"What other girls? There are no other girls. They don't exist."
Do they or don't they? Will they or won't they....
One of the best things about doing this blog is that it forces me to watch the movies at least a second time. I say forces because prior to this I adamantly refused to watch films multiple times. My reasoning was two fold. One, there are so many films I want to to see and will never have time for, secondly I felt the films would not impact me as powerfully upon second viewing and I feared this would diminish the overall experience. (The few exceptions to this were "Apocalypse Now," " Eyes of Laura Mars" and "Local Hero." for reasons I can write about at another point.) Through this blog I have come to realize just how important re-watching a film that I am intrigued by can be. Most often the experience becomes far more powerful, not less. Such was the case for me in re-watching 'Spiral'.
'Spiral' as I said in the blurb, is a creepy little thriller that I felt was deserving of attention. Not my usual genre of choice, to put it mildly. I knew that it would be almost as risky as 'Feed' as far as others wondering why the heck I would choose it when there are so many good movies out there. While I watched 'Spiral' again with a friend who had not yet seen it I noticed that I was watching in a very different way. It felt as if I was the film maker instead of a viewer and that my friend was the test audience for MY film. Seeing it through his eyes my mind looked for all the possible flaws, cringing inwardly when I perceived them and cheering at the moments of genius. I was acutely aware of his reactions, heard every sigh and groan of disbelief . I could clearly sense the point at which he began to suspend his disbelief and get drawn in. After it was over we talked about 'Spiral' for at least two hours, re-watching specific scenes, listening to the commentary etc. The more we talked the more interesting the film became to both of us.
In this give and take, the questions raised and the theories posited, I find many new things that I never would have caught or understood. There is the original viewing, the dissecting , the reviewing, the blog dialogue with you guys, and now with DVDS insights into the process itself, the people who created it, their concepts versus my reactions. There are so many angles from which to view a film and each of these angles, each of these phases is becoming equally important to me, equally stimulating and exciting. I loved films before I began this blog and now I am becoming enamored.
16 comments:
Like Lee’s friend, I spent the first 45 minutes of this movie bored out of my skull. This was a horror movie with no horror, a thriller without a thrill, a whodunit without a who (or a “dunnit”). The plot was slow moving and filled with clichés that brought back the good old days of ”Friday the Thirteenth in 3-D:” The pretty girl falls for the moody loner, the loner has some obsession with drawing pictures of women, the loner’s boss (and only friend) is getting fed up with him, the women in the office (except the one who falls for the loner) wear sexy, form fitting tops, the men in the office are sexist pigs, the loner has paintings of one girl all over his walls. I wanted to shut it off, thinking GMAB! and TTHOMLINGB! but I had promised myself I would watch all these movies 'till the end.
At last the story moved forward. The loner got mad at the girl. Would he break up with her, forgive her, or kill her? He turns to his friend. THEN IT HAPPENS. The movie switches from a C-rated horror flick into a psychological thriller Hitchcock would be proud of. (Think about “The Lady Vanishes”) What is real? What is hallucination? Did murders occur? If so, who is responsible?
It’s a shame it took so long to get to that point, but in the end it was WWW! That last shot of the friend outside his office building, when the impact of what he has let happen sinks in is fantastic.
Too bad the members of the Academy had already stopped watching.
I beg to differ from Breather and Lee's friend. It did gain momentum in the second half but I was into 'Spiral' from the first frame. FAH. A well done "creepy little thriller."
I'm happy to see 'Jindabyne' added to the list Lee, it should generate some heated debate!
SPIRAL seems to have been a total failure with the critics, not a bad sign that it could be worth watching! I'll share a line from one review I read that seems to sum up the majority view, "The pace of this movie would make a snail jealous."
I beg to differ along with Filmluver. It is precisely because of the lack of blood, gore, sex and manic pacing that I liked this! It was engaging, creepy and kept me wondering from the start whodunit and what was dunned. The last ten minutes or so leading up to the final scene that Breather describes is perfection. The payoff for being patient with this film is big. And if you read about the backround, budget, and time constraints the group of people making this were under I think you'd be amazed that they pulled it off so well. The ACADEMY should have stayed and watched it through. Not an award winner by any stretch but a standout example of a simple, well done, effective thriller.
It seems I am part of the minority who loved this film, which doesn't surprise me. Usually people are looking for a fast-paced, flashy thriller with plenty of sex scenes and loud, scary noises accompanied by an extremely shaky camera. This film has none of those, yet it still managed to give me chills. Joel Moore's performance is absolutely fantastic as Mason- edgy, unstable, nervous, intriguing. Amber Tamblyn is excellent as Amber- bubbly, fragile, sweet, and innocent. The writing is surprisingly good. Don't pass this one up if you are a fan of psychological thrillers that make you think.
