Page 3 of 4
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:19 pm
but in horror there is a need for figure of Other - monstrous, dangerous, different, one needs an opposition. in this case blue collars. but maybe you are right to some extent, because all of the country folk in EL where somewhat strange/sociopathic/etc. (btw, Calvaire does the same IIRC)
but director said he didn't want to make a social commentary, but a horror flick. i am not sure if it really neccessary to always search for a political message behind a movie. because it is scary as hell - realistic and disturbing.
for me it was very powerful opening of FF. i remember myself sitting with jaw on the floor, not believing what i was seeing. knife to the mouth - awww! the other scene that really moved me was, when they set Indian boy on fire - totall shock. what was the strongest point of EL to me, was its plausibility - one can easily imagine some minor situation escalating into such a bloody mess.
great movie even if class issues are debatable
CAPTURING FEAR not a commentary on society
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:59 pm
This was one of my favs of the festival.
I think the thing to remember is that the movie is trying to capture THAT FEAR you feel, well i do anyway and i'm a big guy, when you pass a group of youths in the street on a cold dark night, that little gnawing doubt if you're going to get your head kicked in tonight.
and this is what happens in my nightmares...
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:01 pm
grzegorz wrote:but director said he didn't want to make a social commentary, but a horror flick.
Frankly I don't care what the director said his intentions were, the effect was that I felt increasingly that the film was hitting me over the head with a right-leaning agenda.
This was the effect this film had on me. To be honest I think it is unlikely that an overt message of any kind was intended, and clearly the "hoody" is a new trend in horror. But I feel that if you are making a film that skews so close to reality then it's disingenuious to claim that no social commentary was intended.
I can tell I'm in the minority in having a problem with EL, that's fine, and I wont deny it was well made and acted (the ending was still contrived though).
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:57 pm
Well i consider myself left-leaning (although soft-left) and quite like the fact that it put the boot into those kinds of people. Maybe I'm a left wing reactionary, although one can indeed be left wing and very reactionary. It's not exclusively the preserve of the right.
I like you though found the ending contrived (what happened to the car she crashed into right near the house?) and depressing. I wanted her to get revenge.
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:00 pm
grzegorz wrote:but director said he didn't want to make a social commentary, but a horror flick. i am not sure if it really neccessary to always search for a political message behind a movie. because it is scary as hell - realistic and disturbing.
I agree with this. We can analyse something to death but sometimes I think it's inappropriate. It would make sense to here had the director said he was making a point about society, but as pointed out here, he just wanted to make a horror film. I feel that the most effective horror films are those that play on realistic fears, and to be fair, the gangs of kids with not much to do are a real concern for many people.
I see this film as more about events getting out of control, rather than a statement about class.
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:28 pm
I don't really understand why having a few gobby chavs in a movie has provoked such a big debate. Why is that demonstrative of a "right-leaning agenda"?
If you watch any drama featuring businessmen, senior police officers or politicians, they are almost without exception portrayed as corrupt, self-serving and venal, but I don't see anyone making a fuss about a "left-leaning agenda".
And we're talking about a horror movie here. Is the rest of this forum filled with anxiousness about negative portrayals of rednecks, Norwegian hunters, medical students or satanic social-workers?
In any case, the chavs aren't even portrayed in a totally negative light. Brett is clearly psychotic, regardless of what "class" he comes from, and at least two of the other kids are shown to have severe doubts about what they're involved in.
Posted: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:04 pm
Nice to see so many people had similar thoughts as myself. I was a little troubled that the "social commentary" was reactionary, but once we got to see just how extreme Brett was prepared to go to avenge his dog, the film tipped into action/horror and left any realism behind.
But it achieved what it set out to do - I felt my pulsing racing several times during the latter half, and I'm sure I forgot to breath a couple of times.
What with this and The Strangers, this should teach any nice young middle class suitor not to propose marriage to his beloved without a shotgun or an armed guard.
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:03 am
MaxRenn wrote:Frankly I don't care what the director said his intentions were, the effect was that I felt increasingly that the film was hitting me over the head with a right-leaning agenda.
well, i have to agree - director's intentions are to some extent not important. his creation speaks for itself. thus i'd say - i loved the movie, it scared the sh*t out of me, _despite_ contoversial tackling of social issues. it might be right-wing, conservative bullsh*t in portraying rural communities (but as somebody above mentioned - not all the kids are alike, some of them have doubts etc.), but it is still very effective - scary.
This was the effect this film had on me. To be honest I think it is unlikely that an overt message of any kind was intended, and clearly the "hoody" is a new trend in horror.
again, have to agree. the film speaks for itself.
But I feel that if you are making a film that skews so close to reality then it's disingenuious to claim that no social commentary was intended.
probably, commentary on "hoodies" was intended. but portraying blue collars in such a way was because of genre rules - when setting up the story there is a need to create sense of otherness, not belonging, threat. opposition normal vs. abnormal. it is my feeling that such right-wing optics (if we agree to call it that) is by-product of the genre.
on the other hand - there are horror movies where upper classes, aristocracy, etc are the villains - there is legion of movies like that. do you apply class analysis to "Dracula" as well?
anyway, it's nice when movie creates controversy and i agree to disagree (although i see your point)
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:04 am
grzegorz wrote:anyway, it's nice when movie creates controversy and i agree to disagree (although i see your point)
Going to be very interesting to see what happens when this movie is realeased in the UK. Posters all over the underground in London now, much as I disliked it, I think it could take off in a big way if it connects with an audience (which it clearly did at FF). If I worked in the P&A dept for whomever is releasing it I would be setting up a private screening for Amanda Platell right now
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 10:53 pm
before i saw this film I had dubbed it Daily Mail: The Movie.. it lived up to expectations :P
Posted: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:05 pm
It does seem that the director has gone out of his way to make a film that will provoke The Daily Hate to bitch and moan. Just because a film is rated 18 it wont stop people moaning about it, as people love a good moan.
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 1:03 am
I'm still struggling with this concept of Eden Lake as a right-wing, middle-class, Daily Mail, etc movie which portrays an "entire class" in a negative light. We see a few arsey teenagers and their immediate families. They're not very nice people - so f***ing what??
Who's to say they are even "working class"? We see one family house and a Saisho boombox and hear some regional accents (although they all seemed to have different ones...). Maybe the rest of them live in a mansion and get chauffered to school.
Are troublesome teenagers (and bad parents) some kind of urban myth? Or should there have been some nice PC little disclaimer at the end saying "This was a work of fiction. The producers acknowledge that the vast majority of working folks are well-adjusted, productive members of society and apologise for any offence caused to hoodies (the nice ones anyway)."
Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2008 10:47 am
Thought this was a good opener for FF. The tension was built up well and the kids felt like a more extreme version of kids I see most days.
I didn't like the couple to start with, although they grew on me through the film - they seemed far too happy and smug at the start for my liking...but maybe I'm just bitter and twisted?
Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:05 am
this was a great start and a really made film, great acting from both the younger and older actors and yes an element of reality although as with all good horror/thriller just alittle removed from reality but still with enough of a hint to make you think...mmm would i have done that
Posted: Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:43 am
I had a chance to review this film, if you're interested: