Directed by: Paul ScheuringBased on the book by: Mario Giordano
Screenplay by: Paul Scheuring
Cinematography by: Amy Vincent
Editor: Peter S. Elliot
Cast: Adrien Brody, Cam Gigandet and Forest Whitaker
Year: 2010
A present-day recreation of the true-life Stanford prison experiment which often becomes so over-the-top in its melodrama, it's really hard to take anything or anyone really seriously in this film. So much of the film could have been taken as a commentary on human nature, authority of political and religious institutions, free will, etc... But despite its attempts to tackle such lofty concepts, the approach ends up being laughable and childish.
When you have two academy award winning actors, the smart choice is to allow them to play off each other's performances with subtlety (ei. Heat), not to force both performers to out-act each other in a bid to see who can chew the most scenery.
Watching this, I kept thinking how I'd find it much more fascinating and disturbing to see the actual footage of the Stanford experiment then this film. Every actor is given such obvious tell-tale characterizations, that the audience knows exactly who these people are, or who they will become within their first 5 minutes of screen time. I mean, Forrest Whitaker's character for example, I don't think anyone who sees this film will be shocked to see that when an already psychologically unstable, Norman Bates type of nut-case is given absolute authority over people's lives, (surprise, surprise) it makes him into a total monster.
So many of the supporting characters seem like just insane choices to be put through such an experiment (research into the actual vetting process for the volunteers was very rigorous and only the top mentally stable candidates were allowed to participate).
Another thing I found to be just an easy out for the director, was the focus on the incredibly sympathetic prisoners (fat dude with glasses and diabetes, old black guy, scrawny little "prison bitch" etc...) at the beginning, but when the shit hits the fan and the prisoners start running amok, that's when all these ripped dudes with crazy full-body tattoos start suddenly popping up in the frame. Where the hell did these guys come from? WTF? Keep an eye out, for them, it's just hilarious.
When you have two academy award winning actors, the smart choice is to allow them to play off each other's performances with subtlety (ei. Heat), not to force both performers to out-act each other in a bid to see who can chew the most scenery.
Watching this, I kept thinking how I'd find it much more fascinating and disturbing to see the actual footage of the Stanford experiment then this film. Every actor is given such obvious tell-tale characterizations, that the audience knows exactly who these people are, or who they will become within their first 5 minutes of screen time. I mean, Forrest Whitaker's character for example, I don't think anyone who sees this film will be shocked to see that when an already psychologically unstable, Norman Bates type of nut-case is given absolute authority over people's lives, (surprise, surprise) it makes him into a total monster.
So many of the supporting characters seem like just insane choices to be put through such an experiment (research into the actual vetting process for the volunteers was very rigorous and only the top mentally stable candidates were allowed to participate).
Another thing I found to be just an easy out for the director, was the focus on the incredibly sympathetic prisoners (fat dude with glasses and diabetes, old black guy, scrawny little "prison bitch" etc...) at the beginning, but when the shit hits the fan and the prisoners start running amok, that's when all these ripped dudes with crazy full-body tattoos start suddenly popping up in the frame. Where the hell did these guys come from? WTF? Keep an eye out, for them, it's just hilarious.
2.5 out of 5
No comments:
Post a Comment