Scalene

"Scalene" is a decent, crafty thriller, and I applaud its ambition to give its audience something psychologically complex to chew on. But it's also a case of a director not being up to the challenge he poses himself, and the result is a film that frustrates its audience, not because of its intentional ambiguity, but because it's at times downright confusing.

Margo Martindale plays a woman taking care of her mentally handicapped son. She enlists the help of a college student as a part-time caregiver. When the student begins to suspect that the son is being abused by the mother, she takes matters into her own hands and does something appalling in an attempt to protect him from further harm. The gimmick of the story is that it's told through three different perspectives -- the mother, the son and the caregiver -- each perspective in turn using a different chronology. The mother's story is told to us backwards, the caregiver's linearly, and the son's in a mixed up stew that is supposed to mirror his mental processes. The director has been on these message boards (or at least someone claiming to be the director) defending his film against charges that it's intentionally ambiguous. According to him, it's not ambiguous at all, and he points to the middle section of the movie, the part told through the son's point of view, as containing the key that makes the rest of the movie fall into place. After watching the film once and being a bit befuddled, I re-watched that middle section, and it does in fact bring some clarity to the film. But a better director could have helped his audience understand things on one viewing without sacrificing any of his artistic integrity. When re-watching a film gives you a greater appreciation for it, that's the sign of a well-made movie. When re-watching it simply clarifies some points that were too obscure to understand the first time through, that's poor story telling.

But "Scalene" does have a lot to recommend it, and it is thought provoking in its own modest way.

Grade: B+

A perceptual thriller told from three points-of-view revolving around the rape of a female college student by a mentally handicapped man and his mother's subsequent revenge after his incarceration.

I have to give this film some credit. I started off not liking it, thinking the acting was poor and the characters unlikeable. The film quality was also somewhat suspect (though this might just be because I was watching a screener and not a "real" release).

As it progressed, I still found the mother's acting to be a bit weak, but the other characters more than made up for her shortcomings. And then the film goes for an emotional punch, and another one, and one more... the characters remain unlikeable, but this turns out to be the beauty of the film. We find it hard to sympathize with the mother, despite her years of hardship. We find it hard to sympathize with the caretaker as her exploitation motives come more and more to the forefront. The only one who seems to come out unscathed is the disabled boy...

Films without heroes are hard to judge. I think people generally walk away feeling dirty or empty inside and therefore want to give the film a bad rating or review. In fact, if they do this, I feel they missed the point. Any film that is able to affect you, make you feel empty or dirty, is powerful. Films make us feel happy or sad all the time, but few really present humanity in all its blemished notoriety.

I want to congratulate Zack Parker on this film. While it is by no means a perfect film, it is a powerful film and an emotional uppercut.

The plot of this film is extremely ambitious and sometimes the director isn't up to par. I have a feeling he was going for noir, something hitchcockian, but it didn't quite work out that way.

I have to wonder, too, how this would look with a better budget. I enjoy the story, but it is also rather over the top and clearly pulling for your heart strings. Maybe a bit more kitchen sink realism would have helped.

I really like the ideas, but... like I said, it tries a little too hard in some areas. A bit overwrought. But good.

Regardless, a really riveting film. There was never a boring moment. Well, except for the scenes that were too drawn out. Other than that though, it was good.

When I first saw Scalene, I left the viewing with a big WOW!. Great independent film and kudos to the director, producer, writer and actors for a simple yet well arranged movie. The reverse story technique was a nice touch. Personally, I'm tired of those so-called mega-bucks movies made up of plenty of effects and little story to them. I found sympathy for the all the characters, particularly Paige, who went to lengths to do the things she had to do. The only thing I have some issues about is the ending, it could have totally been done full circle. I recommend Scalene for those who wish to leave the beaten path of Hollywood movies to enjoy a great piece of film-making.

I saw this film at the private screening this past weekend in Indianapolis and left the theater sure that I had just seen what will be one of the best films of 2011. Scalene is the third film by director Zack Parker, though it clearly marks his entry into a whole new caliber of filmmaking. Inexchange (2006) and Quench (2007) were good films, but they were films nonetheless of a director still honing his craft. Scalene, however, is a film that after having seen, people will ask themselves, "why haven't I heard of this guy before?" It epitomizes the very best of what independent film can and should be. This was a low-budget film, but there is nothing about the production that would lead anyone to believe that it didn't have millions of dollars at its disposal. A higher budget would have only meant more expensive actors and crew, but certainly not better. In many ways this is a difficult time for independent filmmakers. The majority of films that now premiere at independent festivals have A-list stars attached to them which attracts audiences and money to the festivals, but makes it more difficult for first-rate productions, like this one, to receive the recognition and exposure they deserve. Often low-budget films don't interest the larger movie-going public because they expect that perhaps the professionalism of the production will be at a level below which they can appreciate or tolerate. Often this is the case. However, I challenge anyone to see this particular film and not come out of the theater with a new-found appreciation of what can be accomplished with relatively little money, but a whole lot of talent.