One cannot watch this without being aware of how it was made in the first place. Boon and curse alike, social media has reshaped our world in ways both great and terrible, yet when it comes to storytelling, rarely does it seem like the full potential has been explored. Anyone can write a film or TV show where the characters use social media, just as anyone can write a film or show where characters use a phone, write a letter, or talk to neighbors. Sometimes focusing on these facets can provide a unique spin on a tried and true notion. Far more infrequent, however, are those films or shows that meaningfully incorporate a variety of media platforms into the entirety of the storytelling (e.g. 'The Lizzie Bennet Diaries') - or that very emphatically seek to make the audience an active part of the narrative, as D. J. Caruso attempted with 'Inside.' Then again, one can read about the novelty, but was that intent borne out in the final product? How does the sum total come off for someone who learns about the project long after the fact, and did not have the experience of supposedly helping to shape the story? What is the project's longevity? It's safe to say I had my doubts before I sat to watch. Now that I have: I admire what 'Inside' tried to do. I don't think it really works.
There are some issues we readily discern, and the first is the central conceit of someone being abducted but left with a computer and an Internet connection; we can only hope the writing will be smart enough to provide a satisfying answer in due course. Beyond this, truth be told, the high production values don't comport with the premise. On the one hand we have the webcam footage, the messages on social media, and the very thought of an immersive, interactive viewing experience whereby otherwise uninvolved viewers can aid the protagonist. On the other hand we have the professionally composed score; the otherwise cinematography and image quality, recalling contemporary crime procedural shows or more straightforward horror-thrillers; the casting of someone as well known as Emmy Rossum, and other professional actors appearing (by way of the Internet connection) as supporting figures. The possible verisimilitude of the former facets butt against the obvious contrivance portended by the latter facets, not to mention the cheeky, mocking lines of text inserted by the antagonist, or our protagonist's casual sign-offs. It's video blog fiction, juxtaposed with the "escape room" thriller (e.g., 'Saw,' less the violence) that is up to industry standards.
Oh, and as to that central conceit: I see what Caruso was trying to do through all this, and I salute the sentiment. The picture is disappointingly bare-faced about the purpose, however, and say whatever else one will about the strength of the writing, I just don't think it's enough for the sentiment behind the conceit to resonate with any impact.
The suggested novelty is swell, but when seen from a distance, especially with the professional-grade aspects, it doesn't specifically come across that the intent was borne out. It would be necessary to see "behind the scenes" and "making-of" materials, and retrospectives including surveys of all who participated, to genuinely get a sense of the project's success in terms of interactivity. Outside of that, twelve years on - as it presents, one has to suppose that the interactive portion was really nothing more than the illusion of control: the story was always going to unfold the same way, and by having "Christina" post online viewers could merely be allowed to feel like they were contributing to the course of events. Maybe someone else will read these words and say "duh, obviously," but that's just the point. 'Inside' sold itself as a "social film experience," telling viewers to "play your part." If the interactivity doesn't meaningfully come across for those watching from afar, then it just becomes a standard-issue horror-thriller, and at that, a horror-thriller that can't particularly make itself be felt.
I appreciate all the odds and ends in and of themselves. The crew did good work in every capacity, and I like Brian Tyler's score. Emmy Rossum gives a commendable performance, probably the chief enduring highlight of these fifty-two minutes. Though not the most robustly engaging material, I appreciate what Caruso put into his screenplay, and his direction is capable. Yet this could have just as easily been a pure, conventional thriller - probably a TV movie - without the interactive aspect, and none would be the wiser. And that says more about 'Inside' than all the rest of my sentences could. I guess it's alright if you come across it, but don't go out of your way, and be well aware that unless you are one of those folks who had the "inside" information in 2011 and were part of the production through your own online activity, then to watch after the fact means we're getting no more than half the experience.
