'a film so obsessed with keeping the audience on their toes that it doesn't pay enough attention to its own footsteps' |
A deeply troubling but ultimately rather empty Hitman-Horror debacle, Kill List turns out to be a film so obsessed with keeping the audience on their toes that it doesn't pay enough attention to its own footsteps. Turning fairly quickly from a domestic drama to a glum buddy adventure - as killers Jay (Neil Maskell) and Gal (Michael Smiley) embark on the murderous completion of the titular list - Ben Wheatley's film slowly devolves over its runtime from an ambiguous character assassination to an ill-defined genre mess, pre-occupied with ensuring you have no idea what exactly is going on.
The beauty of creating a film like this is that multiple interpretations are available, encouraged even. The end - a nasty little schlocker of a reveal - most obviously forces a rethink of a character who, it seems, has been set up as unsympathetic from very early on. But still, even given the actions perpetrated, the presence of the external force - first introduced as weird, occult-ish client, Struan Rodger in the hotel - complicates things. If you accept that the whole thing has been a movement through one person's fracturing psyche then the presence of the strange men and women in straw masks is troubling at best and flat out debunks the theory at worst.
The inclusion of a group we'll call, for conveniences sake, the Pagans, reflects something of a current interest in British Horror, also present in last year's Wake Wood. Not entirely dissimilar to this, Wake Wood explicitly explored parental guilt, another theme Wheatley's film comes close to commenting on. The problem with the return of the Pagans in both films, arguably more so in this, goes beyond the issues relating to the defined external threat, mentioned above. Putting people in odd masks, having them strip naked for no apparent reason, increasing the strange symbols throughout the film; it's all just too easy. There's no background to any of these people, they're all just a little mad, rather too influential over the world than can be believed, a little too fond of taking midnight strolls by torchlight and carving things into the backs of household mirrors; they're the 'anonymous evil' and 'the other' writ large, the gigantic shark in the ocean who kills apparently without motivation or prejudice.
At about the halfway point, where things start to get really nasty, Wheatley seems to recognise this, suggesting a linked destiny between the two threads, the hitmen and the Pagans. But that's all it ever is: a suggestion. Like a lot of Kill List, something more developed is hinted at but never explored. Claiming this as something brave, a recognition that your audience are intelligent beings, is a handy get out clause but here it just doesn't feel like a valid one. Too much of Kill List seems to happen in Wheatley's imagination, not enough of it on screen. Ambiguity only gets your film so far. At some point ideas need to make fatal impacts on the celluloid.
Look further...
Sam Cooney's excellent article 'Killing People For Money: The Unsentimental Portrayal of the 'Hitman' in Kill List' is available at Rushes Magazine.
I totally agree with your rational / reasoned review. I came out of the cinema back in September thinking it was one of the most disappointing films of the year, and I just can't get my head around all the glowing / rave 5 star reviews there have been of Kill List.
ReplyDeleteYes it's great to leave things open to interpretation and keep the audience guessing and let them think afterwards, but this just seems like 3 extremely average short films stitched together that just so happen to have the same case. There's no logic and rationale whatsoever. Yes David Lynch's 'Lost Highway' does something similar with regard to pulling a completely nonsensical plot switch, but that at least has the style and verve to pull it off.
On top of that is the sheer unlikeability of the characters... Seriously, I could go on for a lot longer, but I won't. Good review!
I meant 'cast' in the 2nd paragraph, not 'case'.
DeleteI certainly can't see where the 5* have come from. I understand and respect the positive reasoning behind some reviews - Sam Cooney's above for example - but a perfect film? I can't see that at all.
DeleteLike your comparison to three shorts; it is very much like that, without much thought into how they should all join up.
Interesting. the film has been well received internationally. Speaking from the Canadian perspective, a fair bit on online sites and media have praised it quite a bit.
ReplyDeleteI don't know when exactly this comes out in my neck of the woods, but I'll still take a chance on it.
There are a lot of positive reviews of it knocking around the place but its IMDb average is on a fairly middling 6.3. Most of the reviews I've read have been wowed by the atmosphere (which is good) and its willingness to break genre but ignore the problems these things cause to the narrative of the film.
DeleteHaving said that, obviously give it a go if it appeals to you - I do seem to be in the minority when compared to other review sites.
I watched this mess a few weeks back and I became frustrated during the last third.
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong, the first half could have set up a bit of a stonker, something in the realm of redemption, closure and relationship rebuilding for the ex-soldier/hitman and his wacky Irish mate. But, the introduction of that last theme (I'm having to choose my words carefully to avoid obvious spoilers) completely derailed the film for me. I actually remember sighing as I ejected the disc from my PS3 to put it back in its case.
2 out of 5 is spot on.
Yes, very much agree, just seems to lose its narrative somewhere. A lot of people - even those who liked it - have questioned whether the end makes sense and I would completely agree with them. It is, as you say, a bit of a mess.
Delete