Unter Kontrolle

Working her way into the business under the shadow of her internationally renowned father, Jennifer Lynch exists as a figure in the industry that will be sure to catch the eyes of film enthusiasts for years to come if only to witness how she establishes herself as a single entity outside of her father's influence. Surveillance, which sees the director return to film after a fifteen year hiatus following the lackluster Boxing Helena, despite its reigns being pulled this way and that by father and producer David, nevertheless does create an interesting vision here that is both expected and yet somewhat refreshing. In the midst of the countless numbers of drudgery that fills in the genre's hotspots year after year, Lynch manages to stick to her father's mantra of keeping things basic, and at the same time daring and bold. However, diverging heavily from the surreal abstractions associated with Mr. Lynch's features, Jennifer creates something that combines originality with tradition in a successful dish that isn't perfect by any means, but nevertheless succeeds in providing ample thrills and suspense.

Surveillance is essentially the story of four groups of people; there are the two serial killers on the loose involved in a series of murders within the past months; there are the local-area cops involved in one of the crimes directly; then there's the FBI agents sent to investigate and go over the head of said officers; and finally there's the surviving civilians of the killers' most recent venture. Taking place over the course of perhaps a few hours of interrogation spliced with flashbacks relating back to the day of the last known murders, the script mixes subtle plotting and slow moving developments with a high caliber of character work and atmospherics to keep things moving. This shift from heavy-handed mystery-solving to a healthy balance between character dynamics and dialogue allows the movie to broaden its horizons and escape the usual middling indifference a cold-blooded thriller usually indulges within. Indeed, perhaps the most compelling side of Surveillance doesn't necessarily reside within its plot (although, things to pick up steadily from act three onwards), but through the characters and performances by their respective thespians.

Retrospectively, Jennifer Lynch's directing takes many leafs from her father's style, the least of which certainly not being her use of eccentric characters, dialogue and establishment of surreal tone. Indeed throughout the course of Surveillance, one is likely to find themselves not only disturbed by the visual brutalities (which are few, but nevertheless potent), but the more visceral elements spliced through the film through shades of atmospheric manipulations. Sure enough, this certainly isn't Mulholland Drive or Eraserhead by any means; rather, Lynch does well to avoid becoming a mere parody of her father, and establishes a familiarly tense tone without overstepping the boundary into pure abstraction. Through this, Surveillance instead strikes chord not dissimilar from such features as Natural Born Killers, and House of 1000 Corpses in its deconstruction of authority, twisting of the natural order and unsettling the settled, cozy tinsel lenses of Hollywood horror.

The performances, although not quite as compelling as Lynch's overall direction, nevertheless do well to echo the themes of script with a similar sense of disjointedness from reality. For the sake of preserving first time viewers from any major plot developments past the half way mark, I cannot go into stark detail involving any said performer's styles, but can at least attest to the fact that most of the central cast do a very good job of portraying their characters with enough uncertainty to keep the viewer guessing. Throughout, you are left wondering "who done it", yes, but the end result isn't as obvious as most hackneyed thrillers and will certainly catch audiences off guard if they're not careful. The performances, alongside Lynch's subversive, purposely withholding script make sure to establish this mystery, keep it interesting (for the most part) and then unravel it to the enlightenment of those unprepared.

There are problems however, most of which reside within the movie's middle act that dwindles along for a good half hour involving neither sufficient plotting nor characterisation to the extent that is displayed earlier on. Furthermore, the experience as a whole, although fulfilling a promise to deliver suspense and extreme tension during its greater scenes, nevertheless boils down to one of temporal satisfaction. For what it's worth, Surveillance provides a fine look at how the thriller can be done well with plenty of viscerally and cerebrally engaging sequences and cascading shades of disturbing nightmare-quality insanity, but it nevertheless can't quite escape the tedium that is often associated with the genre. Definitely worthy of a look-in for fans of either the thriller or David Lynch himself, but for everyone else, this will probably be a temporarily engaging affair quickly forgotten soon after the credits roll.

• A review by Jamie Robert Ward (http://www.invocus.net)

Jennifer Chambers Lynch, one would assume had been nursing her pride from the dreadful reception of her debut, Boxing Helena. Fifteen years later she releases Surveillance. This one, a murder mystery, is a major improvement but it still has problems. It is a well-crafted seventy minute movie with a remaining twenty minutes of clumsiness, bad writing and a twist which unfortunately is predictable. The movie comes apart when it needs to come together, and the result is medium good, when it could have been very good.

