake of The Woman in Black, employ the jump-scare with strings to literally jolt you, which I consider a cheap way to do things. Dunstan and Dillon make things unsettling in a great fashion, their collaboration makes this movie come off in the right way on more than enough occasions that it’s a significant part of why the whole film works.
There’s very little in this movie I would say is written poorly. Not even a handful of scenes, in my opinion.
One sequence, though, I found particularly dumb: when older daughter Jill Chase (Madeline Zima) comes home with a boyfriend, they seem to just not notice a thing until The Collector is spotted, creeping in the dark while the young couple starts to get frisky; meanwhile, I thought the entire house was filled with traps and devious devices to really fuck someone’s day up. I guess it was an effort on the part of Dunstan and Melton to try and either add a shot of breasts (Zima gets her chest let loose for a few seconds before Mr. Collector is seen), or maybe it was simply the fact they wanted a way to have another member of the family be killed onscreen instead of just tied/locked up somewhere in the house. Either way, I thought it was a bit dumb.
However, they did save themselves a little. Poor Jill meets an awful end (as seen above), and I thought it was pretty gnarly in the best way possible. Junky lead-up, but a good horror movie kill indeed.
Overall I have to say the characters aren’t developed much, if at all. Outside of Arkin, honestly there’s no real development of any other character. I really do like Arkin, and I’m not even a big fan of Josh Stewart – but he plays it well. We get to see a good bit of him in terms of character, not enough of the family. I cared about Arkin as a character, but when it came to the family I sort of felt apathetic; there wasn’t enough time to get to know these people before they’re locked up in the house and being messed with/tortured/killed. With Arkin, we see bits of his family, the tough time he and his wife are obviously having. There’s also the moments with Arkin where we see him talking to the youngest Chase daughter, even the older one, and he genuinely seems to be a good guy. So I connected with him, whereas the family didn’t get enough screen time for me to be invested in them. Certainly – SPOILER AHEAD – I suppose that’s why Arkin is the character who goes along to the sequel, along with The Collector obviously.
Most people try to pick holes through the story of the film, but me – I know when to suspend disbelief. Sure, something like this would probably never happen in real life. It’s like a reverse Home Alone where Joe Pesci and Danny Stern break into the McCallister house before they could wake up to go to Paris, and they terrorize Kevin along with his family using booby traps.
But it’s scary. For me, anyways. I thought The Collector was a great horror villain. And even though I personally enjoy some of the Saw franchise, I find The Collector more entertaining. In Saw a lot of the people Jigsaw was taking were some messed up people – not all of them deserved that craziness, but some of those “victims” of his were awful sketchy. With The Collector, as opposed to Jigsaw, he’s active in the murder of these people – that’s what makes him a badass horror villain, more so than Jigsaw. He doesn’t let people ultimately decide their fate; he breaks in, kills with his contraptions and traps and gadgets, then The Collector takes someone with him along to the next house of horrors.
Yeah, you have to suspend some disbelief. Certain horror is meant to be realistic, other stuff is not – The Collector is an all-out horror, balls to the wall, but it isn’t meant to be the story of a real serial killer. The main villain, for me, is up there with some of the iconic guys. I wouldn’t put him next to Michael Myers. I would, however, put him next to Jason and Freddy both at times – even though I love those two and they’re ultimate icons of horror. I just think The Collector is interesting. Very interesting. So if suspending disbelief at times has to happen, I’m all for it. Because this isn’t meant to be one of those raw and realistic bits of horror, not like a found footage movie tries to be (notice I did emphasize the verb ‘to try’ because not all of them can achieve that goal) or something like Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer. This movie is meant to be visceral, gritty, and fun in the most disturbing sense of horror.
For me, I’ve got to say this is a 4 out of 5 star horror film. In my books, there’s not a whole lot more Marcus Dunstan needed to do on his part as director. Although there could’ve been a few tweaks in the script – I thought the parts with the daughter/her boyfriend didn’t make enough sense because the whole house seemed booby trapped and everything yet they were unaware so long, plus Dunstan and Melton could have given the family more depth than they were allowed (I connected with Stewart’s character because he had a decent little backstory while the family felt flat), I think the weakest element is the acting. Again, Stewart was good, but I didn’t particularly think anyone else stood out – other than Juan Fernández, who is beyond creepy as The Collector. They are the main characters, of course, I just did not feel like the supporting cast held up their end.
Either way, it’s a great little film that came out of nowhere. I’d seen a brief synopsis about a year before its release, but nothing much else. Then once it dropped, I was blown away. I also enjoyed The Collection, its sequel, and I’ll be doing a review for that one soon, as well.
Check this out if you haven’t, hopefully you’ll be pleasantly surprised by this tense and intense horror-thriller.