Out of the Blue

It was inevitable that - like the Stan Graham saga of 1941 made into the movie "Bad Blood" - the Aramoana massacre of 1990 would eventually be turned into a feature film. To their credit, the cast and crew of this have done a good job of it and perhaps just as importantly, the script writers have attempted to provide a little insight into why it happened, although the full background is something that people will need to read the two books that were written about it to get. The film starts in the morning of the day it started (the events lasted into the next day) and continues - with only a couple of brief flashbacks on the part of Gray - till a conclusion just after Gray is shot dead by police. It manages to keep fairly true with the actual events (as described in the two books) although there are some departures of varying importance. The film works well as a drama and unlike a Hollywood movie doesn't portray anyone as a superhero, or thickly apply sentimentality. The cinematography is also superb.

New Zealand docudrama about the massacre that occurred in Aramoana when an angry gun nut opened fire on his neighbors and severely reduced the population.

Slow to start, I thought that this was going to be a typical story of a shooting with its pleasant vistas and the get to know the participants set up scenes. However once things got going things spiral out in ways that they can only in real life. The violence, which we know is coming, is at first explosive and in its way out of left field. Then as the neighbors and soon to be targets attempt to figure out what the "fireworks" are things becoming darker as the random acts of violence begin to pick up. What do you do when a nut job begins to open fire? Here's the answer.

Though far from perfect, its a tad too clinical for my tastes, this film really packs a punch, especially in the final scenes where there are a few decidedly haunting images that not only drive home whats happened but also turns so of what we've seen on their ear (The swat team in slo mo).

I thought it was quite good. However I'm not particularly pleased with the Weinstein company who is its distributor. No ads for the film in New York. Sure you screened it for critics, but no add other than in the general ad for the IFC center where its playing. Clearly you don't want anyone to see it or know it existed.(I caught it on IFC on Demand cable service.) I only gave it a shot because I saw the title in the Time Out New York film reviews. Clearly they don't know what they are doing since here's a film they should promote but don't, yet other things like... Doogal...they promote like mad even thought it belongs in the bottom of a charnel house's fire pit.

If you get a chance to see it do so, its too good not to be seen.

I remember very well the events unfolding in Aramoana as it was broadcast on the TV and radio. I was a Police Officer at the time and the death of a fellow officer was tough news to hear. Seeing the events recreated on screen for the first time brought the memories flooding back. Seeing how even in a relatively peaceful nation such as New Zealand, no-one is immune from random acts of violence was very sobering. I sat bolt upright the entire movie and didn't realise it. The theater was deathly quiet. This is a movie that pulls no punches and has not an inkling of Hollywood in it. It is a sad, dramatic, true to life retelling of the massacre. This type of film is one of the reasons I avoid many of the big budget Hollywood movies. There's no glorification here, no overly animated death scenes, this is movie making at it's best. The story is being told without embellishment and in a sadly beautiful way. A must see for New Zealander's, and for anyone else interested in seeing a powerful, compelling movie. New Zealand's movie of the year, without doubt.

It was refreshing to watch a movie that accurately depicted events without all of the Hollywood American-Pie. The acting and cinematography made this film feel as though it were a fly-on-the-wall documentary. I feel that the subject, and particularly David Gray, could have done with more of an introduction. The movie was 100 minutes long but I was so engrossed by the candid nature of the film, it felt much shorter. I didn't even finish my popcorn and drink! All-in-all, this is a hard-hitting movie about a tragic incident. It isn't glamourised at all and I came out of the movie feeling quite subdued. Worth a watch.

I was lucky enough to attend a preview screening of Out of the Blue at the Embassy theater. As the final credits rolled and the curtains closed I realized I had finally found the meaning to the word 'masterpiece'. This is unquestionably one of the best films I have ever seen. Period.

The portrayal of David Gray is haunting in every meaning of the word. Matthew Sutherland is an expert as his craft. I despised him throughout the film but at the same time felt pity; for what he was going through mentally was almost as scary as what he was causing the town to go through.

Robert Sarkies has proved to us that he has a genuine eye for directing, and that he is loaded with talent. Although he has already worked on several other New Zealand films/series, I believe that this could be his calling card for getting into the big-budget pictures.

The acting is incredible, and I really admire Karl Urban for returning to NZ and doing this low-budget film. Every single performance in this film is nothing short of spectacular. I have never felt as though I actually knew a bunch of people in a movie until now. It was genuinely the most scary thing I have seen when the town goes to hell.

I wish that this movie could get a wide theatrical release, although I am almost certain it wont because its story wont really effect anyone outside of New Zealand. However, if you live in New Zealand you must see this film when it is locally released in cinemas. In fact no; everyone should go see this film. Everyone. Twice.

10/10 This is what happens when you get a bunch of people together who love what they do to make a movie.