FESTIVAL REVIEW: DETENTION (SXSW ’11)

I must see this.

Yes you must, you all must.

This movie is BONKERS.  Joseph Kahn said in the q+a that he wanted to capture the true way that kids today communicate. Most of the time, it just made me think, man, I do NOT understand kids today. But yeah, people. This movie has a character with fly DNA who spits acid and spends a large portion of his childhood wearing a television set on his hand. And he is like the tenth most important person in the cast.

Dude, your review has me fucking PUMPED to see this now.  Goddammit, I really wish I coulda made it to SXSW now.

I just knew Torque wasn't a fluke.

CHUD's Torque Defense Force finally stands redeemed and victorious. 

Saw this tonight (Seattle Intl Film Festival) and very much enjoyed it. The pacing is very demanding though. I have a hard time imagining it becoming a hit, but I had a lot of fun watching it. I think Chewers will eat this up.

I did have a very hard time hearing the dialogue though. I don't know if that was for the same reason as Renn mentions in his review.

The trailer mentions SCREAM (meta-horror referencing meta-horror) and that has me a tad worried and the weird juxtaposed imagery has me thinking "Richard Kelly" and that has me even more worried, so your review helps to relieve some of that...

I'm gonna see if I got this right, as I've only seen Detention once.

Not only is Scream mentioned, but it's pretty much ancient history. The modern version of Scream in this universe is something called Cinderhella, which is half slasher half torture porn. And there have been so many of those movies that the Cinderhella franchise has already begun to drown in self-referential excess after countless sequels, reinventions and spinoffs. Post-post-post-post modernism, one might say. So the trailer's glib mention of Scream is more than a little misleading.

I want to be able to talk in detail about this, but I can't until the movie's theatrical release; all I'll say is that without a doubt it's the best movie I've seen in 2012 (acknowledging that you all who have seen it saw it last year), and if I see 10 movies that are better this year I'll be blown away. If you get a chance to see it, do. Then see it again. Among movies that get better with multiple viewings, Detention is easily a stand-out; having seen it three times at this point, and also interviewed Kahn at a round table, I can say that my perspective broadened and increased with each viewing and with that half hour spent chatting Kahn up about the film. It's...it's just brilliant.

Finally got around to this. Jesus Christ. This movie. "Bonkers" barely even comes close to describing it. This may in fact be the weirdest movie I've ever seen that was made with slick production values (ie, not the work of some madman who barely grasps cinematic form). It is so weird that it really transcends any "good" or "bad" criticism. I desperately wanted it to end for the last 30 minutes, because it is so ADD relentless. And then was sad when it did in fact end.

This is definitely my "must see even if you hate it" movie of 2012.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshua Miller 

It is so weird that it really transcends any "good" or "bad" criticism.

 

+

 

This is definitely my "must see even if you hate it" movie of 2012.

Probably the two truest statements in the thread. Really, this is something you must watch if you're even a mild cinephile; it's the sort of film you've got to see to believe. 
 

The film is... INSANE.

In terms of sheer filmmaking prowess, you have to see this.  It makes Speed Racer and Scott Pilgrim feel so tame in terms of pacing and density of information that's thrown at you.  It's a film that demands to be rewatched, discussed, and rewatched again.  I think that's where the film's 'value' will come from.

As an actual character piece, I don't think a lot of it comes through dramatically.  I never felt all that engaged with the lives of the kids.  And that could easily be a generational thing now (in addition to the fact that I've NEVER been in sync with youth culture, even when young!).  But I think it's because the movie just never stops moving to allow any such moments to land.  In capturing the speed of a young mind so well, the filmmaking seems complicit in the erratic behavior and inability to take a breath.  This is no fault of the cast, however.  I think all of the actors in the film (even Dane Cook!) do a great job and were totally game for what Kahn was going for.

But I'm in awe of just how much that the insanely erratic first half the film is paid off by the second half.  

I can't wait to discuss this with you guys.

EDIT: Unfortunately, there wasn't much of a turnout at my showing.  Apologies to Joseph Khan on behalf of my city.  He flew all the way up here to be met by a quarter-full theater.  But he was still very game to talk about his film.  It's unfortunate that there couldn't have been more promotion for it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcnooj82 

As an actual character piece, I don't think a lot of it comes through dramatically.  I never felt all that engaged with the lives of the kids.  And that could easily be a generational thing now (in addition to the fact that I've NEVER been in sync with youth culture, even when young!).  But I think it's because the movie just never stops moving to allow any such moments to land.  In capturing the speed of a young mind so well, the filmmaking seems complicit in the erratic behavior and inability to take a breath.  This is no fault of the cast, however.  I think all of the actors in the film (even Dane Cook!) do a great job and were totally game for what Kahn was going for.

