Frequencies (OXV: The Manual)

Director: Darren Paul Fisher. Starring: Daniel Fraser, Eleanor Wyld, Owen Pugh. UK, 2013. Budget: unknown, but very low. Box office: unknown. IMDB: 6.8. RT: 100%. My rating: 1.5/4. Romantic girly YA movie pretending to be hard science fiction.frequencies

– Sex is like masturbation, just with someone else.
– I hope not.
(conversation between Marie and Zak)

– I have a 210 I.Q. I never needed to take notes. I just didn’t want to always have to look at people or have them looking at me. It’s the eyes.
(Marie)

It may actually took a while to figure out what is wrong with “Frequencies”. The photography is solid, the dialogues ate witty, the acting is trustworthy and the concept may seem intriguing. Quiet high ratings for such a low budget British movie. But… it just doesn’t work all together. For a not high demanding viewer that doesn’t ask too many questions, “Frequencies” may seem fine. But after a deeper look, it’s easy that it is just another shallow YA movie, this time without a big budget. The whole construction of the movie starts falls apart rapidly. “Frequencies” suffers from a typical disease of being too ambitious, hence trying to say too much and as a result saying little.

vlcsnap-2015-04-20-12h20m10s808

The plot. What we have here? An alternative version of the world, where each person has a special frequency. It totally decides your destiny – those with high frequency w20170307_143753ill never be late for a train, get a bad job offer or spill a cup of coffee (and vice a versa). The whole society is divided from early school years in different groups based on each person’s frequency. Accidentally a boy (Daniel Fraser) with one of the lowest frequencies ever falls in love with a girl (Eleanor Wyld) with a uniquely high frequency. Can he find a way to stay with her?

After a good start, instead of developing more main characters and telling us more about 20170307_143545frequencies and the dystopian (utopian?!) world, the movie is piled up with unnecessary elements. None of which are truly original or well explored, mostly being borrowed elsewhere. Examples? For a few minutes we are introduced to a character who learnt how to foresee the future – this idea is never repeated again. Then, main characters manage to invent a special machine that can alternate frequencies if special words are pronounced. What is it, science fiction or Harry Potter? (I have nothing against Harry Potter, by the way). Then we learn that these magic words cause a side effect (and it’s rather silly). Later, we are introduced to the music concept – music somehow equalizes different people’s frequencies. To make it even worse, the plot even introduces a conspiracy based society. And trust me, there’s much, much more…

20170307_143708With this kind of a realization, the main concept seems even more superficial. Finally, what is this frequency? Is it your destiny? So what will happen if somebody with a high frequency and a low frequency go to catch the train at the same time? The movie never explores even an idea that simple, let alone how the whole society works.

The reception. The film currently has 100% on Rotten Tomatoes (which I find weird). It didn’t win any major awards on independent film festivals except for Kansas City FilmFest.

Worth watching? Not really. “Frequencies” may impress those who haven’t seen many good films as technically it is a well done movie. But dig deeper and you’ll recognize that it looks more like 20170307_143732a shallow gimmick than a good-hearted story it intended to be. After all, it’s one more YA romantic story about a divided society, two teens who cannot be together for some reason (frequencies, in this case) and try to change their destiny.

Don’t fool yourself with the sci-fi wrapping – there’s very little of it. The more you deconstruct the film, the more it starts to fall apart. Surprisingly, the messed up plot, good photography and very decent acting may mask the flawed concepts pretty well (hence high ratings), but as you peel deeper there’s little inside. At its best, “Frequencies” can deliver some witty lines.

Acting:  3/4
Directing: 2.5/4
Originality: 2/4
Maturity: 1/4
Pathos level: high
Final vote: 1.5/4

Watch instead: “The Lobster” for wry and deadpan humour about our society norms and a couple relationship’s dissection, sentimental “Fahrenheit 451” by Francois Truffaut is a curious old dystopia based on Ray Bradbury’s novel, “THX-1138” for minimal and deadly visuals, “Gattaca” for a futuristic take on humanity, “Sunshine” for space dystopia, “Moon” for a minimal thought-provoking futuristic dystopia.

But if you really want to understand why I was so harsh with “Frequencies”, have a look at “Dead Man’s Letters” and “Stalker“. These movie are meaningful and touching, but never manipulating… never having so much vicious excess.

Never Let Me Go

never_let_me_goDirector: Mark Romanek. Starring: Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley. UK, 2010. Budget: $15 million. IMDb: 7.2. My rating: 2/4. A love triangle story in a dystopian society.

– We didn’t have The Gallery in order to look into your souls. We had The Gallery to see if you had souls at all. Do you understand?
(Miss Emily)

There is something deeply weird with “Never Let Me Go”, the third feature film by Mark Romanek. Mostly, it’s the tone. Continue reading

Triangle

TriangleDirector: Christopher Smith. Starring: Melissa George, Michael Dorman, Rachael Caprani, Henry Nixon, Liam Hemsworth. UK, Australia, 2009. Budget: $ 12 millions. IMDb: 6.9. My rating: 1.5/4. Unscary horror wrapped in a dull time-looped puzzle.

