FilmsCanChangeTheWorld

There are two types of plots. Plot as plot (which is what Shelby Oaks is), and plot as an expression of story (meaning the author has something to say about life). Plot as plot is fine, it's fun, it's fluff, it's a love letter to the genre, it's a one time watch, it's a "yeah there were a couple of creepy moments", it's a "I liked the camerawork", it's consumable but not overly meaningful. Nothing wrong with Shelby Oaks, it just didn't really 'do' anything.

This is not it. So this is Ryan Murphy's tribute to a serial killer to basically humanise him, try his upmost to inspire empathy in the audience towards him, and say thank you to him for torturing and murdering many people, all because his actions would later inspire iconic horror movies that informed and changed Western culture. Murphy's obsession with old Hollywood and pop culture seems to blind him from the humanity of the killer's victims (maybe because their was nothing special about them in his eyes) and glamourise, sexualise, homoeroticize, and find a type of appreciation in the killer himself because his actions made an impact. Other than this twisted take, there's really nothing new about the toolbox of narrative quirks that Murphy uses here. We've seen them all before at this point, and done much better than this excessively slow-paced trash.

I enjoyed this for what it was. Couldn't help but see a real missed opportunity to tighten up the script and take it much harder into the subject matter, and amp up the body horror intensity (eg. The Substance). The metaphor is easily understood, and it works on a superficial level, however there were a number of plot holes and fillers that needed work. It lacked some dramatisation needed to replace the excessive tone-building exposition scenes. And the elements such as the church and the water offers a few rules to this universe, but not enough to explain the finer points which leads me to assume that they were an easy plot device to try and make the story work. The main challenge to this story was to try and create two flawed characters who were relatable enough for us to identify with, so when the horror begins our empathy triggers us into the torment of their pain, but I don't think the writing quite got their, for me at least. The characters were obtusely unaware of their own flaws which made any truthful internal conflicts harder to be explored pushing them into the role of passive victims of their own ignorance.