Can't say I'm surprised at the mixed reactions to 'Spiral'. At least the negatives are not as vehement as they were about 'Feed'!
What are some of the things I liked about it:
-Slow and deliberate pacing but not boring.
-Tight editing.
-Great photography by Will Barratt.
-The use of color in this film was precise, effective and outstanding.
-Small budget and shot in under 30 days, a REAL Indie film.
-Good casting, especially loved Zachary Levi as Berkeley.
-Good old fashioned creepy plot.
-No sex, no blood and gore, makes us use our imagination....
-The last 15 minutes, as referenced by some of you guys, makes the whole film WWW..
What didn't I like:
-I found Amber's character a bit annoying (but loved her clothes!)
-Mason's character (played by Joel Moore who also co-wrote the film) is repulsive to me and I couldn't imagine anyone becoming attracted to him. Intrigued yes, attracted? no way.
Forgot to add that Moore also co-directed 'Spiral.'
Sorry Joel.
THIS WAS DEFINATELY NO "FEED".
I REALLY ENJOYED THIS FILM FOR ALL THE REASONS EVERYONE EXPRESSED.
MOST IMPRESSED THAT IT WAS A FIRST FOR THE CREW. LOW BUDJET ,INDEPENDANT FILM. THE ACTING WAS GREAT{I DO AGREE WITH LEE THAT HE WAS NOT A VERY ATTRACTIVE FELLOW} AND IT DID HOLD MY ATTENTION TROUGHTPOUT AND OF CORSE THE ENDING WAS WONDERFUL
DONT KNOW HOW IT CAME UP ANONYMOUS
SILVER
I'd list 'Dogday Afternoon', 'Chinatown', 'Blade Runner', 'Big' and 'Network' as my most re-watched films. I enjoyed Lee's post talking about the idea of watching films over again and what that experience is like. I never thought that much about it and am looking back at my history and trying to figure out why some films that I really liked I only saw once and others multiple times. I think it is a great topic of discussion and I intend to give it more thought.
I haven't watched 'Spiral' yet but it's on the agenda for this weekend.
In answer to Breather's first paragraph:
This was a thriller with a lot of THRILL. a whodunit with a very clear WHO and a whole lotta DUNNIT!
And I would like to add another name to the It's Raining Men list:
Berkely.(sorry Mason..) My my my.
Nuh uh, nevertoosoon. Mason was *FINE*!!! Paint me next, Mason!
I'm with Nevertoosoon on this one.
Hallelujah!.....
ps: Clearly Mason dunnit. (Proceed with caution Flickchick!)
As advertised, SPIRAL was a "creepy litle thriller"! We just finished watching and thought it was a kick. Nothing grand or earth shattering but a good example of a true INDIE film and certainly a labor of love. Happy Halloween everyone!
Here's a question: Do you think that he actually killed all the women in the notebooks or just Amber? Was the rest of it all in his head? We seem to be split on that issue over here....
Tim -
I think we have a serial killer on our hands. Tho' we only know for sure that Mason has talked about the other girls, we do have the opening sequence showing the waitress in the resturant. Latr on we see the resturant again, but no waitress. Not proof, but the filmmaker is giving a pretty strong hint.
What I want to know is how Mason pulled it off for so long. He doesn't seem the master criminal type. He doesn't wear gloves, establish an alibi or any other "trick the police" thing. I can't belive that none of the other girls (such as the waitress) were so disconnected from society that no one noticed they were gone. (I read a story about a serial killer in Chicago in the 1890's who got away with it for a long time because he ran a hotel that his victims stayed at. He made sure they were from far far away, that their families were not likely to visit. After killing each girl he would say she had mentioned a fiance and ran off, leaving no forwarding address. Again, a bit too sophisticated for Mason.)
Tim and David,
I suspect he did kill all of them. The town is a transient area and I would guess that many people , especially young ones , pass through it only briefly in their travels. If none of the bodies were found then as of yet no one has reason to suspect a serial killer. I'm not sure of the time frame of the murders, might be over a good period of years, again making the likelihood of anyone noticing lower. But it still does raise questions as to why the women weren't missed. But maybe they were and we just aren't privy to that info. Perhaps now that Berkely knows for sure and he reports it to the police they will look into old files and piece it together. In movieland that is.
Post a Comment