Treed Murray

A man named Murray gets into an altercation with a gang after getting lost in a park. The gang then chases him and Murray is forced to hide in a tree. Of course it doesn't take the gang longer than a minute to find him hiding up there (and thankfully it didn't take them longer... that would've made for a poor movie). This is how Treed Murray begins. The rest of the movie takes place over the course of one night, with Murray hiding in the tree, and the gang waiting, taunting, intimidating, and threatening him from down on the ground.

Of course Treed Murray isn't as simple or basic as the plot may lead you to believe. At only 90 minutes long, it manages to be more intriguing, fascinating and brilliant than any movie I think I've seen in the past year. The dialogue, which makes up 95% of the film, is more than enough to carry the entire movie on it's own. On top of that there are amazing performances from all the actors. David Hewlett, who was the best thing about the Canadian show Traders, is in almost every scene as the main character, Murray. He brings so much to the movie and his character. At every point in the movie you sympathize with him, despite his character being a bit of a low life. It seemed like every other scene had some new revelation about Murray that gives you good reason to hate him, yet Hewlett still makes him a likeable guy somehow. If Treed Murray can get as much great exposure as one of Hewlett's earlier movies CUBE got, he could become one of Canada's next big acting exports.

But as brilliant as David Hewlett was in Treed Murray, myself and everyone else who watched it with me thought he was upstaged by Cle Bennett, who plays the gang leader Shark. Bennett is powerful and charismatic, an odd thing for a young and fairly inexperienced actor. One of the questions brought up in the story is why Shark is the leader, and why he makes all the decisions for the rest of the gang. I'm thinking if I knew someone like him, I'd probably do whatever he said too. I hope there's a Director out there looking to hire Bennett, because he has such star potential.

In the end what really works about Treed Murray is it's realism and character development. Even though Murray is the hero of the film, he has many flaws. And even though all the gang members would be clear cut villains in a typical American movie, here they have several redeemable qualities. I loved that all the characters had interesting and honest things to say. Despite the fact they're trying to kill a guy for no reason, I found myself agreeing with so much that they said.

Treed Murray is one of those rare movies that you not only can't turn off once it begins, but you can also watch over and over and over again. I give it 10 out of 10. If I was allowed to give it anything higher, I would. I LOVE this movie.

If you were to read a summary of a film about a man stuck in a tree and you weren't at least intrigued about how a director and actors could sustain a film for about 94 minutes about a man in a tree then you clearly are a person with no curiosity. If like me you are a curious person then you have to watch this film and if you are not curious then i especially insist that you watch this film.

Simple concept. Business man Murry is on his way to work and to avoid homeless people and the crowd takes a short cut through the park. On the way he is stopped by a 14 year old who demands five bucks for directions. Murry who is not keen and to waste five bucks knocks the youth in the face unfortunately for him the rest of the gang pops out and Murry runs. Tired and with no way out he climbs a tree. From here on in is the setting of the film, Murry in a tree surrounded with five youths.

The acting by the entire cast is of high quality David Hewlett's performance as Murry is just a pleasure to watch as he tries to save himself but as he also reveals more of his sort comings. As the film progress' your perception of all the characters change as you realise that everyone is both heroic and no-heroic. The depth and breath of the characters is what makes this film intriguing, this film is purely about people and the lengths people go to survive and to belong to something.

After watching this movie, I came here expecting it to get a rating somewhere under 3. I was astonished seeing the 8, and more astonished reading the reviews. This movie was just plain awful, the characters weren't very believable if you ask me. I thought the funniest part was at the end when that guy(I didn't bother remembering the names) went to get his grandfathers gun from the garage, real tough gang there. Then the part where they were cheering Murray and the cop just went away, ugh. FJOEWIJGROIJG is the only way I can describe it, I'm just in awe at the high rating from IMDB voters.

Taking a page from old-fashioned, one-off thrillers from the Sixties and Seventies like LADY IN A CAGE or THE INCIDENT, writer/director William Phillips uses a deceptively simple plot to produce a psychological thriller/character study that at the very least is engaging. Thank goodness the producers made sure that it got a title change before reaching American screens. As it is, the new title "GET DOWN" may trick some people into thinking this is some kind of disco period piece like CAN'T STOP THE MUSIC. For anyone who may have given this film the brush-off for that reason, let me assure you: this one is WAY better.

