Red Lights

The skeptical psychologist Dr. Margaret Matheson (Sigourney Weaver) and her assistant, the physician Tom Buckley (Cillian Murphy), are specialists in disclosing fraudulent paranormal phenomena. When the famous psychic Simon Silver (Robert De Niro) reappears to his public after many years of absence, Tom becomes obsessed to investigate whether Silver is a fraud or not.

"Red Lights" could have been a good movie with an intriguing premise. Unfortunately the plot is destroyed by the awful rushed conclusion, leaving many open questions behind. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Poder Paranormal" ("Paranormal Power")

Dr. Margaret Matheson (Sigourney Weaver) and her assistant, Dr. Thomas Buckley (Cillian Murphy), are university professors who debunk psychics, mystics, healers, and other similar snake charmers. They have never met a fraud they couldn't uncover, until Simon Silver (Robert De Niro).

Simon Silver had been around for ages doing his schtick. Margaret went up against him years ago and lost. He stopped performing for a long time after an opponent of his died of a heart attack during one of his shows. For some unknown reason he is seeking to make a comeback and Tom Buckley wants to take him down. Even though Tom is hankering to expose Simon, Margaret is not sold on the idea, in fact she's opposed to it, but Tom will not be denied.

When Tom starts the process of trying to figure out Simon's tricks many weird things begin to happen. Is Simon doing all of this? Is he really as powerful as he claims?

"Red Lights" is atmospheric and well paced with good dialog. I like the plot idea: using science and instrumentation to expose fraudulent psychics and mentalists. My sentiments are always with the most sincere and the least arrogant, yet I'm always looking out to see if I'm being swindled by the movie itself. "Red Lights" keeps everything fairly straightforward without too many plot tricks. This was a good movie and a good quality production overall.

Free on IMDb TV.

Firstly, apologies for the review title. I've seen too many tabloid headlines.

Red Lights was reasonably original, well-written and well-acted. Any movie that can tick these three boxes is worth a look. Although the build up to the introduction of De Niro's character (Simon Silver) represented a slightly excessive portion of the movie it was, nevertheless, interesting. I gather the ending has divided opinion quite a lot, and I admit that it could have been done much better. I've said before when reviewing movies that it's never a good sign when you have to have a character explicitly explain just what has happened in the film. It might have been a better idea to leave it without the explanation and let the audience decide. That might have stoked up debate in a good way and generated some more interest in the film.

Acting-wise i'm sorry to say i'm always skeptical when Robert De Niro appears in a movie nowadays. The man was a terrific actor in his day, but he's been in a lot of recent turkeys. He doesn't have a lot of screen-time here but his performance was fine. If he keeps choosing credible films like this one his reputation will start to repair itself. Sigourney Weaver performs with credit as usual and I always rate Cillian Murphy highly.

Definitely worth going to see this. It's above average, if only slightly.

Not very often do you see such juxtaposition in film in terms of narrative structure. Unfortunately the second hour of this ambitious thriller fails to follow its enthralling predecessor, which explores a new and engaging concept.

Following in the footsteps of the director, why not separate my review into two halves? Though I will try not to decline in the quality of analysis.

With a highly respected and frankly quite surprising cast (the surprise being the lack of marketing and attention the film has received), nothing negative can be said of the fine performances, most notably from our protagonist Cillian Murphy. The actors deliver dialogue to assist the slow plot development and at times subtle, appropriate humour between Murphy and Sigourney Weaver's characters. The chemistry between the two paranormal researchers is evident throughout and it is not until one of the film's many expositions where this is lost. This technique of continuous revelations is what enables an audience to remain in their seats despite having perhaps consumed too much of the overpriced beverages from the lobby, and as cliché as it is, keeps you on the edge of your seat. (hopefully not due to irritability) The script itself unveils an original idea of exposing paranormal phenomena as fraudulent, which itself is reason enough to enjoy this film in theatres while you still can!

Now onto the second hour, I mean paragraph. The immediate impact of the arguably primary disequilibrium can be felt as it occurs, as the tone of the motion picture changes. Unexpected plot holes begin to expose themselves as spots might to a thirteen year-old. This unfortunate turn in events (speaking both figuratively and literally) proves to lead to an eventual anti-climax, that cannot be described as anything else but disappointing. As a consumer, I found myself questioning where exactly the film was going, as one might if taken on a different bus route to a usually predictable destination. Though we ended up at the expectation of predictability and disappointment. (only an expectation in hour two) Anticipating the final exposition was a task of its own, would there be a resolution? Would our unusual tragic hero achieve his goal? How would a new equilibrium be incorporated? This is what kept blinking to a minimum throughout, though eyes were still rolling at particular moments due to the inconceivable mistakes and unexplained occurrences. We were almost being rushed towards the end of the story so that the theatre could get more people to enjoy the film for an hour or tw... forget it, just the one hour.

Without the cast to save the ambition and potential of Rodrigo Cortes' piece, it no doubt would have been a disaster in all respects and its already mundane box office performance would be as low as my mood coming out of Screen 14 last Wednesday. With all respect to the director/writer though, 'Red Lights' is worth watching based solely on the first 60 minutes because of the idea, as well as the performances of the many talented actors, despite some characters being completely irrelevant and unnecessary. If you find yourself searching for something to do one evening, and if there are no particular films you desire to see, but you desire to see a film then 'Red Lights' will moderately satisfy your appetite, though you may be disappointed there wasn't more on the plate.

When you see the cast list for this film, you have to wonder why it never succeeded. Red Lights is not a perfect film by any stretch, but it is still engrossing and approaches the subject matter with a care and detail you wouldn't expect.

In regards to my experience with Spanish and Mexican filmmaking (I bunch them because they seem to have similar artistic tropes) Red Lights possesses much of the same details. Moody lighting, technically sound editing and generally brisk pacing. We get this during the first 2/3 of the film, and then things kind of fall off the track. Cillian Murphy's character is becoming unhinged and possibly the more frenetic pace and editing is meant to match that. Either way it wasn't necessary. Murphy has enough range and chops to bring that energy to the screen.

What I especially loved was Robert De Niro's performance. Hammy, over the top when it needs to be, nuanced and bizarre when the story calls for it. I especially enjoyed the aspects of how Sigourney Weaver and Murphy hunt down and debunk the fake mediums and psychics. It's clear the director has some experience or did massive research on the subject. I appreciate this because we were definitely brought into the world of the skeptics and the believers.

There is really only a couple things I disliked. The music was basic at best, sometimes coming in too hard and melodic. I especially did not like the score for the final scene, which is really the only part of the movie I take issue with. In a perfect world, the score and the Coda would have been removed, and instead the final scene could have played out like The Usual Suspects. Either way, we got the ending we got. I think many people would hold it in higher regard if it wasn't spelled out the way it was. Maybe we will get a directors cut (unless the choices were what the director wanted of course).

The movie won't wow you but it will bring you in. I enjoyed the premise and while the ending was too spelled out... I had no problem with the final resolution.