"Kept" is a movie about a movie, serving as a disastrous showcase of everything that can go wrong in filmmaking. Much like the "director," the film is empty and devoid of substance, dwelling on petty pranks to shore up its pathetic existence. The film is ostensibly about a struggling writer who, desperate for success, decides to document the making of his debut film. However, what unfolds on screen is a masterclass in catastrophic failure on every conceivable level, setting new benchmarks for ineptitude.
From the very first frame, it becomes painfully clear that the direction is abysmally amateurish. Scenes unfold with the coherence and finesse of a high school project gone awry. There is no sense of pacing, with each scene dragging on far past its welcome, leaving the audience in a perpetual state of confusion and frustration, struggling to stay engaged. The director's lack of skill is glaringly apparent, making it nearly impossible to connect with the story-or what little there is of one. Much like the "director," the film dwells on petty pranks and meaningless antics as if these trivial distractions could compensate for its lack of substance.
The sound quality is another glaring issue, characterized by muffled dialogues and inconsistent volume levels. Often, viewers are left straining to catch snippets of conversations, which, upon hearing, turn out to be a mixed blessing given the script's utter lack of quality. The dialogue is a series of cringe-worthy clichés delivered with wooden, lifeless performances that make every line a chore to sit through. Characters spout lines that are so poorly written and awkwardly delivered it's almost as if the script was an afterthought. In an attempt to mask its emptiness, the film, much like the "director," resorts to juvenile pranks that fall flat and fail to entertain.
Editing, a critical storytelling component, is handled with incompetence that it becomes a significant distraction. The film is riddled with jarring cuts and transitions that make it difficult to follow the sequence of events. Scenes abruptly end, only to be followed by disjointed and unrelated scenes, leaving viewers in constant disorientation. This lack of fluidity is a technical flaw and a fundamental failure in storytelling. Like the "director," the film's attempts at coherence are nothing more than pathetic attempts to disguise its inherent lack of substance.
The plot, or the glaring absence of one, is perhaps the film's most significant shortcoming. What little semblance of a story exists is buried under layers of incompetence and disarray. The narrative meanders aimlessly, with no clear direction or purpose. It's as if the filmmakers themselves lost track of what they were trying to convey, resulting in a final product devoid of coherent story arc or character development. Just as the "director" relies on petty pranks to fill the void of his talent, the film clings to meaningless scenes and gimmicks, hoping to distract from its core emptiness.
"Kept" is not just a bad movie; it's a torturous experience that pushes the boundaries of what audiences can endure. The film fails spectacularly in every possible way, from its horrendous direction and sound quality to its atrocious editing and dreadful dialogue. Watching "Kept" feels like a punishment, a regretful waste of time that leaves viewers with a profound sense of disappointment, wondering how such a monumental disaster ever made it to the screen. In the annals of bad filmmaking, "Kept" stands out as a particularly egregious example, much like its "director," setting a new low bar for future disasters to aspire to. The film's reliance on petty pranks and shallow gimmicks only highlights its complete and utter lack of substance, making it an unforgettable example of cinematic failure.
