Showing posts with label India Cinema. Show all posts
Showing posts with label India Cinema. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 25, 2020

Review: Tony


Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2020
Images from the Internet


Tony (aka My Mentor the Serial Killer: Tony)
Directed by Vipul K. Rawal
eBiz India Entertainment Unlimited
124 minutes, 2019

While the American film market is arguably the most influential, it pales in comparison to the sheer volume that comes out of India, the most prolific cinema industry on the globe. Some Indian releases occasionally make it out to the world’s theaters and become hits, like Dil Se (1998; translated as “From the Heart”), but outside India, most are just shown on cable stations.

Mahesh Jilowa
If you are into Bollywood on any level, there are some things you probably know. First, most films from there are also light musicals, even during some of the most intensive of stories (again, such as Dil Se  is a perfect example), though this one is not. That would have been a hoot. Secondly, releases from that part of the world tend to be really long, rarely being under two hours. This one does fall into that category, at 2 hours and 4 minutes.

When it comes to films about serial killers, most of the attention is on the police investigations, aligning with the likes of “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit” or “Criminal Minds.” This film is a little different in that the main focus is on the serial killer, here known as – duh – Tony. There’s definitely police action, but the locus is on the killer and his followers. While this does not fall under “horror,” it certainly aligns nicely with “thriller.”

Yashodhan Rana
Because of the filling of time, we don’t even get past the prologue and into the flashback, doing a reverse of most of the West’s genre flicks which start in the past and then switch to “now” (usually). Here, the beginning sets up the story that happened previously, and then switches back and forth between the past and the present until they catch up. Nice touch.

For the main story, we meet four college psychology students working together on a class project. They are the reluctant Ashish (Mahesh Jilowa) who we meet in the prologue, the bearded leader of the group, Martin (Dhruv Souran), Kartik (Kabir Chilwala) and the only woman of the quad, Kamya (Jinal Belani). Ashish is an orphan and poor, and Martin is the spoiled and privileged son of a rich local politician. Kartik and Kamya are also from the higher and monied end of the social strata.

As the assignment for the class, they are given to present a project about an occupation. Martin wants to do something different, so he hides a camera in a Catholic church confessional and winds up recording the declaration of a serial killer named Tony (Yashodhan Rana).

Before you can say Man Bites Dog (1992),  the group is aiding and abetting Tony on his murderous path, becoming part of the equation rather than merely being “objective” observers.

Dhruv Souran
As for Tony, he is not like most serial killers in Western films, who tend to be social rejects (what we now call InCels), or suave and charming (such as Christian Bale’s American Psycho). While he is handsome and self-assured, he is also cold, calculating, and smarter than our students in manipulation, even with egocentric and hubristic Martin’s high IQ. Other than Ashish, the other three are really into the excitement of killing, tempted by the dark side. Tony, however, does have a secret that I figured out far into the film, probably right where I was supposed to do so.

There is much more to the story, including corrupt cops and politicians, jealousy, persuasion, and a bit of mental illness thrown in to produce what ends up being an overly long but interesting film in total. Sure, there could have easily been about 30 minutes taken out; do we really need to see Sub-Inspector Vilas Mote (Manoj Chandila), our main police character, ride his scooter for as long as we do in a montage? No, but I would say the same about Easy Rider (1969).

Manoj Chandila
While a belief in a Christian power is prominent, a question I have about the tone of the story is whether it is anti-Catholic. These Protestant students basically call out Catholics for child abuse and the ambiance is quite dismissive. In the attached photo, Martin contemptuously says, “These Catholics go to church after making a mistake, not to the police station.“ Personally, I think all religions have issues – and I’m certainly not Christian nor Hindi – but it felt kind of like finger-pointing and preachy in that way. What I mean is, if you had substituted the Church for a Synagogue, the ADL would probably be protesting, rightfully.

Filmed in the city of Mumbai (India) and in the Hindi language with decent captions, this is a pretty nice thriller that is part police procedural and part reminiscent of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986), especially with Tony’s kind of flat-yet-smirking personality that makes him all the creepier while also normalizing him at the same time. Speaking of smirking, Martin
reminds me so much of Trump Jr.; it’s the same sense of privilege and believing they are immutable because of a rich and powerful daddy, when they are just someone you want to get a very strong comeuppance.  

