Since her childhood, Jessica has been haunted by recurrent nightmares whose meaning escapes her. This peculiarity has led her to study the psychophysiology of dreams and to follow a therapy ... Read allSince her childhood, Jessica has been haunted by recurrent nightmares whose meaning escapes her. This peculiarity has led her to study the psychophysiology of dreams and to follow a therapy with Sean, her mentor and boyfriend, to try and understand the origin of her nightmares. F... Read allSince her childhood, Jessica has been haunted by recurrent nightmares whose meaning escapes her. This peculiarity has led her to study the psychophysiology of dreams and to follow a therapy with Sean, her mentor and boyfriend, to try and understand the origin of her nightmares. Following the death of her maternal grandmother she hardly knew, Jessica reluctantly return... Read all
I THINK that I can see what the director is TRYING to do. I appreciate a number of the visual sequences, especially the REALLY creative lighting. The Ambient soundtrack (NOT the sound design. I will come back to that in a moment) is quite good. VERY moody. This is the ONE aspect where I think the director did achieve a Lynchian feel in the movie. In my lowly and wretched opinion, IF they had just approached the film DIFFERENTLY, I think there was enough creative energy and vivid imagery to pull it off. BUT... what I feel is 'wrong' with this film and unfortunately where it fails in what it is TRYING to do, is just the approach is all wrong. If you are going to imitate or be inspired by or try to have a similar approach to a film as, say, David Lynch, I feel that the single, vital thing ABOVE ALL is the MOOD that you create. Now, I feel that he did this SOMETIMES with certain short sequences. But, where I feel that he worked against himself is by 'jarring' or kind of 'cross-purposing' the very mood he was trying to create by introducing a kinetic visual style and Techno-Electronic sound that, to me anyway, totally destroyed whatever eerie, disturbing mood that he was trying to create.
Again, just my opinion... But, I think that if he had gone for a more laid back, static shot, murky sub-conscious approach and ditched all the Techno-Electronic / Mtv crap, then it likely would have worked pretty well. Just the wrong approach. And, what the HELL was up with the almost bloody CONTINUOUS hand-held crap in just about every scene. Dude... you are NOT going for a 'Found Footage' feel here mate. What the hell is the film all about anyway...? DREAMS, right? So, to me, it seems that the ENTIRE mood and visual / sonic approach to the film should have centered around Dreamy, murky, understated visuals and effects. Just SLOW the damn thing down dude... All that hyperkinetic Techno stuff, in my opinion, just ruins the whole thing. This is PRECISELY why I hate the 'American Horror Story' series. Absolutely NO subtlety at all...
Look... if you are making a film about 'Lucid Dreaming', I can understand why you would want to let loose with all these GREAT awesome visuals. Okay, fine... However, WAIT until you build up to it. WAIT until you create a ponderous and disturbing and YES, a DREAMY mood, even a Nightmarish mood and then BUILD and ratchet up the tension until you have this great WILD, Hallucinatory finale. THAT would work, I think. It was a shame too, because some of the technical approaches and techniques were GREAT, in and of themselves. A shot here, a short sequence there. BUT... you HAVE to be able to put it all together in such a way that it is EFFECTIVE and creates the mood and overall result that you are trying to achieve.
Also, maybe it was just me, but I REALLY thought the girl was LAME. She was not a very good actress. So, when you are trying to evoke this deep, disturbing, subconscious fear in your audience, you ABSOLUTELY have to have an actress who can convey that BELIEVABLY and GEEZ, a LOT more subtly than this girl did. Particularly this really stupid, open-mouthed expression that she had throughout most of the film. Bad...
And I KNOW that I've harped on this before, and I KNOW it is one of my little personal neuroses, but the Sound Design was VERY amateurish, and at least to me, that takes me right out of the film every time. What I am talking about is like for example the girl is opening a little box across the room from the audience's perspective. And from where you and I are seeing her it is like 30 feet away. And yet, the sound of the cardboard rustling is around like 100 decibels and sounds like it is right next to your ear. Or, just in general, EVERY bloody sound is HUGELY amplified, every footstep, every swish of material, ALL of it is boosted up to '11' I'm sorry, but not only is that NOT at all realistic, but to me it just is plain stupid and inexcusable.
So, yes, I did give the film a '5' And yes, that is probably a little generous. BUT, what tears at me somewhat is that I can ALMOST see the film that the director is trying to make coming through on the screen, but it is hidden under all this crap that I mentioned which basically ruins it. And I DID truly appreciate the EXCEPTIONAL creativity that went into a lot of the lighting, editing, and some of the visual techniques, so I felt that my score should at least reflect my acknowledgment of some of these things.
I guess I would say that if you are like me and you REALLY like David Lynch and what he does, then you likely will find this film to be clumsy and conflicted in it's approach and mood. If you like the subtlety that David Lynch uses in his long, static shots, and SLOW build ups and weird images and visuals that seem like he dug them up right from your subconscious, then I think this film here will probably come across as far to jarring and disjointed. Now, IF you are the kind of person who likes stuff that is more 'In your face' and kinetic with an Electronic-Techno soundtrack, and you like more direct, brutal imagery, well then you might like this movie more than I did. So, it just depends on the TYPE of visually 'Out There' kind of stuff that you like...
- Oct 7, 2015