The Strangers (2008)
Do you enjoy watching a cat toy with a mouse?
9 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
If so, you may enjoy this directorial debut from Bryan Bertino that seems part of a post-"Devil's Rejects" trend of "no-frills" low-budget horror films ("Vacancy" also comes to mind) where basically you take some "ordinary people" and let some miscreants have at them for an extended period of time. It harks back to the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" where there's no "big payoff" in terms of learning who the miscreants are or why they're doing what they're doing. They're presented as a kind of force of nature whose victims were just luckless enough to cross their path; the moral equivalent of a car accident, maybe. If you've seen the trailer for "The Strangers" you've already heard the only "explanation" offered for this local terrorism:

"Why are you doing this to us?"

"'Cause you were home."

(This itself seems a ripoff of the classic Richard Pryor routine about meeting prison inmates, but never mind.) It seems almost pointless discussing the victims because, as in a De Sade novel, they clearly only exist to be victims, but it's Liv Tyler (who, as with Cate Blanchett, having seen her as an elf it's hard for me to accept her as anything else) and a guy unknown to me as a young couple arriving at the guy's remote (very, very, very remote) South Carolina digs after a wedding. We learn that earlier she had rejected his own marriage proposal to her, thus bumming both of them out. The only reason for this subplot seems to be to give them something to discuss until the strangers show up (there's an awful lot of "filler" in this flick) and to let them have a poignant moment when they're about to die. Once the strangers do arrive, it's pretty much "by the numbers" cat-and-mouse stuff; as is a requirement for horror movies made since cell phones were invented, it's pointed out why their cell phones are useless. What did strike me here was a kind of "Hollywood throwback" level of stupidity displayed by the victims. Citing all the examples would make me exceed my IMDb word limit, but here's one: after the male victim unwittingly kills his friend with the shotgun (which hardly seems to count as a "spoiler," it's telegraphed so clearly), do he and his non-fiancée decide to take the shotgun (by the way shotguns fire "shells," not "bullets," but I figured that was a deliberate goof) and make a run for the motor vehicle that the friend must have used to get there? Or even just hold their ground with the gun and wait for the strangers to come after them or leave? Of course not....

As for the performances: Ms Tyler bumps up against her thespian limits (I hadn't noticed before how essentially sad-faced she is) but at least does some stretching out, unlike the total inertia of her male co-star. Director Bertino never lets us see the strangers' faces clearly, so what I can say. The only one of them who has lines delivers them well, I guess. (Okay, maybe the other woman had a line too at the end, I couldn't tell which of them spoke it.) The film is almost stolen by the two Mormon boys who bookend the proceedings and who enable the semi-obligatory "final pre-closing-credits shock" moment. ....A few minor points: the opening narration is merely irritating, reminding us of the vastly superior "Massacre" and trying to impart some cheap authenticity to this fictitious tale. ("Inspired by true events" ---one could say that about almost any movie.) Also, the old-fashioned turntable playing the old-fashioned vinyl records gets so much screen time it deserves a credit. It almost inspired me to go dig mine out of the attic... but not quite.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed