When I first read the rather daunting reviews here, I was a little iffy about watching it, but I decided to take the plunge. What I discovered was a little gem--an atmospherically dark, moody, journey that builds in suspense to a rather thrilling climax.
I think the pace was good though perhaps just a wee bit too slow for some. Coming off of another film where the action sequences hit you virtually non-stop roller-coaster fashion, it might even seem sluggish, but to me this was more than offset by the visually attractive elements of the film, some great camera work, and some very worthy acting.
Some have stated that they found the story-line vague, but I didn't at all--if you follow the dialog, it is obvious what is happening, and the end is rather thrilling. I would have preferred that the character of the "disheveled man" (read 'Mad Doctor' and also *secret* someone else in the film) had been better developed, but it seems the writers wanted our lack of knowledge about him through the body of the film to be held as more of a surprise--a part that was both eerily and excellently portrayed by Jack Erdie.
I've always enjoyed Bill Sadler's work--he's another Scotty Glenn in that he's such a flexible, utilitarian actor--though his cameo here was too short.
I think it's now in vogue for people to dis Val Kilmer--he's getting older and fatter--but he lends his weight (seriously--no pun intended) to his part and is at least credible (as always). My only wince during the film was when, after a burst of threatening anger, he suddenly, calmly, admonishes his daughter and her friends for being together, warns them not to do it again, then drives off business-as-usual, when any other Sheriff/father would have been far more aggressive and not so instantly calmed.
The big surprise for me was the excellent work by virtually all the supporting actors--character development was as good as their screen-time allowed, but the actors had both depth and presence in every scene. I think this one fact really made the movie for me. Perhaps it was, in some cases, the dearth of dialog which, a la Alan Parker/Kubric-style, helps to build suspense and add depth. I think they are all responsible, in working with such a script, for delivering a solid movie experience. I simply cannot find fault in any of the acting--all were on beat throughout.
Elisabeth Harnois also gave a credible and professional performance in the lead role--at least as good as other actors with her age and experience--I had no problems at all in believing in her character, or anyone else's in this film. What I thought might be an awkward moment in the scene transition from her brother's disappearance to her crying in the parking lot explained itself away when we recognize her dilemma--'what should she do next'? I think the directors were on queue and were consistent and seemed intent on getting as much from a scene as budget allowed, yet there were no long, wasteful scenes or gratuitous landscape pans often seen in other films of this budget range to 'not waste the camera rental fee'--every scene seemed to transition well, and at an apparent purposefully suspenseful pace. The backdrops in Riddle were fabulously 'decaying middle America' and I found myself wanting to see lots more of them in play.
Lastly, I must say that the film score, while apparently purposefully unobtrusive, was too much so. Many scenes seemed wanting for music that just wasn't there at all. My bailiwick, a better, more sinister-sounding, more energetic and engrossing score would have added so much more depth to the slow-beat pacing of the dialog and many of the scenes.
While many film goers (and reviewers) seem to have embraced a more black & white style of critique of the movies they see (it's either a 'Taxi Driver' or a 'Plan 9'), there is a universe of film in between--and much of it is worthy. Riddle is certainly up there in both effort and craftsmanship, and I hope the cast and crew, the producers, directors and writers, will bring us more and better in the future.
I rate this film as a 7--a good, solid, entertaining movie.
.
I think the pace was good though perhaps just a wee bit too slow for some. Coming off of another film where the action sequences hit you virtually non-stop roller-coaster fashion, it might even seem sluggish, but to me this was more than offset by the visually attractive elements of the film, some great camera work, and some very worthy acting.
Some have stated that they found the story-line vague, but I didn't at all--if you follow the dialog, it is obvious what is happening, and the end is rather thrilling. I would have preferred that the character of the "disheveled man" (read 'Mad Doctor' and also *secret* someone else in the film) had been better developed, but it seems the writers wanted our lack of knowledge about him through the body of the film to be held as more of a surprise--a part that was both eerily and excellently portrayed by Jack Erdie.
I've always enjoyed Bill Sadler's work--he's another Scotty Glenn in that he's such a flexible, utilitarian actor--though his cameo here was too short.
I think it's now in vogue for people to dis Val Kilmer--he's getting older and fatter--but he lends his weight (seriously--no pun intended) to his part and is at least credible (as always). My only wince during the film was when, after a burst of threatening anger, he suddenly, calmly, admonishes his daughter and her friends for being together, warns them not to do it again, then drives off business-as-usual, when any other Sheriff/father would have been far more aggressive and not so instantly calmed.
The big surprise for me was the excellent work by virtually all the supporting actors--character development was as good as their screen-time allowed, but the actors had both depth and presence in every scene. I think this one fact really made the movie for me. Perhaps it was, in some cases, the dearth of dialog which, a la Alan Parker/Kubric-style, helps to build suspense and add depth. I think they are all responsible, in working with such a script, for delivering a solid movie experience. I simply cannot find fault in any of the acting--all were on beat throughout.
Elisabeth Harnois also gave a credible and professional performance in the lead role--at least as good as other actors with her age and experience--I had no problems at all in believing in her character, or anyone else's in this film. What I thought might be an awkward moment in the scene transition from her brother's disappearance to her crying in the parking lot explained itself away when we recognize her dilemma--'what should she do next'? I think the directors were on queue and were consistent and seemed intent on getting as much from a scene as budget allowed, yet there were no long, wasteful scenes or gratuitous landscape pans often seen in other films of this budget range to 'not waste the camera rental fee'--every scene seemed to transition well, and at an apparent purposefully suspenseful pace. The backdrops in Riddle were fabulously 'decaying middle America' and I found myself wanting to see lots more of them in play.
Lastly, I must say that the film score, while apparently purposefully unobtrusive, was too much so. Many scenes seemed wanting for music that just wasn't there at all. My bailiwick, a better, more sinister-sounding, more energetic and engrossing score would have added so much more depth to the slow-beat pacing of the dialog and many of the scenes.
While many film goers (and reviewers) seem to have embraced a more black & white style of critique of the movies they see (it's either a 'Taxi Driver' or a 'Plan 9'), there is a universe of film in between--and much of it is worthy. Riddle is certainly up there in both effort and craftsmanship, and I hope the cast and crew, the producers, directors and writers, will bring us more and better in the future.
I rate this film as a 7--a good, solid, entertaining movie.
.