Violation

It's wholly different from any other rape-revenge movie out there, and has so much to say about the genre and an audience's thirst for revenge. Not strictly a horror film. I'd call it more of a Haneke type drama with some truly grotesque moments.

How do you deal with grey areas? Now the main incident that kicks our main character ... out of her "comfort zone" I reckon you could call it ... is something that a lot of people will have a debate over. The movie almost dares you to talk about it ... make a judgement ... give your take on what you think happened or rather who is to blame - maybe even both individuals.

I personally think it is clear whose fault it is - having said that, it does not mean I agree with what follows - what is being done to the guilty party. Now you can interpret that any way you want. And the movie makes it easy to get triggered ... it shows a situation that could and does unfortunately happen. But again, there are grey areas ... so there is room for some debate - or is there? Even that is up for debate ... a movie that dares and does handle a subject matter that has been exploited in a different fashion ... while ultimately also exploiting it ... differently and in some forms the same ways ... it is tough to actually go into certain crazy things that happen ... and if you are squeamish you probably shouldn't even watch this ... everyone else prepare yourself to feel very uncomfortable ...

When I saw Violation at TIFF earlier this year, the passion from the creators was more than evident, with their capabilities being well showcased in the short films created in the past 13 years or so. A lot of those technical capabilities can be found here, made more impressive by the film's small budget. It features a solid performance from Madeline Sims-Fewer in the lead role, some fantastic color choices, and impressive practical effects. However, where this film falls flat in my opinion is in the content of its story. The film has a solid concept at its core, and naturally warrants a slower pace; but unfortunately does not make good use of its time. Between long conversation scenes adding little to the story, and intense scenes progressively becoming sluggish, the hour and 40 minute runtime of the film ultimately feels unwarranted, and often padded. I would love to see more from the directors, as they are clearly very talented, but Violation unfortunately left me feeling disappointed.

The pace of the movie was very slow. I got bored watching. It's not a horror movie. The drama aspect of the movie predominates. The director emulates biologists in the movie. He took a long shot of clear, enlarged images of caterpillars, birds, fingers and fingernails, and even the stamens. It's like he wasted time prolonging unnecessary scenes so that the movie would be longer.

This was the absolutely most annoyingly too-long and too-slow film I've ever seen. Someone forgot to get the reel to the editor, because each and every scene was between 25-95% too long and dragged out. I lost count how many times we all yelled at the screen "omg get on with it already" or "someone please fast forward this already". This film is the epitome of "too much filler and very little substance". I've never been and seen a more annoyed audience.

The ridiculously too-long-for-this-film 107 mins felt like over 3 hours. The useless and unnecessary Nat. Geo nature shots were utterly annoying and pointless, so let's take 15 mins off for that nonsense. Now cut out an average 70% from every single scene. Now you're left with a 28 min short film, that will hold every viewers attention, eyes glued to the screen, with them sitting on the edge of their seat, with their heart racing and blood pressure elevating. THAT, is what makes a great film, not endless useless fluff and filler that makes you angry and lose interest - constantly.

Just for fun, I will use a basic editing program and cut this film down to a short myself, just to watch it again and actually enjoy it, as well as recommend only my version for viewing to my friends and family. Otherwise if you really hate someone, have them watch this full dragged out long and boring annoying nonsense.

Clearly the problem here was that collab'd writers and directors Dusty Mancinelli and Madeleine Sims-Fewer have only written and directed short films, this being their first full length feature - that should've also been a short. Aside from some plot and technical issues, the core concept and guts of their story was excellent, especially taking some gambles with gore and borderline soft-p0rn nudity. Unfortunately, transferring that concept into a full length screenplay, ended up a muddled melodramatic mess beyond belief. Had more writing been invested in the characters relationships and dynamics, this may have worked as a full length film.

The cinematography was horrible with the worst decision for color filters and contrast. The shaky cam was bearable, but the close-ups were unrecognizable for the most part. You'll squint, get closer, go farther, rewind and relook, and you still won't be able to make out what the heck you're supposed to be looking at. And then out of nowhere, for no reason, a bug is in the frame lol. The score was very fitting, although it was also too loud, too frequent, and overbearing in some parts. Performances were on point and convincing, especially Sims-Fewer.

Although this was a low budget indie film, it still had serious contention to be great - had it been edited/cut down to a short, of which I am determined to do myself, and/or had more substance and much less filler. It's a very generous 5/10 from me, more so for the efforts invested.