Hard Candy

nacho libre

Why is there no review of this film on this board? I demand someone viewing this thread to go see it. It's a terrific film.

it's not broaching an awkward subject that counts, it's how you do it. I can assure you this film does the latter magnificiently.

Karl Hungus

If you're not writing a review yourself, don't post a thread on the Film Reviews forum.

Necronomicon

There is, if you could be arsed looking beyond the first page.

dudara

<>snip<>

sorry

Carcharodon

ahh, one of the most frustrating films i have ever watched, although the girl (Ellen Page) got great reviews for her performance i couldn't stand her for some reason. There were gaping holes in the film, it was a very sloppy film in my opinion and not very plausible to say the least.
The film really annoyed me ....

Laslo

Carcharodon wrote: »

ahh, one of the most frustrating films i have ever watched, although the girl (Ellen Page) got great reviews for her performance i couldn't stand her for some reason.

Just watched this. I have to agree, she completely over-acted it. Lots of silly little facial ticks in between lines. Pitifully poor and cringe worthy performance from her made this movie impossible to bare.

Otis Driftwood

Have heard alot of people raving about this movie and I must say I thought it was total bull spit.
One of the most over rated films Ive ever seen.

Predictable and melodramatic.

DUNG IMHO.

missingtime

I was actually raving about the trailer but never got to see it. Once I did I was incredibly dissapointed/annoyed by that Ellen Page girl.
God was she so ****ing over confident and narky or something. She deserved a good thump and I was actually delighted when he managed to hit her in the movie.

rosboy

Sorry guys...I have to disagree with ye! I watched it yesterday after hearing little about it, except that it was getting good reviews. I really enjoyed it. I'm not going to try and say that there weren't holes in the plot, but I thought that the director created enough tension in the film that you cold see past it.

As for Ellen Page, I thought she was believable in the role, and here performance helped brush over the plot holes, and distract you for them.

Now I'll just wait for the backlash.....:D

Jack B. Badd

This film was so unbelievably bad. Bad plot, bad casting, (horrendously) bad acting , bad script, just bad. I'll never get that hour+ back. NEVER!

Fysh

I was going to reply and write a fresh review of this film, when I remembered that I'd written a review shortly after watching it. Which is this post in the original review thread here.

Not that it really needs any lengthy dissection; in fact, "shite" pretty much sums it up.

rosboy

Looks like I'm out numbered!

oxygen_old

i also liked this movie. I know its a tad unrealistic to have a 14 year old killer, but that was the point of the movie, she was the exception to the rule. Also her cockiness and precociousness, are what enabled her to pull off this dangerous act of vigilantism. She was annoying, but that was part of the plot. Also

missingtime wrote: »

She deserved a good thump and I was actually delighted when he managed to hit her in the movie.

:eek:

missingtime

Yea I know, a bit extreme but she was very annoying.

TerrorFirmer

I thought this was quite a decent film, although a bit too far fetched to make it as good as it could have been. I know suspension of belief and all that, but that's something I would to apply to the more liberal genres. Still though, I liked it - as for saying the acting was terrible, I fail to see how you could reach that conclusion - the acting was excellent, it was the only thing the film had to hold it all together.

Fysh

I know that with a film like this different people will have different mileage in terms of what they will or won't accept, but honestly, I found Hayley's character and Ellen Page's portrayal of her significantly less convincing than I did Jason Vorhees as played by Kane Hodder.

It's not the unlikeliness of a 14-year-old killer, it's the unlikeliness of that 14-year-old as a killer. I got the very strong impression that she'd have been too busy reminding everyone about how she was on the honour roll to actually do any of the things that happened in the film.

Although it is somewhat worrying that in a film dealing with a 14-year-old vigilante versus a predatorial paedophile, the vigilante is irritating enough to make you question your initial assumption of automatically sympathising with her....

SexyIrish

I quite liked this movie as well. I like Ellen Page (she was actually 18 when filming the movie :eek:) and I think it just worked.

I think the whole point was that you weren't sure if you were up for the girl or up for the guy. Even at the end of the film, it made you question what you'd seen. I don't think this is a plot hole, I think it's actually pretty good writing and directing. All the best movies make you think about them and question them.

I also think that few movies with such a small cast can keep the suspence up for very long, but Hard Candy manages to do it well.

But that's jus MHO!

nacho libre

SexyIrish wrote: »

I quite liked this movie as well. I like Ellen Page (she was actually 18 when filming the movie :eek:) and I think it just worked.

I think the whole point was that you weren't sure if you were up for the girl or up for the guy. Even at the end of the film, it made you question what you'd seen. I don't think this is a plot hole, I think it's actually pretty good writing and directing. All the best movies make you think about them and question them.

I also think that few movies with such a small cast can keep the suspence up for very long, but Hard Candy manages to do it well.

But that's jus MHO!

I think so too.

As the film progressed i saw her as irritating and by the end of the film i actually had some sympathy for him. Which as you say is down to great writing and also i think good acting.

Jack B. Badd

nacho libre wrote: »

As the film progressed i saw her as irritating and by the end of the film i actually had some sympathy for him. Which as you say is down to great writing and also i think good acting.

I don't think this was down to good writing or acting. I felt sorry for the protagonist in The Woodsman, which I was quite surprised at, but it didn't require any of the children being obnoxious little b*stards.
Imo Ellen Page ranks in the same category as Keanu Reeves when it comes to acting ability.

Fysh

nacho libre wrote: »

I think so too.

