I've seen my fair share of fest-circuit films lately; the good ones are often pretty good, the bad ones AWFUL. And then there's Dermot Doyle's "Hill 16", a genre-defying debut that is a true pleasure to watch. Part coming-of-age story, part crime thriller, part comedy, Doyle's film seamlessly interweaves the stylizations of the various genres with the complexities of real life.
Hill 16's cinematic vocabulary is impressive. Shot on DigiBeta, it purposefully employs an array of color schemes, camera movements, and compositions; communicating mood, voice, and information through visuals. In addition, Doyle has done a remarkably fine job of editing the film, using the techniques of jump-cut, voice-over, and tangent in ways reminiscent of Martin Scorcese and, more recently, Guy Richie.
Whether intentional or not, this cine-historical reference makes sense in Hill 16. The story centers around Niall Brady, a 16-year-old student in suburban Dublin. His life is full of the typical camaraderie and mischief that any teenager might join his friends in, though his life is somewhat stifled by his parents enforcing a curfew. Most of Niall's pals aren't crooks, but it is clear that teenage life in their town is a breeding ground for young criminals, whether it be drugs or some other racket.
The plot pivots suddenly when Cel is introduced, an attractive schoolteacher who Niall meets at his usual bus stop. The luckless Niall is immediately taken with her, and she seems to welcome his boyishly shy demeanor and apparent infatuation. Niall is taken with her, but doesn't want his smart-ass friends to know he's in a (chaste) relationship with a woman almost twice his age. Likewise, she only agrees to see him in places like the movie theater where they won't be recognized.
Plot threads involving, sisters, drug deals, schools, art, sports, annoying cousins, etc. all weave in and out of the narrative and usually serve a purpose. The vignettes inserted for texture and characterization are treats also. The story's pacing has room for adjustment, but chances are we're getting a lot better version than the, get this, FOUR-HOUR original cut that Doyle had on his hands initially.
What can I say, it's smart, good-looking, good-sounding, dramatic, funny, and even feels like a personal story, like the writer (Doyle again) embellishing on what he knows from real life. If you get the chance to catch this at a film festival near you, SEE IT! You will not be sorry.
