A Beautiful Train Wreck
There have been many brilliant horror movies in recent years, from IT to Get out and even Lights out made an acceptable showing; the Spierig brothers new film Winchester, will not be counted among them. A dry and dull affair, with all the tension of a wet noodle and the emotional impact of kindergarten musical. Relying entirely on outdated and overused film technics, hoping to catch viewers off guard as they slip in out of consciousness trying make it through its bloated and utterly predictable script. Winchester is a paint by numbers film emphasises all the wrong aspects and contains such little respect for its viewers it seems to actively go out of its way to insult them every step of the way.
The film claims to be "Based on true events" in much the same way that the vomit I had to swallow watching this film was based on the meal I once ate. It tells the story of a rich widower and heir to the Winchester gun company as she attempts to battle the spirits of all those killed by her company's guns through the use of nonsensical architecture and a belief in the divinity of the number 13. Told through the eyes of a painfully foreshadowed phycologist as he attempts to diagnose the aging widow and keep his mind intact through this unrelenting beat down of a film.
The films main stars Helen Mirren and Jason Clarke are both so obviously waiting for their pay check it's astounding that they weren't caught on camera checking their bank accounts. Both actors have proven themselves to be talented and capable of greatness, which just makes watching them phone it in with such apathetic performances you almost feel bad for them having to waste their time so very uncomfortable. The supporting cast range from forgettably mediocre to downright cringeworthy. Mirren and Clarke combined may be enough to carry this film, but it's a heavy burden and without motivation, they don't carry it far.
They aren't helped by the simplistic script and cookie cutter plot of course. With characters being forced to repeat and explain every single detail of the plot to such a minute scale that even the most unobservant viewers feel bludgeoned by the film and it's clearly non existent expectations of its audience. Not that the plot is complicated, philosophical or otherwise difficult to completely understand. The film seems to have a secret agenda, aiming to hit as many horror clichés as possible without being noticed and fails terribly.
It comes down to writer laziness more than anything, and no where is this more apparent than in its supposed "horror" elements. Relying exclusively on jump scares the film is about as nail biting as a double amputee. For all the dark pallet choices, dramatic camera angles and laughable attempts at foreshadowing, the film contains absolutely no tension whatsoever. The film is so predictable that a mere five minutes in, the audience had already begun audibly counting down the seconds until the next jump scare arrived. It's attempts at phycological drama are half assed and lead nowhere, much like the dramatic family angle that was almost built into a solid arc only to completely neglect the payoff at the finale. It's attempts at romance were so unreservedly noxious that it raises the question of whether the directors understand basic human emotions.
A question made further prominent when you consider that aside from writing and directing this abomination they were also responsible for the music. A monotonous, mind-numbingly soporific murmur that pervades the film. While not as terrible as the other aspects of the movie, the constant hum of tortured violins and protracted pianos wears thin very early on and works to further distance the audience from the atmosphere that the film makers seem so desperate to create.
If the film does have a saving grace however it is Ben Nott and his cinematography work. While this film may be doomed to the dumpster fires of history, it will be in no way because of how it looked. The lighting is appropriate to the scenes, the colour pallets are fitting and effective, and camera does the very best it can to portray the emotions and drama that the rest of the film lacks the power to present. Winchester is doomed to become a black spot on the resumes of nearly everyone responsible for this films creation, however anyone who has the misfortune to watch this feature will agree that Mr Nott deserves to hold his head high.
In summary, Winchester is a beautiful train wreck, a ten-a-penny mediocre mess of writing that somehow obtained enough of a budget to lure in a couple of decent actors and a good cinematographer. Is it scary? Most certainly not. Is it enjoyable? Only if you really like seeing handlebar moustaches. Is it worth paying the price of admission? If I still have to answer that question, then who knows, for you, maybe.
The film claims to be "Based on true events" in much the same way that the vomit I had to swallow watching this film was based on the meal I once ate. It tells the story of a rich widower and heir to the Winchester gun company as she attempts to battle the spirits of all those killed by her company's guns through the use of nonsensical architecture and a belief in the divinity of the number 13. Told through the eyes of a painfully foreshadowed phycologist as he attempts to diagnose the aging widow and keep his mind intact through this unrelenting beat down of a film.
The films main stars Helen Mirren and Jason Clarke are both so obviously waiting for their pay check it's astounding that they weren't caught on camera checking their bank accounts. Both actors have proven themselves to be talented and capable of greatness, which just makes watching them phone it in with such apathetic performances you almost feel bad for them having to waste their time so very uncomfortable. The supporting cast range from forgettably mediocre to downright cringeworthy. Mirren and Clarke combined may be enough to carry this film, but it's a heavy burden and without motivation, they don't carry it far.
They aren't helped by the simplistic script and cookie cutter plot of course. With characters being forced to repeat and explain every single detail of the plot to such a minute scale that even the most unobservant viewers feel bludgeoned by the film and it's clearly non existent expectations of its audience. Not that the plot is complicated, philosophical or otherwise difficult to completely understand. The film seems to have a secret agenda, aiming to hit as many horror clichés as possible without being noticed and fails terribly.
It comes down to writer laziness more than anything, and no where is this more apparent than in its supposed "horror" elements. Relying exclusively on jump scares the film is about as nail biting as a double amputee. For all the dark pallet choices, dramatic camera angles and laughable attempts at foreshadowing, the film contains absolutely no tension whatsoever. The film is so predictable that a mere five minutes in, the audience had already begun audibly counting down the seconds until the next jump scare arrived. It's attempts at phycological drama are half assed and lead nowhere, much like the dramatic family angle that was almost built into a solid arc only to completely neglect the payoff at the finale. It's attempts at romance were so unreservedly noxious that it raises the question of whether the directors understand basic human emotions.
A question made further prominent when you consider that aside from writing and directing this abomination they were also responsible for the music. A monotonous, mind-numbingly soporific murmur that pervades the film. While not as terrible as the other aspects of the movie, the constant hum of tortured violins and protracted pianos wears thin very early on and works to further distance the audience from the atmosphere that the film makers seem so desperate to create.
If the film does have a saving grace however it is Ben Nott and his cinematography work. While this film may be doomed to the dumpster fires of history, it will be in no way because of how it looked. The lighting is appropriate to the scenes, the colour pallets are fitting and effective, and camera does the very best it can to portray the emotions and drama that the rest of the film lacks the power to present. Winchester is doomed to become a black spot on the resumes of nearly everyone responsible for this films creation, however anyone who has the misfortune to watch this feature will agree that Mr Nott deserves to hold his head high.
In summary, Winchester is a beautiful train wreck, a ten-a-penny mediocre mess of writing that somehow obtained enough of a budget to lure in a couple of decent actors and a good cinematographer. Is it scary? Most certainly not. Is it enjoyable? Only if you really like seeing handlebar moustaches. Is it worth paying the price of admission? If I still have to answer that question, then who knows, for you, maybe.
- samuel-bell94
- May 6, 2021