Chained for Life

A unique film that acts to comment and critique the audiences biases. Technically speaking the film is excellent, with unique shots that fulfill a larger purpose. They didn't film a scene a specific way because it looked good, but because it fit the narrative, or was trying to make the audience as uncomfortable as the actors.

The story is simple and i was there was more meat on the bone, at points it felt like it drifted off focus, and the conclusion felt rushed and underdeveloped. Ultimately the film acts to break down and critique how "abnormal" people are viewed by society and treated in the film industry. It does an excellent job directing this message to the audience, if you pay attention you will understand what the director is saying about our behaviour towards the "abnormal".

Unfortunately i think the movie was held back by some unconvincing performances by Jess Weixler and Stephen Plunkett. Their dialogue felt unnatural and as if they were reading directly off a script. Every other actor did a fine job, especially Adam Pearson, who delivered a stunningly charged performance during a car scene in particular (no spoiler).

I would recommend this film to anyone interested , it could challenge your world view.

This must have been an immensely enjoyable film to make, once they'd worked out what piece of cinema or film they were actually trying to conjure - a little bit all over the place, to say the least, but as original a proposition as you've likely encountered for some time - with the main premise established on cultural prejudice and discrimination to difference. It uses those who lack the symmetry of societal expectations of beauty, by several standard deviations in this case, to reaffirm that differences are only skin deep but those physical attributes are shackled to the individuals psychology, as well as societal norms, whose end result is to imprison them without bars for most, if not all of their lives - akin to living in an open prison or asylum for a crime or crimes you didn't commit.

A movie about making a movie, and more.

One of our two main characters has the genetic disorder - neurofibromatosis. So, kudos to both, Pearson & Weixler, for their commitment & skill in presenting a thoughtful script.

Movie statements: "Disfigurement - they taunt me and beg me to show my face. Only so that when I do, they turn away in horror." "Do we long for beauty because we seek order & symmetry?"

MY thoughts: One thematic goal was reducing stereotyping in film. Another theme was - should a disabled or disfigured character be played by a non ... Yet, oddly, in this film, the Siamese twins portrayed were not joined; just twins. Another theme - is it vanity putting on make-up to feel pretty? Still another (and I really question) - "Actors that are beautiful have a greater range of expressiveness which gives them more opportunities, and we love to look at them."

One review had remarked on the movie being a puzzler about many layers of frames competing. I think the meta-cleverness of the movie being within layers upon layers makes it hard to watch, but that it also resonates long after in the same way Memento does. You have to really think about how it all fits together and what it is saying.

The uniqueness of normality. The beauty of authenticity. The illusiveness of abnormality. The uncomfortable act of being seen. The ugly act of being ignored. The horror of theatricality. The truth of fiction. The monstrous clarity of objectification. The innate naturalism of aberration.

The least democratic thing in our society is how attractive others find us.

This movie is a subtly unfolding, intentionally clumsily-forged, plasticine act of dreamlike kindnesses and social inhumanity.

The mostly unseen Herr Director of the movie-within-the-movie, Warner Herzog-esque in his rhetoric but Uwe Bollian in his craft, is a huge delight. And Jess Weixler does her best young Drew Barrymore at first, but arcs towards being herself as the film unclenches in its formalism.

I also like how this movie opens by highlighting one of the multitude of ridiculous Ayn Randian comments that hack Pauline Kael slung in the name of film criticism.