FBI agents Anderson and Halloway for months have been investigating a series of interstate serial killings. The latest chapter in their investigation brings the stories of two odd-ball cops, a dis-communal family on a road trip, and a couple of coke-snorting kids, together in Rashomon fashion.

I like the way Surveillance plays out. Lynch keeps everything slow and mannered, unlike Boxing Helena which is over-blown from the beginning. Lynch is able to keep the film under control, but unfortunately is unable to pull the wool over the viewer's eyes. The answers we are looking for become obvious too quickly, making one question whether her intention was to have the viewer fooled or not. Survaillance is not designed to be conventional thriller. It is too deep and psychological for that, but it sort of ends like one.

If I was gonna label Surveillance in a word, it would be 'bitter'. When it's over, you come to realize that none of the characters (save one or two small roles) are all that respectable. Lynch's screenplay breaks them down into those who mistreat and those who get mistreated, sometimes both. On a positive note it contributes significantly to the drama or tension of the picture. There is a major lack of heart to the film, although at the same time, there is a certain lack of credibility as a side effect. Any attempt to explain may be a spoiler so I wont go that far, but that raises another question...

If I don't intend to spoil it, does that mean I am recommending it? Well, truth be told, I didn't dislike Surveillance. It is eerie and grim, which is certain a plus for a thriller, but the outcome is kind of disappointing. My advice: watch it only if you are curious, but it is not a movie that needs to be seen.

A good thriller is my favorite genre and I was hooked into this film within the first few seconds and stayed involved for the entire ride. It kept me guessing throughout. The contrast between eerie cop shop and stark, beautiful prairies is a stylish treat for the eyes. The performances are believable and compelling. Well cast, without exception. The little girl is surprisingly good. Her even performance made me wonder about what had happened to her and drew me into the story. When she wasn't on screen, I worried about her safety. The ending is a clever, eerie choice. I was taken completely by surprise and I usually predict a telegraphed ending a mile away. In this case, any other choice would be a cop-out (pardon the pun). I was glad that the director resisted the temptation for a blood-fest. It could have gone much further in that vein. Instead the tension relied upon intelligent visual storytelling. Kudos to everyone involved. I thoroughly enjoyed this film.

I'm usually happy to spoiler away in reviews - this time I shall be very careful not to spoiler.

I hadn't realised that the tendency to make disturbing movies is hereditary, but Jennifer Lynch's Surveillance is every bit as disturbing as anything Dad David has made. It starts with a moderately familiar scenario - two FBI agents arrive at a small police station (4 officers, one captain, one dispatcher) in the back of beyond to tape video interviews with the survivors of some sort of incident: the nature of what happened is revealed during the interviews. To say any more is to spoiler, so I'll shut up about the plot.

But I will say that "disturbing" is the best word to describe almost all of what follows. And not just one lot of disturbing, but several. The film is gripping, visceral, and features some stunning performances, notably from Bill Pullman who is not someone who I would normally have put high on my list of those I expect to surprise me performance-wise.

Not an easy film in many ways, but definitely worth catching.

As if to demonstrate the old adage that "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree," director Jennifer Lynch gave the world in her belated sophomore effort, 2008's "Surveillance," a film just as disturbing as any in her father David's oeuvre. Her follow-up to 1993's "Boxing Helena," the film follows two very atypical FBI agents, portrayed by Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond, who are investigating a string of homicides in the plains of Nowheresville. (The picture was shot in the grasslands outside of Regina, Saskatchewan.) The pair interviews three salient witnesses: a young female coke addict (Pell James, who is excellent here), a local cop and an 8-year-old girl (Lynch elicits a wonderfully mature performance from young Ryan Simpkins). By the film's end, the conflicting accounts yield a somewhat clearer picture, before a twist ending really pulls the rug out from under the viewer. Indeed, this ending--a remarkably downbeat, merciless and outrageous shocker--should stun and flabbergast most of the film's audience. A repeat viewing of "Surveillance" demonstrates how very fairly the writers and Lynch have played their game, and will give an added appreciation for certain actors in the cast. "I promise you, it's not like the other films you'll see," Ms. Lynch tells us in one of the DVD's copious extras, and darn if she isn't right! I cannot offhand think of another picture so deliberately amoral, and so blithely ruthless in the treatment of its entire roster of characters. While some might walk away from "Surveillance" clucking "sick, sick, sick," most, I feel, will applaud its bravura daring, technical brilliance, fine acting and shocking windup. It's certainly not a movie to watch with the kids or with Aunt Petunia, but for those game for something different, it should just prove the ticket....