I do like the effort this small crew and cast put into this, my hat if off to their efforts, with all the photos, evidence/CSI type stuff, newspaper stuff, not easy at all.
It does have its moments, visually, not bad, not amazing but still nice enough. The special effects with the scars and what not were very impressive and realistic, and so was the CGI effects.
My main issues is the script. Chris' goal: to find evidence the cult was real.
I get that it's for Chris to shed his guilt and be square with Billy, but it's forgettable because it's explained late in the film in a throwaway line and we don't experience the bond Chris had with Billy and the subsequent falling away of their relationship to feel the motivation.
He has to prove the cult is real, to who? Billy mentions the disbelievers, who, that's important context, and it never goes anywhere. He's dead and already believes in it. Why wasn't it for Billy's mother, to put her mind at ease and also Billy's, that would of made some sense. Billy was seen as mad, so why didn't he try to clear Billy's name, something impactful.
In the end, Chris meets Billy in a dream like cottage scenario, that's fine, but the problem is, it's not impactful or memorable, because that ending wasn't earn, great endings need to be earned. The whole film had very tame moments against Chris, no specific escalations against what he wanted to make the ending feel earned.
Billy says that Chris doesn't have to feel guilty about anything but if he proves his research as legitimate (to who?) then they're square with each other....which is it? Is he in Billy's good books or not?
It took till nearly the last 10 mins for anything impactful to the main character to happen, you need to put that at the beginning of the second act. You might be saying: "Where can you go from there?". Well, that's why writing is so tricky. I remember hearing in an interview with the Coen brothers about their writing process, when they come up with escalations for the main character, if they can find a way for them to get out of an escalation in less than 2 weeks, they they throw that out and try again. That's one of many reasons their films are so impactful and memorable.
The fact that his friend went all the way to Bosnia makes him the more compelling character than the actual main character, who just is in a cottage putting photos on a wall, it's so lack lustre. And what is "real" in terms of a cults existence? What specifically does he need to find, there is evidence of it all around him, it's not a compelling struggle. This makes the whole film vague, real to one person might not be real to someone else. Is it that the cult had an official leader? A registered manifesto somewhere that he needs to find? The cult has paranormal evidence behind it? And is it proof for Chris himself? For his doubters? Billy's mother? It's all so vague. It needs to be a specific thing.
He's basically doing the goal of Billy, fact checking the believers, nihilistic people and giving it to the people who thought Billy was mad. But that goal would be more fitting if it was Billy as the main character.
With Chris, he doesn't have as much to overcome, it's not him who is labelled as mad and wants to clear his name and be recognised as someone who studied something tangible and real as billy puts it. We don't experience Billy's reputation ruined or his mother being hounded by people for her "mad son", if that had of been the case, I'd of felt the motivation of Chris to verify this cult.
Had Billy's mother of called up Chris, desperate, she's a broken woman because her son died of mysterious circumstances in the middle of nowhere. Chris is confused and angry and guilty about not being there and us having experienced how good friends they were, and now wants answers to proof he died for something meaningful.
Chris needed to be way more pro active in his goal, it really isn't his goal, he's been asked to do it on someone else's behalf instead of Chris taking it upon himself to try and earn his friends forgiveness, it's just not compelling as it could of been.
The most powerful thing was the director's real experience of wanting to see his sick friend for the last time and not being able to and them dying without him being able to see them, that was more compelling than the whole film, why, WHY didn't he make a film directly about that, you can see in the film he had access to a hospital bed, WHY?????
With Chris, I don't experience the guilt and weight of how he feels to get on board and want to see him relentlessly try to achieve his goal. I would have, had I experienced how much Billy meant to him and experience Chris not being there when he died. Then I'd be on board. It just needed a few scenes. Shame.
It would of been cheaper, probably, easier and WAY more compelling than this film.