The premise is straight to the point: a harried businessman, John Murray (David Hewlett from the excellent CUBE, another controversial indie flick), is on his way to work downtown, and probably late. Not wanting to be bothered by the homeless people and the panhandlers, he decides to take a short cut through the city park. Bad luck for him. On the way, he is stopped by a young thug whom he asks for directions. The teen demands money for his help, and when Murray refuses, the kid blocks his way and demands his wallet. P*ssed off by this, Murray pops the kid in the face with his briefcase, which results in the sudden appearance of the rest of the "gang" the young thug belongs to. WORSE luck for him.

A chase ensues, and a desperate Murray resorts to the only thing he thinks will prevent him from a severe beating: he climbs a very tall tree. Hence the title. Now a war of words, wills and wild attempts to get at him begins, revealing things about Murray and the young punks who are after him, that let the audience in on one important truth...none of us is better than anyone else, even when we'd like to believe we are. Because as it turns out, we are more alike than we want to admit, or may even realize.

For a small, short film with no big names to speak of, there are strong performances all round, with Hewlett leading the cast. Murray is not a likeable character, even when we know that he's in the right about defending himself, yet Hewlett still manages to make him seem human and flawed, rather than outright hateful, which would've been a major hardship for the film to overcome.

All the young performers are fairly good, with Cle Bennett a remarkable standout as the "gang's" leader, Shark. He has a lot of the same vibe and style as ANGEL'S J. August Richards, and I suspect it won't be too long before we end up seeing him getting a lot more work.

Though the socio-political and economic issues addressed here have reviewed before, and in much better fashion in other movies, at least Phillips guides his cast in a way that makes it all seem fresh and original. That said, the director couldn't miss throwing in a least one homage, namely to John Carpenter. It involves a very unexpectedly creepy scene, in which Murray witnesses first hand, the one thing that makes his aggressors actually run for the hills, (or in this case, the bushes.) It is a very goosebump-raising scene that carries with it echoes of ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK or ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13, and you've gotta love somebody with enough smarts and savvy to give 'props' to those two classics.

I'll give this four out of five stars. A bigger name cast and a more seasoned director would have raised GET DOWN'S cinematic pedigree, but as is, it won't leave you bored, and not too disappointed, (unless, like me, you don't get into the anti-climactic finish.)

I was flicking through channels on my TV dial at 1:30am couple of nights ago when I stumbled upon this thing already deep into opening credits. Though the little that I saw of the introductory sequence had me convinced it was at best a corny Canadian TV 'project' or an episode of some US syndicated TV series shot in Toronto I still decided to keep watching. And I'm glad I did. Well, kind of.

The first part of the movie (chase scene, Murray getting on the tree, first physical confrontations before the impasse, etc.) is truly riveting. It exploits every big city dweller's palpable fear - that of being victimized in a random, senseless act of violence. Basically, this is the same shtick Steven Spielberg built his movie empire on: introduce a rudimentary phobia every normal person harbours to some degree, extend it to extreme levels, and then exploit it cinematically to no end - his movie "Duel", and even "Jaws" to a lesser extent, often came to mind during the initial stages of "Treed Murray". So, kudos to William Philips for, at least, keeping me on the edge of my seat. At this point I still cared about all characters and was really interested in seeing where the plot takes them.

Unfortunately, the movie starts derailing sometime into the public park tree standoff. Despite coming off as this great menacing force in the beginning, watching these 5 hoodlums gets to be a major drag as time goes on. The screenplay tries its hardest to put a human face on them through minor, halfassed subplots, in hopes of providing the story with fresh legs, but all the details they (in)voluntarily surrender about personal hardships pale in comparison with the fact they're chomping at the bit to kill this random guy for absolutely no reason. We also learn Murray is no choir boy himself, but again, the fact that he cheats on his pregnant wife, occasionally uses hard drugs, and generally seems to be a manipulative, self involved jerk is completely irrelevant when viewed against the insanely murderous path these kids are on.

The fact that screenplay calls on the kid-gangsters to take turns at being evil, insightful, conniving, benevolent, barbaric, caring, bloodthirsty, poignant, etc. doesn't help either. That it comes off hokey is no great surprise as such series of transformations would be next to impossible even for seasoned pros to pull off, let alone a bunch of teen actors.

One also can't help but notice the unrealistic touches throughout the film. Murray, lame ad-exec who probably never lifted anything heavier than a pencil in his life, exhibits remarkable balance and stamina in fighting off a couple of charging gangbangers from a narrow tree branch. While incapacitating one of them, the other manages to get on the tree and Murray amazingly further succeeds in cuffing and tying him using a personal belt - quite a feat considering for example that it usually takes two trained cops to cuff an overzealous protester on terra firma.

Still, I'd be more than willing to overlook all the artificial moments had the movie been more brave and direct. It started off with a lot of potential but quickly started losing its punch.