– Well listen we don’t have to go today if you don’t want too.
– No I do… I… I… I wanna go.
– You sure?
– Yea… yea!
– Yea? OK!
 Lets go sailing!
(a typical dialogue)

Most movies about time travel/time loops share one thing in common. No, it’s not what you thought. It’s an immense and inexplicable character obtuseness. I mean, what would a normal person do if he travels in time and meets his friends or even himself? Of course, kill everybody, do odd stuff he wouldn’t normally do, write scary messages to your counterpart and maybe slaughter him as well! Otherwise time travel is not fun, right?

It’s also the first thriller I have ever seen that takes its own plot so carelessly – the poster itself is already a spoiler. Continue reading

High-Rise

Director: Ben Wheatley. With: Tom Hiddleston, Jeremy Irons, Siena Miller, Luke Evans, Elisabeth Moss. UK, 2015. IMDB: 5.7. My rating: 2/4. Psychodelic decadence kaleidoscope of a class conflict in one building.

highrise

– You know, Toby, when I was your age, I was always covered in something. Mud, jam, failure…
(one of the main characters)

– Do you want an autograph?
– I am actually searching for Riesling.
(dialogue between Hiddleston’s character and a famous actress)

– Keep the change!
– There is no change.
(dialogue between Hiddleston’s character and a shop assistant)

20170317_221720High-Rise” is based on the 1975 novel of the same name of J. G. Ballard. So maybe some of you have some idea of what to expect. I didn’t. The story is about a luxury tower building projected by a talented architect Royal (wonderful Jeremy Irons). It is fully functional and has everything necessary for its inhabitants, even a gym and a supermarket. A young psychologist (Tom Hiddleston with a very aristocratically sad face) has just moved in. However, soon the tension starts to rise between common families living on lower floors and an elite class living higher.

20170317_190118

It is an extremely cold-blooded movie. With all the atrocity, sex and schizophrenia that we20170317_221637 see, it leaves however no place for the compassion. There is too much of everything – too many characters that change each other too quickly, too much craziness that may appeal first but then falls into a self-repeating decay, too many straight-forward metaphores (for example, the surname of most important person in the tower is Royal). It starts pretty intriguing but soon, just as during the scene where Hiddleston’s character with no emotions is operating on a human skull in his laboratory, the director Ben Whitley tries to use same cold approach 20170317_221118on the novel’s metaphore about capitalism and social classes. From being just hectic and nervous, the movie becomes simply shizophrenic with the feeling of “let’s see what’s inside of this skull”. There’s some good satire and irony here, but it’s spread for almost 2 hours that feel infinitely long.

20170317_220853As the story goes on and the bloody revolution actually happens, it’s easy to lose track, like if the movie didn’t know in which direction move next. The photography is beautiful and the acting surprisingly is really very sturdy, balancing on the edge of excess (Tom Hiddleston, Jeremy Irons, Elisabeth Moss, Siena Miller, Luke Ewans and many others – all did a good job!). Still, I couldn’t refrain from the feeling that instead of being means to express something, the redundancy and craziness became the aim, like here they were created just for the sake of it. It’s like fighting for freedom not because you want freedom but because you like to fight.

20170317_221039
High-Rise” is beautifully shot. Most scenes and just any random frame could be easily converted in great photograph or even poster. You get this feeling easily – just have a look at the trailer. But as I said before, our eye can be tricked with ease and it gets used quickly to the excess on the screen.

Worth watching? Decide by yourself. In first place, it would be honest to pay tribute to the20170317_185711 director – “High-Rise” is stunning visually and all actors are great. But that’s it. It’s not a bad movie, but it feels just… somehow unnecessary. “High-Rise” drowns in excess, just like the elite class it’s deriding. If you want to examine an ant hill that is put on fire, then go for it. Still, with a source like here it could have become something bigger, but it seems that this was more of a cool-looking exercise for Ben Wheatley without examining deeply what the story is really about.

Attack The Block

Director: Joe Cornish. Starring:  Jodie WhittakerJohn BoyegaNick Frost, Luke Treadaway. UK, 2011. Imdb: 6.6. My rating: 3.5/4. Black comedy with alien invasion in London suburbs.

– No idea. Not a bloody clue. Maybe there was a party at the zoo, and a monkey fucked a fish. 
(Ron about the alien the boys found)

– You’re quite fit you know? Have you got a boyfriend?
– Yeah.
– You sure about him? Where is he? Cos he ain’t exactly lookin’ out for you tonight. — He’s in Ghana.
– You going out with an African then?
– No… he… he’s helping children. Volunteers for the Red Cross.
– Oh… is it? Why can’t he help children in Britain? Not exotic enough is it? Don’t get a nice suntan. Tsst.
(conversation between two teens)

This one is a true gem with British flavour. A lovely movie indeed and it’s much more than it seems. It’s kind of a bad street teenager with rough manners, but good at heart, sentimental and ready for the next adventure. The story starts with a teenage street gang of mixed race in South London suburbia – they find themselves right in a middle of an alien invasion. So i20170205_210824magine mixing the life and language of street teenagers who try to seem cool and control, as they believe, through fear and minor crimes, with the sudden attack of the monsters. Hilarious, scary, atmospheric and sentimental. And all that wrapped in a social context. Continue reading