The Belko Experiment - movie review
The Belko Experiment
Plot: In a twisted social experiment, 80 Americans are locked in their high-rise corporate office in Bogotá, Colombia and ordered by an unknown voice coming from the company's intercom system to participate in a deadly game of kill or be killed.
Cast: John Gallagher Jr., Tony Goldwyn, Adria Arjona
Director: Greg McLean
Certificate: 18 (strong bloody violence, gory images)
Runtime: 1hr 29 mins
Release Date: Friday 21st April 2017
Written by the mind behind Guardians Of The Galaxy (James Gunn) comes the complete opposite style of filmmaking with The Belko Experiment; a total gore fest that will likely satisfy some or completely turn off others. In regards to this proverbial fence, I came down hard on one particular side. Now, considering gore has little to no effect upon me, I am a fan of the Saw franchise and James Gunn's work has yet to disappoint, all the signs point towards me liking Belko Experiment. Alas, luck cannot always swing in my favour. Personally, and I understand that I could be in a minority here, I thought Belko Experiment was an intriguing concept but the execution was exceptionally poor.
Violence is The Belko Experiment's most significant issue. Going into the film, I thought this film would adopt a black comedy approach similar to Gunn's other work like Super. It would be a film that, for some sick and twisted reason, be darkly comical to see an office temps head explode. For that to work the film would need to maintain that tone from the offset so it doesn't feel out of the blue. Belko does the complete opposite. I found that, whereas Gunn may have written a smart script that balanced the obscene violence with messed up jokes, McLean's direction doesn't do Gunn's work any justice at all. When the first head explodes like a party popper, it was shocking but it wasn't anything I haven't seen before. Then every death seemed to get a bit more ridiculous, implausible and wholly distasteful. I should stress, I have no problem with any film portraying violence in a serious or comic tone. I have thick skin and that sort of stuff doesn't bother me. Kingsman's infamous church warzone is a prime example of how to make the most horrifying of sequences downright hilarious. Belko doesn't have the required tone for any of that to work. When staff are being lined up against the wall and being shot in the back of the head like some sort of mass execution, it left an incredibly sour taste in my mouth. The whole film became seriously unpleasant to watch and that's not a compliment. Whilst the film isn't technically glorifying the violence and is posing the question of what the audience would do in this situation, the film takes itself too seriously for these cartoonish deaths to land with the intention that the creators hoped for. Either the killings don't matter or they do. Which is it? By the time Belko reaches the hour mark, I was already beginning to check out, not just because of the irritating tone but due to the monotonicity of the whole movie. There's only so many times a head exploding or people arguing about who needs to die can happen before it sends you into a boredom induced coma. McLean adds no excitement or intensity to proceedings. All throughout the film, I was expecting some interesting and clever directing choices that make this at least stand out from all the other B-rate grindhouse flicks. McLean does nothing adventurous. He plays it as safe as can be and even though it hurts to admit, James Gunn is not working on his A-game and therefore, doesn't give McLean the best material to work with. Whether he was saving himself for Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 2 or Gunn just wasn't giving it his all, Belko suffers from wafer-thin written characters and strange lines of dialogue that never feel like a regular human being would ever say.
FACT: John Gallagher Jr. auditioned for a role in a previous film directed by James Gunn, but wasn't right for the part. However, Gunn thought he was the best actor he'd seen in an audition, and vowed to work with Gallagher again.
To give the film some credit where it's due, the idea of morality and that question of 'What would you do?' is presented with at least some ingenuity. For me, I did something unexpected and found myself agreeing with Tony Goldwyn's character. Out of all of the people, he wasn't a homicidal maniac but at the same time, he wasn't the goody-goody wannabe hero trying to save everyone. In a situation where you are strongly led to believe that to save a large sum of people, a smaller number of people are required to give their life, I understood Norris' (Goldwyn) reasoning for what he did and the choices he made. Do I agree with them? Hell no. I wouldn't be working for some shady company that operates in the middle of freaking NOWHERE that has to have armed security at the gates and has ties to Colombian drug cartels so ergo, I wouldn't be in that situation in the first place. All I'm saying is, Barry Norris may not have made the most ethically correct of choices but he did what he thought was the right choice and tried his best to save himself for the sake of his family. Tony Goldwyn is to credit for this slight positive because his performance seems to be the only impassioned one. He gave a shit which is more than I can say for most of the other actors. John Gallagher Jr. doesn't exactly do much to convince anyone that he's leading man material nor do I empathise with his character in the slightest. In actual fact, I was kind of rooting for Mike to die so the film could do something different for a change and focus on someone without a metaphorical rod up their bum. Michael Rooker makes a small cameo and he's fine but the role is too miniscule to comment in detail. James Gunn's brother, Sean, makes an appearance and he too, is just fine but nothing special. Most infuriating of all is Melonie Diaz. Not that her performance was an issue (it was average) but her character arc was featured so heavily and became so prominent for a large portion of the film, that the eventual conclusion is awful. Utterly ridiculous. It's the equivalent of being stood up on a date. I'm also using the review as a way to reach out to any medical, specifically psychological, professionals that may be able to help John C. McGinley. After seeing his performance in this, I don't think he's well. The character of Wendell is meant to be unlikeable but McGinley takes it to a level that goes past a character actor, beyond parody. I now fear that he's simply become Wendell and this is not good. It's tremendously frustrating to watch a decent actor go to the extreme and then stand out like a sore thumb because the other actors and the entire creative team aren't bothering. As for the ending, it's stupid. James Gunn likes to go crazy in his films but Belko's conclusion is almost identical to Independence Day: Resurgence giving their fateful wink to the audience as they tease a sequel. By looking at both of their respective box office results, it's going to be a long wait.
From the start, I thought Belko was going to be a simple yet forgettable film that provides the trashy violence and mildly entertains the dark areas of my mind. Instead, and as the film continued, it drags through what should be a brisk runtime, includes bland and emotionless acting from actors who'd clearly be elsewhere and an extreme amount of violence that is by no means necessary unless the tone be drastically altered. In the end, part of me wished I was working for Belko instead.
My Verdict: 3.5/10
If you like what you've seen here don't forget to share this with everyone you know, comment below and check out my other reviews. Thanks for reading!!
Comments
Post a Comment