Soho Square

I was going to give this a seven, but after re-watching it with the director's commentary I give it an eight. Its VERY hard to believe that it was made for £5000... it certainly doesn't look, feel or sound like so cheap a project. It doesn't have the 'floating fuzziness' of other DV features I've seen (this may be, as the commentary suggests, because some of it is film?) Whilst the performances are occasionally creaky and the exposition filled with ellipses, it manages to make a merit of its weaknesses as it moves further and further into willing abstraction. Its ultimately a film all about Mood and, in a way that belies its budget, it makes its tight-framed abstract photography, eerie score/sound design and thoroughly non-linear approach to its narrative its strength. The result is similar to the style of Don't Look Now, both use the flimsiest of thriller conventions (and this one is pretty weak) to launch off into fairly abstract film making territory. A masterpiece it is certainly not, but as a no-budget B-film, I found it remarkable. Confident enough in itself to relish its slow dark mood in the face of narrative necessity, film students take hope here.

From the information posted on IMDb's site I gather this is an opera prima and if so, we might be in presence of a talent to reckon with. The interview with the director included in the DVD clearly shows a person in his twenties, ready to show what he learnt and is capable of.

Yes, the first half hour or so is confusing -maybe deliberately so- but I'd say the plot is cleverly exposed and handled. And the way things turn out to be and how the particular murder the film begins with fits into the series of killings the plot centres on is smartly devised. I concur with others, commenting the movie on this website, on the unresolved issue of the neighbour mum and daughter, perhaps a more seasoned film maker would have taken care of that more adroitly; yet a case could me made towards the transposition of the detective's wife and unborn child and hence the attention he gives these otherwise peripheral characters. Criticising slowness in plot progress in European films is common in this side of the Atlantic and it's really no big deal. They make their films evolve at a given pace, US and (some) Latin American film makers prefer a different one, it's a question of personal preference.

But in sum, let's follow the work of this young Englishman, for he seems a promising talent.

I couldn't really come to care about the filmic aspects... I was too distracted by the script. The script--if there was one-- was so completely devoid of a ANY merit, I soon couldn't get past it. I quit noticing a nice looking or well framed shot here and there because I was too busy agonizing over why such poor choices in both the script and production had gone unchecked. In the meantime, there are enough hokey but still creepy bits that it was generally a downer -as I guess it was supposed to be--but not through any mastery, just through really bald clichés.

After I watched it, I went to find out more about why it had ever made it to my local rental place; I wanted to know who was to blame. I signed up for this account specifically because I'm so angry with this movie.

yuck!

(I've thoroughly enjoyed, with some reservations, any number of Dogme95 movies... I wasn't expecting a Hollywood Blockbuster)

Anthony Biggs plays the no-name protagonist in this British indie, which starts out blandly enough, like one of those Helen Mirren helmed "Prime Suspect" episodes. As the film progresses, insights are revealed that flesh his character out, and his portrayal is specific and compelling enough to keep you watching. At just the right moment, he chooses to expose facets that make the shocking denouement almost plausible. Director Jamie Rafn plays around with time sequences and jump cuts in a way that's not so much clever as it is jarring. Overall, a very uncomfortable, low-fi, effort that is about anything but the pyromaniacal serial killer supposedly at the focus --- and is all the better for it. Great avant-garde jazz score.

I've noticed that some people have rated this movie a 10. Others have said it's one of the worst films ever made. The truth is somewhere in the middle. If the budget of this film was actually 7K (pounds or dollars?), then it's a very impressive achievement. That said, it's not nearly as good as El Mariachi as some have suggested.

The film moves slowly through the first 20-30 minutes and it's unclear what's really going on. Yes, a cop is investigating a series of murders, but what's really going on? As the film progresses, some things fall into place...but not all of the pieces. Some of the scenes are head-scratchers. What's up with the little girl and her mom? I didn't see a reason for them to be in the film.

As for the technical aspects of the film, the music is very good in a few instances. For the most part, it's terrible and inappropriate to the action. The cuts back and forth do not bother me; it actually provides a fairly suspenseful climax, which was the best scene in the film. The acting is of decent quality, with no outstanding performances. Overall, the film is a 7/10. If you want to see a bad movie, skip this. If you can stand a slow-moving noir, then check it out.