The film follows a deranged killer named henry and has the grainy, simply-shot look of home footage. This is not a criticism, it is the kind of film that would not at all benefit from a blu ray restoration or a £50mil budget. The look and the score, full of clangs and bangs and screams, add to the unease of the overall feel.
The story follows a few days of Henry's life. He has a low life roommate, Otis, whose sister Becky turns up one day in need of digs for a short time, which may become a long time if she feels at home... it doesn't. Otis and Becky seem close enough, at least not estranged, without being too happy to see each other. Early on, Henry's killings, all women and we suspect all from a sexual standpoint, are unknown to his roommate until one night the two of them are shown in a car with two more hookers. Both of which are killed by henry and left in a back street. Otis looks on in disbelief and is for a short time concerned about what this means for him, although before long he comes around to Henry's lifestyle and on more than one occasion the two enjoy a killing together-one so random and pointlessly on a whim, the film almost seems to be suggesting that men from this background may always have a cold blooded murderer buried inside them, just waiting to be coaxed out.
The performance from Michael Rooker as Henry is utterly convincing, that is, as a man who is unexpressive, unreliable, unremorseful about his crimes and impossible to read-maybe since he himself is unsure of the nature of the thoughts in his head. He almost seems himself like a passenger to the story. A lot of this quality is shown through dialogue with Becky-a stripper who's looking for something of a fresh start after her man is sent to prison for murder with a £1million bail - suggesting it may not have been run of the mill but she is fleeing a very dangerous man. They talk and Henry barely visually reacts to her, but he is not so much creepy as socially inept.
There are plot details which are not spelled out but there for all to see with just a little attention spent, the guitar henry brings home, the razor shave and resulting bag drop-off, so inconspicuous you have to question Henry's mindset- whether he views this as crime at all.
Also there are details which may lead to points we don't see, e.g. when roommate throws the broken object from the car-would this be found and contain evidence? The film sometimes feels like a heavily cut version of a much longer and more involved story, I'm sure this is by design and helps to get the audience thinking about it.
This is sparse filmmaking, a style which again adds to the overall feel of slight disorientation which may plague our star. It seemed to me that the film was not judging his crimes from an outsiders pov but merely reporting-does henry feel he is doing wrong at all or is this simply how his life is.. 'it's them or us-you know what I mean?' He says to roommate, who knods, but what does he mean? I wasn't convinced that either character knew. Also consider a moment thst seems to play against type.. henry talks to a woman with a dog and follows her to an alley, we all know what he's thinking yet he does nothing.. maybe he wasn't in the mood.
The elephant in the room is the violence of the film (which clocks in at a lean 80 minutes) yet contains more murders that you can count on both hands, three of which, seemingly a family, take place on screen through the portal of a camcorder, and the tape is played more than once for the audience. This scene is somewhat reminiscent of the famous singin in the rain scene from 'a clockwork orange', with some of the coldness of 'benny's video' murder tape -although the audience is not spared by the atrocities taking place just out of frame, or by the juxtaposing dark humour relief of singing a classic song at the same time. The acts are shown without flinching and are heanous but are at no point unbelievable or meaningful beyond what we see for the sake of what we see. I think the point of all the violence is clear when coupled with Henry's stoic demeanour andreactions and seeming level-headedness throughout, not once does he kill in a fit of rage, nor calculated methods.
It's to show us that some people are not sick at the though or sight of murder. Some may not have any inate moral compass, which we may take for granted. We know serial killers exist but we imagine that they are either mentally impaired to the point of diminished responsibility, or are aware that what they are doing is wrong and illegal, hence the great lengths gone to to cover up tracks etc.
This is a film that does what all good films should do.. inspire thought. I found that for every minute the film played, I subsequently spent a minute considering it.
Dialogue in the film shows henry talking about his upbringing and seems to be asking: are some men born like this? Or are they made to be?
Comments