The film reminds me more of the crime shows that have been come out on cable from Europe recently, such as “Ultraviolet” and “The Valhalla Murders.” The moments of time stretching are definitely there, but overall, this is still a taut thriller, especially once you pass the 45-minute mark. While the ending I thought up was pretty good but not realized, this still passes the biting the fingernail test (figuratively, not literally). Isake lie jao!



Friday, February 27, 2015

Review: Dark Mountain

Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2015
Images from the Internet 

Dark Mountain
Written and directed by Tara Anaïse
Superstitious Films
81 minutes, 2013 / 2014
www.darkmountainmovie.com
www.mvdvisual.com

You know what drives me crazy about found footage films? It’s not the shaky camera, the grainy look, the too-dark scenes, the running with the camera on… okay, I guess that, too. My problem though, is that you already know everyone is going to die, because it says so right there on the box, so there’s no suspense in that part: X group goes to Y remote location where Z bad thing happened before, and were never found again. Then add that this is a “reconstruction of their last days.” Not even ”original” found footage, but speculation?

While I realize that it may sound like I am approaching this with a negative attitude, it’s actually the opposite. You see, I am hoping it is going to be better, by turning old clichés into something new.

I totally admit to the reader that I wrote that above before seeing the film, which I am placing into my players now. See you on the other side.

Aaaaaaaand, I’m back.

The plot is as follows: three filmmakers (why is it almost always three, just because The Blair Witch Project [1999] did it?) who go to investigate a mine in the Superstitious Mountains, a real place in the Arizona desert where supposedly the Dutchman buried some gold (this is an actual local legend there), and many people seem to have disappeared looking for it.

With cameras and lights that are used constantly and never seem to run out of juice, our very attractive twenty-something trio, a couple (Sage Howard and Andrew Simpson) and a friend (Shelby Stehlin), camp in the scrub and then run around a lot – and I mean most of the picture – in the dark (like the Blair Witch Project [BWP]), with only the camera lights or night-vision scope turned on.

The picture starts with the woman of the trio sobbing in her tent, afraid [BWP; though happily no dripping snot from the nose seen this time] before flashing back to some locals being interviewed on camera documentary-style [BWP] about the strange goings on and thereby helping with the exposition. These are non-actors, and come across as the everyday public that they are [BWP].

Getting back to our trio, they track through the desert on foot and camp out after doing the interviews, so we’re already at the half-hour mark. Some cool mysterious things happen with… no, I’m not going to tell you, but I liked it. Of course this leads to more running around in the dark among the desert shrubs.

There are a couple of scenes in the titular dark mountain, but most of the action actually occurs in the dark desert. Lots of mysterious things happen that are unexplainable, but by the time any consistent action, other than teasingly occasional flair-ups, there’s about 10 minutes left in the thing. And you’ll never guess: it happens at night. In the dark. With just the camera lights. Heck, maybe they should have planned it around a full moon?

This isn’t the greatest film in the world¸ and can only be considered adequate, even for the found footage genre. I am disappointed because I was rooting for the female East Indian-American director to succeed.

The filmmaking is full of genre clichés, right down to the being pulled backwards by the feet into the dark gag that’s been in too many films in the past few years (can we let that one go now, please?), as indicated by the cover art above, but most of the action is right out of the BWP playbook, a release I always thought was overrated film as it was.

But the biggest annoyance of the film was the way the vocals were turned down, and the music turned up. Even at top volume, I had trouble hearing what the trio were saying most of the time, but the occasional music was so loud I jumped from that suddenly coming on more than the action (or lack thereof) that was onscreen. At first I thought the sound problem was my computer, but during the extras (the only extras), which is extended interviews of a few of the locals, the sound was crisp and clear. All things considered, though, I thought the acting was top notch, and deserves to be noted.

This is a first and only full length release for director Anaïse to date, but I hope she keeps filming, and comes up with some cinematic ideas of her own. Make me proud, and Namaste!