However, I do feel sorry for it because when it started and became apparent that it was shot on DV, it seemed like it was going to be a genuine attempt to be smart, witty and an interesting twist on a rather increasingly stagnant and tired genre and in all honesty I was quite frustrated when this was not the case.
The film’s premise is quite simple, even if it does sound a little tacky: a teenage boy who has been increasingly obsessed with death since his brother’s death is sent to a rehabilitation camp or “attitude adjustment camp” as it is referred to in the film. On the surface, I felt like it may have been interesting as my initial presumption with the film was that it was going to be a slow-burning, stark and utterly bleak psychological perspective of the American juvenile rehabilitation system and had it stayed within this realm, this review might have been very different. The problem was though, that this simply wasn’t the case and the film wasn’t daring enough and throughout it lacked the audacity to stand up and rely on simpler methods of story-telling, while at the same time taking advantage of good prospects that are right in front of it. However, it fell back on tiresome generic conventions and felt too premature, where the script itself could have done with a couple more re-writes just to have lifted it a little more. Had it exploited the potential of being more about juvenile imprisonment, the film could have such temerity and it would have felt all the more socially significant. I may have then had more respect for its use of DV.
In the specially filmed introduction, director Tim Sullivan and lead actor Diamond Dallas Page stress the point that places such as Driftwood do exist in America and characters such as Captain Kennedy are real, which although hardly comes as a shock (tell me if I sound too British), but what is more important is not necessarily whether they exist or not, but rather what impact these places and people have on the children that attend these institutions and the social significance that it has on the state.
In terms of genre and convention, the film at times becomes almost textbook in the way it is edited and pieced together. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not adverse to genre and generic convention, but there is a level where it simply becomes trashy and cliché and when going into a film with a plot outline such as Driftwood’s, I always feel it necessary to brace myself for some tackiness, but I always think that what lifts a horror film from straight cliché to genuine horror, is its ability to play with the genre and how self-reflexive it becomes. If Driftwood had played on itself a little more and accepted the fact that it was a horror film, I may have appreciated it more, but it seemed like it was relying on it too much when essentially it should have gone the extra mile so that it shone out over other films of the same vein. I also felt that if it had perhaps fallen back and harked more on old-school horror techniques, rather than using modern-day standard techniques of scares, then it may have had such greater potential to have worked.
Although having the occasional segment or section of decency, Driftwood is slightly sub-par and very slightly ham-handed to have been given a better release. It does however have some promise and provides adequate entertainment, even if it does feel a little shy and reclusive at times. Appreciation must be given for the way the film’s conclusion is dealt with because there isn’t one, which although may seem frustrating to some, came as a welcome surprise.
I would also like to thank Anchor Bay for having given me three free DVDs (The Unnamable, The Unnamable Returns and House) and a signed picture of Tim Sullivan as a reward for sitting through the film.
No comments:
Post a Comment