Bad Turn Worse

Bad Turn Worse is a crime thriller done without big budget, but still manages to entertain. It presents good script, murky atmosphere of rural town and fresh partially ironic take on crime drama. The movie is not without flaws though, the pacing might suffer at times and despite some good twist the characters fall into stereotypical teen early on.

This is a story of three teenagers who live in Texas dusty town. One of them decides to steal from the mob, a poorly made decisions that drag all of them into gradually escalating situation. It's a bit slow to build-up on first act as the teens only exchange banters. The plot takes speed after a while, although it's still marred on a couple of scenes.

The premise is seemingly simple, yet the script is smart and it delivers nice twists in timely manner . Acting is good for the three leads, they look juvenile, desperately determined and wanting promise of better life. The chemistry works by meshing these bored boorish characters together in much more adult condition than they are supposed to have.

What set apart this movie from mediocrity is the occasional moments of fresh delivery amidst its bleak visual. Several of the scenes are interestingly done, a bit self-aware, surprisingly bloody and a very reminisces of classic pulp fiction.

Having many genre familiarities, it can be a bit stereotypical and the display of boredom might be stagnant, but with its fine performance and good material, Bad Turn Worse is an engaging human and crime drama.

I seldom write reviews - especially about forgettable films, but I can't understand why every prior review for this film is either so adulating or lambasting. I thought the film wasn't that bad, but it's not all that great either.

It's not a nonstop adventure like "30 Minutes or Less." Its pacing is more like that of "Near Dark" or "A Simple Plan." And the pacing very fits well with the story and its setting.

The script was pretty well-thought out and well-written, if not exactly moving or memorable. The direction and cinematography were excellent. They used the flat, bland, decaying Texas coastal plains marvelously - kind of like John Ford used to use the American west. When the film is over, you may forget the characters, but you'll remember the scenery.

Mark Pellegrino has fun with his role as a charming and self-wise sociopath. William Devane makes the most of his minute on camera.

Mackenzie Davis affects more of a middle Tennessee accent than a south Texas accent but at least she tried. Logan Huffman sounds just like Bruno Kirby and somebody apparently thought he would be more believable as a Texan if he simply called everybody "Hoss" or "Podner." I doubt that annoys anybody outside of Texas (I see most of this movies rave reviews came from Canada, Scotland and Ireland) but sure annoys the hell out of people who know better.

But my biggest complaint, however, is that I haven't heard so many racial insults since "Django." Again, maybe this is the stereotypical Texas that people elsewhere want to imagine, but people in south Texas haven't spoken like that since the '40s or '50s. There's so much intermingling of ethnicities in that area that to think or speak like that would offend the overwhelming majority of ones' family and friends.

Now granted, fictional stories deserve a wide latitude for artistic license, and people involved in nefarious activities can be offensive and without conscience. But so much of the characterization was simply cartoonish and ultimately I think that undermined the film.

I saw this film at the Toronto Film Festival and it was without question, the finest film there. I hope this film gets wide theatrical release! For first time directors the Hawkins Brothers have produced a very tight film that treats the viewer with respect. The cinematography is stunning, particularly given that the film is shot in a rather bleak part of Texas. The film was intense from start to finish. Mark Pellegrino has taken the world of bad guys to a new level. He's a local for sure, but was an original. Quite frankly, all of this cast was top rate. While there are three relatively new actors involved, I expect that we shall be seeing them all down the road - and I would certainly include the directors in this statement, as well. If you get the chance, see this gem.

Now, this is disappointing only because it seemed like it was going to go in more interesting places. The first act is definitely stronger than what follows. Everything before it turned into this crime thriller really, really worked. Its pacing was really well balanced and it seemed like, I don't know, I would be more original? Everything after the money really was just another run-of-the-mill crime story. The acting is fine, Pellegrino is a lot of fun, but really, less and less interesting as it went on. The climax is all kinds of predictable, hokey, cheesy, clichéd, overdone... you name it. Despite the contrivances, I still liked it. The pacing is really well done and it has some nice moods.

Three Texas teens hope to make a break for it and escape their dead-end existence in a cotton-mill town but get sucked into the seedy underbelly of organized crime when one of them steals from the wrong man.

The general plot of this is pretty good, and fans of crime or heist movies will probably dig it. There is a really cool scene with the heist run-through that really makes the film for me, and if nothing else, solidified this as a better-than-average movie.

What are we to make of the "32 ways to tell a story" theme? Is that a hint of how we should interpret this plot? It seems like yes, but exactly what we are to take away from it remains unclear. Perhaps a second viewing is in order?