Reviews

2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Brilliant cinematography, shame about the script
18 September 2018
First the bad things. This film had, in my view, a tedious, clichéd script, which meant the story dragged a lot, and that the characters did not rise beyond one-dimensional stereotypes. I had no problem with the layered flashbacks, but they could not disguise the lack of plot. Despite these major obstacles, I really savoured this film. Always a pleasure to watch the Casablanca quartet of Bogart, Rains, Greenstreet, and Lorre, who made much more of their characters than their cheesy lines deserved. The truly wonderful thing about this film for me was the exquisite design and cinematography--which created a visual feast out of the night airbase, the ramshackle ship, and life in the penal colony of French Guiana. The visual work is every bit as good as Casablanca's, which is saying something. This was a great studio at its peak, in the safe hands of that brilliant director Curtiz. Next time I watch it, I will turn the sound off and lie back and glory in the beautiful array of images presented to the eye.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Regression (I) (2015)
The film has a confused point of view
10 October 2015
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.
71 out of 110 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed