Traque sanglante

I'd been following this films progress for quite some time so perhaps expected a little too much. I consider both Gillian Anderson and Danny Dyer to be good at what they do and was interested to see what Dan Reed could come up with but unfortunately it just didn't work for me.

The problem lies in the fact that the film doesn't really seem to understand which genre it's falling into and as such it fails to impress on drama, horror and thriller elements because rather than focusing on one of them and doing it well it's a bit of a jack of all trades and master of none.

The premise (as with most revenge films) is simple, couple meet and go out, something bad happens and they get their revenge it's a simple formula and one that many directors have handled expertly over the years. Unfotunately in this case it's as if Dan Reed thought, "It'd be great to do one of those revenge films that goes a little deeper by showing a more human side to all the characters and delving into their mental state in more detail...." Wrong! There are also a few key elements missing, in this type of movie there's generally some kind of warning. A don't do this or this might happen element which adds to the tension but there's nothing of the sort here. It just simply happens, then nothing happens for an hour, then something interesting happens and then it ends.

There's a lot of really stiff competition in this genre and hats of to Dan Reed for trying, I have no issue with his directing abilities but in term of writing... I'd say next time he should stick to the formula for the type of film he's making instead of trying to be too clever and he'll have a quality movie on his hands.

Saw a preview of this last night. Still not completely sure what I made of it to be honest. It's a very short film at only 1 hour and twenty minutes and despite this it still feels a little padded as though there wasn't enough story to make it long enough to be a feature film. The key scenes are graphic and harrowing enough and I definitely left with a bad taste in my mouth. Gillian Anderson was probably the best thing about the film but I don't really buy Danny Dyer playing opposite her and there were certain scenes that were unintentionally humorous because of this. Dyer has definitely been a little miscast here and it does make you wonder whether it could have been better with a different leading man. The other problem I have with a film of this type is that in order for you to care about the plight of characters I believe you need at least a little insight into their lives prior to what we are seeing on screen, we need to know about who they are in order to root for them and I never really felt this film gave us the big picture in this regard. Despite it's flaws it's still a watchable drama/thriller but with a few more original ideas and a little added characterisation it could have been a whole lot better.

Straightheads wants to be a modern version of Straw Dogs but just ends up being low wattage, low grade muddled revenge tale.

Alice (Gillian Anderson) is a high powered businesswoman who enters into a relationship with young Adam (Danny Dyer) who only came round to install a security system in her flat.

Alice probably wants a bit of rough and asks Adam to attend a party in the countryside. On their way home, Adam is attacked by three men, Alice is raped.

A month later, still traumatised after the attack, Alice wants revenge and track the men down.

Even with its short running time, this is a slow tedious film and badly shot. I never bought the relationship between the two people. We initially see Adam spying on her in his monitor as Alice comes home from work. After the attack he feels impotent, smokes dope and watches porn.

I love these types of film. Where a man or woman gets horrifically abused and goes on a bloody warpath of revenge! I know the plot is usually thin, but it's often exciting and engrossing enough to carry a film. Just the anticipation of seeing the evil b******s get exactly what they deserve. It's often a feeling of satisfaction. But, it certainly isn't the case with "Straightheads". A film the lottery decided to fund for some bizarre reason! I mean I've written a film and I think it's way better than some of the things I've seen, but do I get any lottery funding? NO!

Rape, revenge is usually quite difficult to get wrong. Even if it does go a bit belly-up it's usually fun and entertaining at least. Actually, the majority of "Straightheads" is quite dull, slow and tedious which is unexpected for its surprisingly short running time of 75 minutes or so. That's about the length of "Inside" and "REC" just think about how much incredible excitement is experienced in those minutes! "Straightheads" sort of failed immediately by being not in the least bit plausible. Would you really ask your slacker camera fitter to go to a party with you? And why would the camera fitter not even question the idea? It starts off weirdly to say the least. When the nasty abuse occurs it's shot in the least effective way with too many clumsy close-ups and basically zero lighting to see what's going on! It also feels quite nasty for the sake of it and doesn't have anywhere near of the directional flair that say, "The Ordeal" expressed during a similar scene.

After this event, you might think that the characters would become a little more likable? They don't, in fact they become even less likable and don't get developed any further either. Am I supposed to like a man who's stoned out of his mind on the sofa, playing weird chav music with porn on his telly? It also doesn't help that Danny Dyer and Gillian Anderson's acting are more wooden than the forest. I felt zero chemistry between the two characters as well, the whole relationship thing was completely unbelievable. Though it wasn't as unbelievable as the pathetic reason given to why the rape occurred!

The film also seems as if it tries to divert from any possible exciting acting that could've actually been quite fun! There's a promising bit where Danny's hiding in the house and one of the men gets a glance at him on the top of the stairs, but nothing really that exciting comes from it! Similarly, there's a part where a daughter runs out the house shouting for her dog which is swiftly avoided with yet another embarrassing sex scene between Danny and Gillian, but don't worry the camera's so clumsy that you can't see a thing!

When the revenge finally does occur (after about an hour of no-suspense building up to it) it's so quick that it feels even more pointless. I don't know if that's what the director's trying to say, that revenge is pointless, but he did it in such a way that it made his whole film pointless! Has he not seen "7 Days" or "I Saw The Devil" which tries to convey the same message in such a gripping and emotional way? (well obviously not because this came out before those two but..) It's also done in a nasty way that just seems like it's trying to shock for the sake of it. It's cringe-worthy and not in a fun "Saw" way, but in a perverted and "why am I watching this?" way!

"Straightheads" does show effective use of direction in the very last minutes but by then it's far too late to care. "Straightheads" is a dull, nasty, implausible, badly written and atrociously directed thriller that thinks it's being way more effective than it is. If you're looking for rip-roaring, emotionally-charged revenge then I would suggest "Kill Bill", "Oldboy", "I Saw The Devil" and other Korean films. Even the remake of "I Spit On Your Grave" is much more intelligent and effective than this. I'd recommend giving this one a miss.

This movie had all the keys to be a great movie, but I was very disappointed with the storyline and characters. Gillian Anderson is a great actress, but I didn't like her in this role at all, maybe other viewers will feel differently. I finish watching this movie, only to see how it ends. Slowly and slow disappointing.