I think these characters are completely secondary to the vibe of this film, but upon a second viewing, it's easy to feel for Riley the sometimes-vegetarian and Toshiba silently pining for the goth girl. It's not so much built-up characters as much as its just moving too fast - a second viewing made me genuinely sad that we were just getting to know why Billy Nolan is so angry before he's torn to shreds.

Anyway, what's wrong with you people? SEE THIS MOVIE.

The thing is, the pace of the movie is so overwhelming that you don't realize how deliberate and at-times measured the film is. After I saw it for the first time I remembered nothing but a Crank-paced insanity fest, but from the second time on you realize there are plenty of deliberate, focused scenes. Once you start breaking into the layered subtleties and are past the novelty of how far out of left-field the script is willing to pull things, I think you get a lot more out of at least the three or four main characters. Especially when you understand that each is living their own specific genre, which carries with it some extra meaning you can extrapolate. One's living a Cronenberg film by way of Burton, another an identity flip-flop movie, another a new-age Hipster take on Bueller, and another a horror flick, and on and on.

Also -- in terms of the filmmaking -- I think it's a huge accomplishment that Kahn gives you that sense of insane pace, and yet the cuts-per-minute ratio is on par with your most measured, oscar-bait drama. It's the dialogue, volume of information, and especially the complexity of the camera movement that give the sense of pace, not the editing- which is a huge relief. This is in opposition to, say, Edgar Wright's filmmaking, which is pretty speedily edited (though still great, obviously).

It's such a fucking sadness that the geek's couldn't find the bandwidth to shit their pants about Cabin in The Woods (deserved though it may be) and support something like this that really, really needed it during the same week. Such a blown move by the studio too.

FUCK YOU, SAMUEL GOLDWYN!

I absolutely got an inkling of just how measured the filmmaking was once the time-travel stuff kicked in.  PARTIAL RECALL of the first half of the film! 

I've been having a very hard time getting people excited about this film. Oddly enough, something that seems to be causing most of the friction/hesitation -- Dane Cook. I thought he was well used in the film, but possibly casting him was a terrible idea, as just his very presence can repel the exact same sort of viewer who will most respond to the film.

My problem is that my usual circle of friends would most likely not like the film very much.  Still, I'm gonna see if I can try to drag a few people to it.

Treated myself to a double feature of this and Cabin in the Woods.  Best night at the movies I've had in a long time.  After this movie, I walked out of the theater in a fit of somewhat manic laughter - I'm not sure of exactly what I watched, but I know that I enjoyed every minute of it.  Dragged along a friend who had heard nothing about it, and we both left determined to tell everyone we knew about it.  The audience wasn't big - probably about 1/3rd of the theater full, but they seemed to eat it up.  I really hope word of mouth helps this get more people into the theater, because I've seen almost zero marketing for this.

Feeling pretty jealous of everyone who had such fun with this, because I found it to be a self-satisfied, excruciating mess.  It is probably the most insane movie I've ever seen, and it hurts me a bit not to like it just for having the guts to be what it is, but God do I never want to spend another minute with what it is.  The only bright spot was Shanley Caswell, who occasionally managed to seem like a vague outline of a person despite every fiber of the film doing its damnedest not to let her.

To be honest I'm actually surprised by the number of people who have seen this movie and really liked it. My recommendation for DETENTION remains firmly just "you gotta see this just to see this." I was frankly expecting more people to fall on the negative side. Though, hardly anyone has seen it yet, so I guess we shall see.

This movie definitely was insane. Love that it finally made it to the big screen! So if you haven't seen it yet, GO SEE IT. It's definitely something to experience, check it out in theaters now!

I definitely agree, DETENTION is INSANE. But it's something you have to experience. So happy it's finally in theaters! Check it out if you haven't already seen it!

I will say that seeing this in a theater after watching it on a screener is amazing. Though the theater I saw it in was very close to being empty, which was, well, less than amazing.

The other thing is that that mercurial pace is one of the film's greatest pleasures. You can watch Detention for the first time and get everything you need to get in order to understand and process the film and its central theme, but it's a movie that's built upon itself in such a dynamically brilliant way that it improves by leaps and bounds with every subsequent viewing. Everything-- everything-- has a setup and payoff here, even the things that you wouldn't expect, and part of what makes the film so great comes from watching how all of those pieces come into play and tie together in unexpected, meaningful ways. (Which sounds like generic praise, but I can't explain it any better than that. For the moment.)

My theater was close to empty and got a bit emptier after the second "character wakes up and starts addressing the camera" opening. 

There's no denying the movie maintains a breakneck pace and there's such a density of information that I would probably notice more on subsequent viewings, if only the characters, jokes and references weren't so intensely grating as to make me never want to watch it again.