Sorry folks, this one's a big loser in my opinion. It's apparently making the festival circuit, which is where I saw it (SFIFF), and I wanted to speak out against this unfortunate phenomenon: the really bad but slickly made festival short.
These films tend to get attention because of their surfacey, superficial flashiness. For instance, this film is in 35mm 'Scope, with a multi-layered stereo soundtrack, and visuals that practically scream at you that they're trying to be artsy and provocative.
Well, hopefully the thin veneer of "creativity" in the guise of skin-deep filmmaking tricks doesn't work on everybody, although it disturbed me that the film seemed to get some enthusiastic applause from portions of the audience.
Back to this film, "Inside".
The film depicts a man suffering multiple personality disorder being interviewed by a nurse who's trying to reach him behind all of his intrusive personalities. I can just imagine the director saying to himself one day, "Wouldn't it be cool if we made a film about a guy with multiple personality disorder, but we actually have characters portraying the respective personalities that only he and the audience can see?!!" Is it just me, or is that the most obvious gimmick that comes to mind? Plus, didn't A BEAUTIFUL MIND do the same thing? (By the way, I'm sure this film was conceived before the Ron Howard movie even came out, but it makes my point that this device is a sadly predictable one). Or does anyone remember a show years back called "Herman's Head" ??
The film is loaded with cliches (padded room, each personality is just a broadly defined archetype, a twist ending that makes us all groan and think of Sixth Sense or any Twilight Zone episode, etc.) The filmmaking is really ostentatious, super-self-important, and inflated way beyond its wafer-thin concept. It looked like one of those commercials or music videos that take on a faux-"cinematic" look but end up being more amusing for their pretensions than cinematically artistic or even dynamic.
Sorry to come down so hard, but criticism keeps the quality up, I hope. I'm anxious to see what others have thought who may have seen this film (as well as the filmmaker(s), perhaps?)
