phantom2-2

I saw this when it first came out, thanks to a roger ebert review. ten years later it's stuck with me and i just rewatched it for the first time in years. the square is simply brilliant.

there are issues with the film that some people might find daunting. it's definitely low budget, though it doesn't come across as cheaply made. the special effects are limited to torrential rainfalls on demand. it's a no-name cast, at least by usa standards, though joel edgerton has made a bit of a name for himself and his brother nash also directed the fairly enjoyable 'gringo!'. the australian accents can be difficult to decipher at times (no, "g'donya" is not a single word). many of the characters look similar and are a challenge to tell apart unless you're paying somewhat decent attention (pervasive mullets and scruffy beards will do that). the dialog is mostly forgettable or hard to hear. but i quibble.

the plot is a fantastic spiral of bad decisions and worse outcomes feeding on each other in an almost gleefully inevitable way. accidents happen. people die. crimes are hidden...but not for long. never has the phrase, "you're a hero," been so mis-applied. no scenes are wasted and even trivial-seeming remarks ultimately have significance. the dialog is nothing special, but that just makes the characters seem more real. the acting is top notch. the square might have worked almost as well as a silent movie, which i consider high cinematic praise.

what is 'the square'? is it the concrete courtyard that ray, a harried construction manager, is increasingly desperate to get built? is it the relationships between ray, his lover carla, and their respective spouses? or is it ray himself, about as square as any lead character in a movie can be. i bet he listens to the australian equivalent of perry como in his free time.

and is that the director in a cameo in the hospital scene, sporting an eye patch over the eye that he lost in his short film "the spider"? (included as an extra on the dvd or on youtube)

a film definitely worth a watch...and then watch again to see what you overlooked the first time.

i first saw liquid sky when it came out and was so intrigued i went back to see it four more times. hadn't seen anything before like it, and haven't seen anything like it since. given that it's obviously a no-budget production by non-actors they do an incredible job. c'mon, anybody who doesn't laugh at the interaction between the scientist and sylvia just has no sense of humor. and there are other priceless moments... ordering shrimp, the look on everyone's faces when jimmy vanishes, "i can't have all these bodies", and best of all: "delicious, delicious." there's more creativity in liquid sky than in a whole summer's worth of Hollywood blockbusters. a lot of it is ugly, some is dated 1980s scene stuff, but it's undeniable and there's not a false note by a single performer. anne carlisle's performance(s) is utterly convincing and it's a shame it's been overlooked.