Trinity

I had no idea what to expect when I saw this film. Cast of (relative) unknowns and the title doesn't give much away either. But...it's a treat. If you like a film that defies genre, that was made outside the mainstream and asks you to think a little then you could do worse than take a look. On the surface it looks a standard sci-fi thriller, two military officers arrive at a remote arctic station to investigate a distress signal sent by a scientist believed missing and wanted for crimes against humanity. As soon as they arrive the sci-fi trimmings vanish and it becomes an intricate and very human psychological game of cat and mouse. Shot with panache and directed with flair it's a little rough around the edges no doubt as a result of a probably low budget and WARNING! it does contain a healthy dose of male and female nudity. Trinity went to work on me long after I saw it and some of the images achieved on a relatively low budget stick with you long after the titles have faded. If you want an action fest don't bother but if you want to be challenged, surprised and in one particularly poignant moment actually moved then check it out. It's worth 80 mins of anybody's time.

Trinity is a curious movie for several reasons. On a practical level, it's curious because, although it was completed in 2001, it has yet to achieve a wide release either at the cinemas or on DVD. On the level of content, it is even more of a mystery.

The film has many of the elements of a stage play: closed, intimate setting; a few characters who we get to know in great depth; concentration on dialogue; and intense performances from each of its three central cast members (Tom McCamus, Stephen Moyer, and Lucy Akhurst). However, its look is nothing that could ever be achieved on stage. Despite the low budget and limited locations, Trinity still looks and feels like a work of art.

In some ways it reminded me of the archetypal low-budget success story Cube, with its atmospheric changes of lighting, claustrophobic rooms, and sense of mystery. Trinity, however, is a much more personal, internal film. There is no external challenge to be faced, no race to get out of the Cube or to survive. The challenges the characters face are their personal demons, and their reasons for being there in the first place.

Although personal demons are not generally the most cinematic or visually interesting subjects of film, each of the three actors convincingly portrays the many sides of their characters. Akhurst is full of tormented rage, and McCamus dangerously quiet. Moyer in some ways has the thankless role of the piece, attempting to insert a voice of reason and normalcy into the situation, until he too is revealed as more than was initially suspected.

Trinity offers no easy answers, and much of the film serves to continually question the characters and their motives, rather than to resolve any issues. However, it is very much a film that begs to be examined more closely, rather than given up out of frustration. Hopefully it will soon get a wider release, and be given the attention and critical respect it merits.

Movies like this... I don't know. Usually I don't watch this kind of movies (ahem... I have a few more odd movies in my collection), except when an actor that I like is in it. Just like this one. Tom McCamus is a very talented actor, and in a few weeks of hanging around on the internet with Tom McCamus fans, it's hard not to become one yourself. So, I'm game.

They say that this is the movie that got Tom McCamus his role as Mason Eckhart in Mutant X. Tom McCamus plays Dr. Clerval. According to me a mixture of Adam Kane (because of his arrogance) and Mason Eckhart (just.. the voice, the glare, the movements... wow).

The lightning is great, the acting is magnificent, especially by Tom McCamus. That man can do a lot with just one look or the tone of his voice. The 2 other actors, Lucy Akhurst and Stephen Moyer are so and so. Stephen Moyer's character is just... annoying and Lucy Akhurst plays the role of the tormented and lost Schiller well. The soundtrack is neat, and the movie shows that you can do a lot with one subject only.

It got me on the edge of my seat all the time. I loved it.

The weird thing is that the movie hasn't been released on DVD overseas, but in a small country like Holland (and Belgium). (Come on Fireworks! Release it already the proper way!)

If your tastes run to movies requiring attention and thought to unravel, Trinity may be for you. If you want car chases and explosions, go elsewhere. Even when there is an explosion during Trinity, we see it indirectly, reflected in the eyes of one of the characters.

Set in an alternative present or near future, Trinity's world looks like ours but it isn't. Trinity deals with the aftermath of genetic experiments directed by a Dr Clerval, an aftermath resulting in the deaths of people followed by the disappearance of Clerval.

"Clerval" is the name of a friend of Dr Victor Frankenstein in the original novel.

Agents Brach and Schiller are sent to investigate a distress signal sent from the arctic research station formerly operated by Clerval. They find one person there, a man who looks like Clerval but who claims to be his clone, not Clerval but "of him", possessing some of his memories, but not all. But is cloneClerval telling the truth? Nearly the whole of the movie deals with the interaction of these characters. Bach and Schiller both have personal agendas beyond assigned duty. It is difficult to know who and what to believe. All three characters carry emotional burdens involving the others, bringing them into constant and sometimes violent conflict with one another. The isolation of the research station creates a claustrophobic atmosphere that none of them can readily escape.

Elsewhere, Trinity is listed as having a run time of 120 minutes instead of the nearly 80 minutes as released in Holland in autumn 2004. Trinity is known to have several different versions. It would be interesting to know just what was omitted in the present release, and how the other versions differed. It would also be interesting to know why the movie was completed in 2001 but not released until 3 years later, and then only in Belgium and Holland.

9 double helices out of 10

Nicely shot, well lit and great music. I'd love to write some more positives, but I'm struggling to find them. I think the script is mainly at fault - it disobeys most of the screenwriting rules (fair enough if the final product works, not if it bores you to tears) and doesn't offer the viewer enough to hold their interest. At the end of the day, there aren't many films you can return to after taking a leak and not realise that's it's still paused for 10 seconds.