leeper@ahutb.UUCP (leeper) (03/11/85)
BLOOD SIMPLE
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Martin Gardner once wrote a book about what he calls the "Aha!-
experience." That is the instant in problem solving when all the pieces of
the puzzle fit together and everything makes sense. MISSION IMPOSSIBLE was
an entire TV series designed to create "Aha!" experiences. In each episode
the main characters knew exactly what they were doing, but until the end the
viewer was confused. Then at the end everything fit together. BLOOD SIMPLE
is sort of the dual of MISSION IMPOSSIBLE. It is a film about the "Huh?"
experience. Through most of the convoluted plot, it is the viewer who knows
what is going on and the characters keep finding out that they only *thought*
they knew what was happening. With the exception of the moments when the
plot twists, it is really easy to keep track of what is happening. Yet,
like RASHOMON, each character has a different understanding of who is doing
what to whom. The plot can just be described as slow chaos punctuated with
moments of delicious confusion from the characters.
This is a film of very high production values which looks as if it was
printed on cheap film stock. Somehow the film stock gives it a feel of
authenticity that a slick production would lack. There are some incredible
camera shots in this film and it is amazing that they do not feel contrived.
It is like reading Victor Hugo: the first time you read a paragraph, you are
amazed at how well-written it is, and only secondarily you realize that it
really did advance the plot. Scenes in this film are amazing in the same
way.
One scene toward the end of the film is particularly haunting. We are
in a dark room and someone is shooting holes in the wall from a well-lit
room. The effect is one of columns of light sprouting out of a dark wall.
The scene fits naturally into the plot, but still is an unforgettable image.
In some way I still do not understand, the cameraman is unobtrusively
able to make the viewer notice props that will be important later. A prop
will become important in the plot and the viewer finds himself thinking,
"Yes, I noticed that prop five minutes ago, but it was in a corner of the
screen and I thought noticing it was my idea."
I disagree with Peter Reiher's review in degree, but not in character.
I'd throw a 60% weighting factor into this film. It's darn good, but not up
to the praise he heaped on it. I'm glad he did, though. I might have
missed the film otherwise.
A cast of unknowns carry this story perfectly and the script is a lot
of fun. Be warned that there is some necessary gore. Rate it a low +3 on
the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
...ihnp4!ahuta!leeper