The_After_Movie_Diner

Please join me as I wrestle with an existential crisis, religious symbolism, Michael Paré and a rotisserie chicken:

The Shelter is the debut feature of writer, producer, actor and director John Fallon. It is a psychological and spiritual drama with a brooding horror underneath for good measure.

I would say it is the kind of film that explores the kind of themes that would only get made independently, and I say that as a huge compliment. It is one of the many reasons I am glad, as a website owner and movie reviewer, I get to see independent films: for the ideas.

It stars Michael Paré who has been garnering an incredible amount of praise for his performance, and rightfully so. It is the sort of soulful, captivating, varied and powerful performance that not only breathes every squeak of life into the script and the premise but also keeps an audience glued to their seat, unable to look away. Good thing too because Paréis on screen the whole time and, for most of it, he's alone.

The story of revolves around Paré as Thomas Jacob. He's a drinking, smoking and screwing, down on his luck hobo with twin bags of guilt and self-loathing. Showing up in an unnamed town he drifts from place to place as we slowly learn scraps of his tragic back story. Finally he winds up at an abandoned, new, white, sterile, eerie town house. Once he enters, he is unable to leave and suffers a long a night of soul challenging haunting, visions and dreams. While a little slow and definitely, frustratingly cryptic in places, the movie excels through the lead performance, the direction, the cinematography and the score. Its lush, crisp photography (by Bobby Holbrook), that makes strong use of light and iconography, and Fallon's keen eye for an interesting angle or a curious piece of intriguing symbolism, lends the whole film a rich, disturbing atmosphere.

The colour scheme is particularly effective and different. While some scenes feel realistic, others are photographed in cold blues, odd greens and moody oranges. Such thought and attention has been paid to the overall look of the film, which is wonderful because so many low budget productions forget to do so.

Keen attention has also, clearly, been placed on which film stock and even which film speed to use, especially during the fantasy segments. There are some very striking and beautiful images contained within the film and the production should be applauded for their cinematic achievements. Although kept to a pleasing minimum, the use of CGI is highly effective also.

The score by Shawn Knippelberg is a discordant, moody and different delight! It's never intrusive and always on point, helping and, sometimes, creating the atmosphere of the film. It perfectly accompanies the drama or the delirium as a good score should do. You never quite know where it's coming from, what you're hearing or even what it's being played on and this adds to your sense of unease.

Also, the juxtaposition of the re-occurring folk song is perfectly jarring and a confident stroke that could so easily fail and yet here succeeds beautifully.

A mention here, too, for the small supporting cast. As I said earlier, most of the film is a one- hander with Paré, who is excellent and not to be missed, but in the few key scenes where he is interacting with, mostly, the women in his life they are all very strong performers and distinguish themselves well. Over all the creative and talented successes in this film far outweigh its weaknesses which, for me, came down to the pacing in some places and the ambiguity of the final act. Maybe I have grown jaded on a steady diet of easily explainable and satisfactorily wrapped up Hollywood fare or maybe I don't remember the religious texts that were drilled into me back in school but I did feel that some of the film's intention and meaning was lost on me.

Maybe that was the point. The film is definitely open to interpretation. That is, also, let's be fair, utterly refreshing when compared to other, tried-and-tested, cookie cutter movies. When was the last time you were left asking questions or thinking about what it all means?

In my mind the film is dealing with themes and mostly ideas, emotions and experiences that people keep inside, hidden, gnawing away at them, picking at the thread of their subconscious. It tries its best to visualise and manifest feelings of self pity, self doubt, loss, guilt, anger, regret and everything else our, de facto, hero is carrying around with him. Its with this task that I think the film definitely succeeds. It's the religious underpinnings and possible message that maybe was lost to me but this also means the film will hold up, for me, to repeat viewings and finding new things each time. In the end though, having a satisfactory conclusion or all of your questions answered is not what it's about. It's clearly a very personal, intelligent work of art by an emerging, talented filmmaker and an aging character actor showing he has depth and range with challenging material.

Everyone will take something different from and everyone will find something they think is enjoyable, intriguing, beautiful and/or sinister. Whatever aspect of the piece grabs you then I guarantee it'll be with you a while. I know, for me, the photography, the atmosphere and some of the images will take a long while to shake off.