Had the film been about Chris trying to save his friend from dying (which leans into the cults ideology about meaninglessness and going to meet the God they serve) in the cult would of brought immediate stakes, escalations where the cult would stop Chris from saving his friend....it was begging for that.
We don't experience the bond he had with Billy, to feel his motivation to pursue his goal, all it needed was a couple of scenes. You had the actors together in a scene near the end, why didn't you show us their bond and then have it fall away and FEEL THE GUILT Chris felt. It's hard to get invested with this film, and with a goal that seems to have no reward, no focus, meander, no escalations against it, the man who wants the goal achieved is dead and he gives no reason as to why he wants it achieved, it's all very confusing.
The actor playing Chris, his American accent comes in and out, very inconsistent and barely American, some points he sounds like he's from England, then sort of American, it's odd and distracting. He's wasn't great with his performance, shame because he really seemed enthusiastic in his interview on the production YouTube channel.
The cinematography where Chris calls friends mum was very nice. I did like that. It felt very genuine and heartfelt. To me, it was the best scene in the film. Great job there.
But then he goes to the forest and listens to Billy about the cult and that it would perform killings and that their God would feed off of this suffering. How is any of this provable? You essentially have a goal, for Chris, that isn't provable, his goal isn't achievable. So what is the point of all this? How can you prove a God exists? All the subjects of the cult are mentally not well. How is the viewer supposed to get on board with a character who has a goal that is impossible to achieve? Proving God and verifying claims from mentally ill people? How? But, on the flip side, if it's simply about proving the cult simply existed, there's already loads of proof, so there is no need for any goal? ....I'm so confused.
When Chris' wife calls him. It has no bearing on the plot, she tells him things he already would know, so it's inorganic and just for the viewer.
Billy says that people from the cult, 1000's of miles away all quote scripture written about the same imaginary being? Maybe because of the internet....go back further, the bible allowed that to happen and that existed 1000's of years ago.
If Billy says the god is "imaginary" then how can all this be verifiable. Again, this goal is not achievable, this story will not work under the context provided.
The escalation where someone from the cult broke in and took things, stalked him, just wasn't compelling enough, steal all his research papers, that would be impactful. It really was pulling it's punches, you need to start big and go bigger from there, very tame. The "mysterious person standing by the house, breaks in" is such a cliche that it had no impact for me, i didn't lean in and go "what is Chris going to do now?"
Halfway through and there really hasn't been any conflict, any escalation against the main character, too much telling and exposition from characters, on and on and on, it really drags. The main reason for conflict is to deliver essential context to the viewer, and thus, without that, no wonder it becomes a muddled film at this point. Why is Chris here? What does he stand to gain? I do not see how getting embroiled in a cult will help him ease his guilt over his dead friend. It's just so muddled at this point.
In fact, after the halfway point, the cult and the man in black encourage him to practice the cults actions, opening up people, it's getting easier for him to see that it's a real cult, easier for him to achieve his goal, it should be the other way around. It's quite bizarre, I don't think I've ever seen a film where it gets easier for the protagonist to achieve their goal. The leader invites him to be blessed or his wife will take his place, it's not an escalation specific to the goal that was set up, it should be harder for him to verify it's a cult, again as I said, not easier.
Billy's experience going home from Bosnia sounds way more compelling than Chris'. Why wasn't the film about that? He was a way better actor as well, full of energy and charisma. He can emote in such a convincing way.
What about the God, wasn't it about to wake? Where's the payoff to that? That could of been compelling.
Honestly, the most compelling thing about his film was the voice of Jonathan Keeble, his voice has such an ominous presence, you get so sucked into what he is saying.
I was excited for this film, cult in the middle of nowhere had such potential. If the script got as much attention as everything else it might of been good.
I feel like David watched 'The Empty Man' and made this off of that. If so, great. If not, David, go watch that film, it is a GREAT film about a man investigating a cult because of a missing person he cares about and he REALLY goes down a rabbit hole and discovers something impactful. It's only on iTunes.
17 out of 27 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
