Régression

For a long time, Alejandro Amenabar has been one of my favorite writer- directors for the twisted suspense thrillers. He was quite prolific at the turn of the century -- "Thesis" (1996), "Open Your Eyes" (1997) and his English-language debut "The Others" (2001). His biographical drama "The Sea Inside" won an Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film in 2004.

Since then though, his output had been sparse. That was why when I heard that he will be releasing a new film this year entitled "Regression," I made sure I went to watch it.

Seventeen-year old Angela Gray accuses her father of sexually abusing her. Detective Bruce Kenner is assigned to her case. The father meekly admits to the crime, but does not actually recall doing it. Kenner seeks the help of Psychology professor Kenneth Raines to elicit his repressed memories, as well as those of the other members of the Gray family, via hypnotic regression. What is revealed from these sessions are diabolical confessions of such disturbing nature that Kenner himself could not get them out of his own mind.

Ethan Hawke is such a good actor, really. From his feature debut in "Dead Poet's Society," then "Before Sunrise" (and its series), "Gattaca," "Sinister" to his Oscar-nominated performances in "Training Day" and "Boyhood," this guy can really portray the most ordinary characters and wind up making them very memorable. His intense take of the obsessed Bruce Kenner was riveting and infectious. His visions become our visions, his beliefs our beliefs. He had a flawless interactive rapport with Amenabar's camera, registering and conveying the anger, paranoia, confusion, and fear of his character so well on screen.

Emma Watson returns on her trajectory to becoming a serious movie actress after being sidelined by unfortunate roles in "This is the End" and "Noah." The talent and the promise are there, but the connection with her role as the troubled Angela was not as convincing as that of Hawke's. Her best performances were still those for Hermione Granger. Her young adult performances in films like "Perks of Being a Wallflower" and "The Bling Ring" had a certain unnatural stiffness in them, as it was again here as well.

Credible supporting performances were given by David Thewlis as the authoritative Prof. Raines and David Dencik as Angela's repentant father John. Going a bit over the top was Dale Dickey and her exaggeratedly demented performance as Angela's grandmother Rose. The strangest casting decision was that of Lothaire Bluteau as the priest Reverend Murray. He exuded such a creepy vibe, which of course may be the director's intention.

While "Regression" was still not on the same level of excellence as "Open Your Eyes" or "The Others," Alejandro Amenabar returned to form with this comeback project of sorts. The script, though weak and flawed in certain aspects (like motive, for one important example), was still logical and grounded despite dealing with controversial religious and psychological matters. The storytelling engages you despite the dark unpleasant topics and relentlessly morbid atmosphere. I am looking forward to the next Amenabar opus. I hope it does not take so many years anymore. 7/10

And it's also a mystery how we watch movies or what we expect of them. You may watch something and think it's the best thing ever, just to find out you're more or less alone with that sentiment. But that's why arguing or even discussing movies can be so much fun and is intriguing to say the least.

Take this movie, which is not the best thriller ever made, but is more than rock solid. I really liked it and it has to do with the acting, the mood it builds up, the tension throughout and how it makes sense altogether. That doesn't mean that everyone enjoys it or will enjoy watching it. Especially if you can't wrap your head around what is happening - or how it is happening. Some won't like how it turns out (no pun intended), but it was fitting in my book. It's something more for the mind rather than something that just relies on shock values (though it has more than its fair amount of that too)

I knew nothing about the film before I watched it, nor about the events on which it is based. Perhaps because of this I became very confused about the film's point of view.

At base, this film asks the viewer to try to distinguish reality from fantasy during a police inquiry into accusations of satanic abuse. The problem with the fim-maker's style, for me, was that all the resources of cinema were used to illustrate not only the satanic abuse reported by witnesses but also other scenarios that had not been reported, so we saw constant scenes of abusers with spookily made-up faces and monks' cowls, and various horrific depictions of satanic abuse. Because cinema is a naturalistic medium, it was difficult to know what was fantasy and what was reality.

The film in some ways had a classic detective-story structure, with Ethan Hawke as the determined investigator. But it became clear that he was an unreliable first-person character after he began behaving irrationally, and that left me, as a viewer, with nothing to cling to as a source of viewpoint in the film. When it came to scenes in which the detective was absent, it was even more difficult to distinguish what the film-maker was depicting as real and what as fantasy. For example, when the victim's grandmother went out to her shed, she saw a normal cat, which turned into a devil cat. This had nothing to do with the investigation, yet its satanic imagery was of the same type as that provoked by the regression-therapy sessions. Perhaps some point was being made about the phenomenon of group hallucination or delusion, but the film repeatedly neglected its responsibility to give us a touchstone by which we could judge the accuracy of what we were seeing.

I think the film could have addressed the topic better with the excellent actors at its disposal by NOT depicting any of the satanic events. It would have been all the more chilling for that, adding to the tension of the inquiry. The most famous dramatisation of this sort of subject matter was Arthur Miller's "The Crucible". Miller creates nightmarish scenes of communal paranoia but without illustrating any of the events described by the witnesses. And this does not hinder the story's potency. (What could be more horrific than to see Miller's village girls in full accusatory mode, triggering the arrest of various pillars of the community on charges of devil worship?) "Regression", however, lacks the necessary moral distance from the events it depicts. Only in the last minute or two is sanity restored. I left the cinema feeling as if I had been cruelly led about by the nose to no satisfactory purpose.

I would have never watched this movie if I had seen the low ratings "stars" this movie received. I am glad that I saw it first. This movie may appeal more to people who grew up in the 1970's and 80's. In that time frame there was a underlying paranoia about satanism helped along by our Mothers and Media.We were told that there were hidden satanic messages in music and other forms of entertainment. There were many movies about satanic worshipers,Cults,anti-Christ and Demons.This movie does a good job of encapsulating that paranoia. I have to say the acting is good and the cinematography is really good. If you like mystery/Thriller movies and lived through the 70's and 80's I think you will like this Movie.The younger generation should also give it a try, you might enjoy it. I Give it 8 at 10 stars.

I don't understand why viewers are rating this movie poor, it may not be an excellent movie but had all the ingridents needed to keep the viewers involved. It was definitely not boring I enjoyed watching from start to finish. The actors did good job, music was good, the film is shot decently. It's definitely worth a watch.