Well the first thing I should point out is that it's not really an action movie, in the traditional sense. There is action in it and two of the scenes in particular are joyous, violent, exciting, well shot, brilliantly executed and suitably cathartic but overall I would describe it as a character piece with a slice of crime drama and action/revenge film tacked on for good measure. I have read tons of reviews coming down on this movie, mostly criticising The Stath, and I have to say that they couldn't all be more wrong. The two best things about this movie are Statham and Simon West, the director. The third best thing is Vegas.

First though, let's get the bad news out of the way. The one thing the other critics won't say or do is criticise the Hollywood legend William Goldman who penned this film, the book it's based on and the Burt Reynolds version of the same story Heat from 1986. I, however, am not most critics. This script, which is almost identical in places to Heat, has no structure, pretty weak dialogue and never quite delves into the character of Nick Wild in the way the movie sort of suggests it should. Let me explain that last part. The film is made up of lots of little strands of plots. A crime story involving the mob and a battered woman's revenge, a wealthy kid who hires Wild to bring him out of himself and be more of a man and, all the while, Wild wanting to leave Vegas but also never quite being able to. None of which are ultimately, really important as they are all meant to just add up to a character study of Nick Wild who, we learn, is a well liked security expert/bodyguard/problem solver with a rough exterior but a heart of gold who has a little issue gambling. It's the 'throw enough bits in a pot and you'll be able to cook something' approach to screen writing. What depth, character and moments there are to be found are brought out by the collaboration of Simon West and Jason Statham, not by anything readily apparent in the script and the pair of them are superb here. It's a difficult watch though because it's not a standard narrative. The crime story sort of has a three act structure but not really and the film, if it was a traditional film, just sort of ends.

The other thing that threw me out of the film a little was the whole world Nick inhabited was populated by famous actors but all of them just showed up for one, sometimes two small scenes. It's an interesting way to cast a film but it did leave me sitting there thinking 'what the hell are they doing in here for just 5mins? that's a bit mad' rather than fully engaging with their characters. Stanley Tucci, Jason Alexander, Sofia Vergara, Hope Davis, and Anne Heche all just crop up and are gone almost as soon as they appear. They play such innocuous, nothing roles as waitresses, card dealers, a lawyer, a mobster... just random 'that guy' roles but being played by recognisable, fairly high tier, character actors. Due to the nature of the plot and the nature of the casting, when the film ends you sort of wish you could spend a lot more time in this world. I have heard this said by another critic but it's something I agree with, it's almost like a pilot for a Statham driven show on HBO or Showtime. It has that kind of plot and casting. A TV Show, I might add, I would watch every week. However as a film it does feel slightly like 90 minutes of set up and no pay off.

All that being said Vegas has never looked so 50s, shabby and cool. Simon West directs with the sure hand of an old pro while also putting in some welcome style and interesting editing. It has a 50s meets 70s feel, it's scored with groovy, slow versions of Christmas songs and it's very very cool. Nick Wild is also a great Statham character because while he can handle himself physically, and he does in some tremendously choreographed, beautifully shot, violent as all hell fight scenes, he also has a nice sense of humour, a strong moral principle and a weakness for the cards. It is only this last aspect, the gambling addiction that traps him in the purgatory of Vegas, that just doesn't come across very well. There's either not enough time spent on it, the script doesn't write it well enough or it just belongs in another movie like a "Leaving Las Vegas" style thing perhaps. Statham does his best to sell it though. If I had to pitch it to you it's Drive (the Ryan Gosling film) meets Leaving Las Vegas the TV Show pilot with Jason Statham.

I would say catch it on VOD unless you're a hardcore Stath head like I am. It does look kick ass on the big screen though, just saying.

This is a funny, charming, unique, throwback slice of Americana with a monster in it. Don't watch this expecting scares or gore, watch this because it is chock full of invention, humour, observation and ideas. It's a homage to old time, small town ideals and camp fire story telling. In this cynical, self referential, gratuity obsessed culture it is a breath of fresh air to see this low budget, independent cast of colourful and creative characters band together to make this movie. When I watch it I can't keep the smile off my face but it's not a derisive smile, it's enthralled, entertained joy.

On top of everything else it is photographed really well and there are some genuinely wonderful shots in the film. The music is an unrivalled delight, the acting is a style all of its own and although it's obviously a suit, the Riverbeast costume is terrific!

I would urge people check this and the group's previous efforts Freaky Farley and Monsters, Marriage and Murder in Manchvegas as they offer more peculiar, funny tales of the things that might be lurking in your woods!