As the film progressed i saw her as irritating and by the end of the film i actually had some sympathy for him. Which as you say is down to great writing and also i think good acting.

Really? I didn't have any sympathy for Jeff at the end, given that he's very obviously a predator. I just didn't have any sympathy whatsoever for Hayley either, because she was a precocious, irritating, up-herself little cow.

There's a lot of interesting scope for examining heinous villains and vigilantes, and exploring whether the vigilantism is damaging in and of itself and whether the cure is better than the illness, so to speak. I don't think this film did that, or at least not intentionally.

Comparing it to the likes of Audition or I Spit On Your Grave gives an important distinction. In those films, the central female character is lashing out in direct response to her previous abuses; in effect, renouncing the pursuit of justice and preferring vengeance.

In Hard Candy, we are presented with a precocious female character who has taken it upon herself to be society's vigilante and hunt down & kill paedophiles. The lack of any real motivation for her to do this, given that she is obviously intelligent enough to avoid the kind of mob mentality that leads to this, means that concerns over why she feels that she is entitled to go beyond the rule of law are never quite dismissed.

Jeff's actions and inclinations represent the most serious breach possible of the implicit trust children have in adults in most societies. However, Hayley's actions and choice of vigilantism represent a choice to ignore the rule of law that is fundamental to modern societies, and thus her efforts to eliminate those she considers a threat to society effectively make her into a threat to society. And while the circumstances that lead to paedophilic tendencies are not fully understood, meaning that to a certain extent Jeff's condition may have been something of a victim of either his childhood or his genetic heritage, while Hayley's actions were entirely premeditated and thus devoid of any gray area that might allow any degree of sympathy. Hell, the only reason she's not a complete monster at the end of the film is the nature of her victims - but you can totally see her character growing up to become something like Liz Dunn in The Hole or perhaps Marie in Switchblade Romance (more the former than the latter, though).

nacho libre

i agree with most of your post.
however, if it wasn't for her traits he wouldn't have got an insight into how his victims felt. i thought this part of the film was very powerful and she was justified in her actions up to this point (i guess you feel none of what she did was justified) but then she took it too far in my view and this is when i began to feel sympathy for him and the woman who would find his body.

perhaps the girl felt she was doing the world a favour but it was not for her to be judge, jury and executioner. i think she actually got off on it but in her head she probably justified it by saying he was a recidivist and the woman who loved him was better off without him.

SexyIrish

All of your points are very valid and part of why I enjoyed the movie so much, Fysh.

Everyone hates people who are bad, paedophiles more so than any (i'd imagine). The girl thinks what she is doing is right because he's a Bad Man and he deserves to be punished. This is a fundamental flaw in her character. Because she feels she is doing right (even tho we, as the audience, know what she is doing is wrong, despite what this man has done in his life), we are more inclined to empathise with HIM, which flies in the face of everything we know, cos he's a bad man who plays with kids.

The fact that she could be WRONG for most of the film (at least, that was what I took from it) further cements our dislike for what should be a likable character (think Batman ) and I think this is what makes the film so good.

I also think that because she's smart and premeditated, she is even more chilling. She has already come to the conclusion that he is guilty and she is thusly punishing him for it. There is no reasoning with her or bartering for your life. In many ways, this reminded me of horror movie monsters, such as Freddy or Jason. If your hero reminds you of a mass murderer, there's either something seriously wrong with your movie, or something seriously right.

I chose the latter!

missingtime

SexyIrish wrote: »

Everyone hates people who are bad, paedophiles more so than any (i'd imagine). The girl thinks what she is doing is right because he's a Bad Man and he deserves to be punished. This is a fundamental flaw in her character. Because she feels she is doing right (even tho we, as the audience, know what she is doing is wrong, despite what this man has done in his life),

The thing is the while it is morally wrong, from a film point of view, seeing a paedophile getting what was coming to him is generally what the audience wants - so in effect she is doing right.

I listened to the some of the commentary on the dvd and what the director had in mind was exactly what you are mentioning...you dont know who to go for. But in the end the point is moot because the supposed "hero" turns out to be a bratty little biatch and in the end you dont care who wins or looses.

Fysh

Batman is an interesting character to mention in this context, but I think the best example of the seriously scary vigilante is Rorschach from Alan Moore's Watchmen. A very damaged personality due to a horrendous childhood, Rorschach is a very rightwing and intolerant vigilante who at the same time ends up being a sympathetic character who, in a certain way, represents a more pure and uncompromised view of morality and ethics.

But the thing is, Hayley didn't strike me as an uncompromising vigilante concerned with the enactment of vengeful justice. She spent a lot of time trying to break Jeff psychologically, and it's never really made clear why she might be doing this other than for her own delectation, since by the end of the film it's apparent that she never really had any intention of allowing Jeff to live. If she really were an uncompromising and dark vigilante, Jeff would never have been given any of the chances he gets throughout the film - she would have killed him mercilessly the first time she had him at her mercy (when she spikes his drink). Of course, that would've been a rather short film unless they then showed Bat!Hayley taking down an entire kiddy porn ring

I agree that compromised heroes are interesting, but Hayley was only ever the hero by default of being opposed to a predatorial paedophile; she showed no evidence of being a character worth rooting for, so instead we got this very nihilistic ending in which the paedophile dies but someone every bit as dangerous lives on to murder another day. Which would be fine, if it had felt like the ending the film was working towards, but it didn't seem that way to me.

Dudess

I expected that film to be utter cock - thought the premise sounded awful - but I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't think it was brilliant or anything but I enjoyed it and thought the girl was excellent.