Author: BRWC

By Alex Purnell. An intriguing who-done-it crime story with grizzly twists and turns, Innocence tells the daring story of care home patient Dylan (Tommy Jessop), a young man who has Down syndrome, as he is relentlessly questioned over the mysterious death of worker Micheal (Richard Glover).

The film profoundly questions the role of disabled actors and characters within the film, and the notion that they are predominantly typecasted as victims. Director Ben Reid wrote upon the film website that the intention of Innocence was to portray a strong character who has Down syndrome for his younger brother Tom, who also has Down syndrome. Reid states:

“This drove me to make INNOCENCE, giving Tom the character he’s always been denied and shining a light on the fact people with Down syndrome are more capable and intelligent than most people believe.”

The most compelling component of Innocence is the constant hurricane of a story the film brings you on. A rollercoaster of half-truths, Innocence feels superbly thought through, with a well-written script which is remarkably fleshed out. What the script did well was to provide a wonderfully paced short, feeding the audience with a constant drip-feed of information whilst hiding the reveal successfully until the final moments.

The character of Dylan (Tommy Jessop) feels three dimensional and fluid as the lead, with Jessop playing the part beautifully, the character is most definitely the highlight of the short, bringing a wealth of confidence to the role.

Despite this, though, the other characters do feel somewhat flavourless in comparison, feeling underwhelming, and as if they are reading directly off the script. This frustrating pot-hole turns the other-wise brilliantly professional short into more of an amateur feeling student film, although in general, it is somewhat forgivable, as the plot manages to uphold the majority of the short.

Innocence is a pocket-sized crime drama you should definitely consider watching. Not only does it fit an incredible plot filled into its 20 minute margin, but it also questions the role of disabled actors within the industry, not only that but it acts upon the issue, telling a suspensefully unforgettable story in the process. 

By Alex Purnell. The story of Bill begins with a widow drinking a mysterious concoction in front of an image of her deceased husband, with the hope that this form of black magic her loved one will come back to her. 

Filmed in a single day and self-funded by directorial duo Dan Gitsham & Sophie Mair, the fresh idea is made even more compelling with the films simplicity, and its tight-time of just 3 minutes means there’s no reason not to watch Bill. 

The use of sound works wonders for Bill, and is the most noteworthy component of the short. Nothing is quite as eerie as hearing a rickety door open slowly when nobody is home or the deafly quiet, albeit obvious sound of heavy breathing. To top this off, the music used helps create an ominous environment with its slightly off-kilter guitar playing and sinister drone. 

The atmosphere is chilling, creating great tension, although Bill is dragged down by a number of components which really could have been improved. The film stars Roxanna Vilk, playing the main role of the widow, and although the performance isn’t inherently bad, Vilk seems to overact, her reactions seem unnatural and don’t appear to sync up with what’s happening on screen. This makes me believe this was more of an editorial or directorial blunder, and not so much the fault of the talent involved.

Alas, for myself the biggest pit-fall of Bill is the excess use of CGI. As a great believer of less is more in horror flicks (unless you are going for a John Carpenter-esque practical horror), I found it less scary and more frustrating, especially as I thought the intention of the film attempts to inflict more of a psychological effect on the viewer.

Unfortunately, the use of a CGI’d blue dead man does little but make me groan, so much potential desolated by showing far too much.

Bill is an enjoyable watch, and its length allows you to view it multiple times to really breath in its DIY beauty. Despite this, it is somewhat plagued by its issues but is admirable in its honest attempt to be different. 

By Alex Purnell. London chicken shops are a representation of your neighbourhood, acting as a community hub for minority groups in the capital. They act as a cheap alternative from other fast-food shops scattered around London and have garnered a level of respect from the locals and because of this, chicken shops such as Morley’s and Chicken Palace are considered a far better representation of London culture than Buckingham Palace or The Tower of London will ever be. 

No more Wings, the directorial debut of Abraham Adeyemi, is a short story about two young black men at a pivotal moment in their lives. The two meet at their local Morley’s chicken shop to have a catch-up, with one clad in a stylish suit and a gilded new watch, whilst the other sports a tracksuit, weed and a grinder. Quickly you can see the stark contrast between the two, as they dig into their 6 piece with chips.

The suited Isaac (Ivanno Jeremiah) lets his old friend know that he is leaving their local district of Woolwich, and has recently brought a house in East London. The other, Jude (Parys Jordan), lightheartedly argues against his friend, suggesting that he should stay for the glow up, as well as protesting that the up-market chicken shops nearby will be gentrified and overpriced.

The film cuts to the two as schoolboys, entering the same Morleys years earlier, whilst this time they are both wearing a standard school uniform. Despite this, you can instantly tell who is who, and not just by their haircuts but instead through the conversation the two engage in.

The duo chat about their district of Woolwich, and whether or not they are going to leave, echoing their future actions. A young Jude strives to be a grime star, representing Woolwich, whilst the young grounded Isaac reminds him of his GCSE’s and states that there’s much more to the world than South East London. 

The simplicity of No more Wings is both it’s most resilient and weakest point. Dialogue is the most integral component of the film and is consistently carried by natural conversation, creating a fluid, realistic narrative which is most definitely the defining feature of the flick. 

Despite this, No more Wings does leave the audience feeling empty by the end, the lack of substance does create a rather dull viewing experience. The dialogue is engaging, but the delivery leaves much to be desired, with the two older versions seeming to not want to be present.

Although maybe intentional with the inclination that the two are drifting apart, it leaves you feeling unfulfilled, as the lack of climax or any real development of character leaves you emotionless.

By Alif Majeed.

Towards the beginning of Onus, Anna, the lead character who had accompanied her partner to her ancestral house, has to choose between staying and running far away in the opposite direction. It also feels like a straightforward choice, considering how creepy Izzy’s family has been. But unsurprisingly, she chooses to stay put before its too late. It is a choice that a lot of horror movie heroines have to make. It has now become a classic horror movie troupe. 

The reason why she does that is not that she is not intelligent. There is no doubt about her intelligence, especially how she figures out something is wrong in the way the house treats both her and the maidservant of the house. The difference is that as a character, she is way too polite. 

I was reading a book about cops where they had mentioned a lot of crime that occurs in an elevator or lift is because the victim is too polite. Like the victim is about to walk into a lift and sees a lone person in the lift. Now it turns into a moment of choice. Even when his / her gut instinct or common sense says to run in the opposite direction, they still enter the lift out of politeness. Only to fall into the trap of the lone perpetrator in the elevator and be the victim. 

Anna feels like a character who has to choose and choose to go down the rabbit hole.  Add to the fact that her natural compassion as a trainee nurse kicks in. It makes a choice seem more effortless. 

Onus is a movie that wears its inspiration up its sleeve. You know where it starts from Get out and veers towards the Wicker Man with Rosemary’s Baby thrown in for good measure. It all adds up to a movie that seems familiar while heading towards its climax. 

Anna and her girlfriend Izzy, decides to visit the latter’s family at her vintage house. Almost immediately upon getting home, she realizes there is something fishy about the house and especially her family. The fact that the family also confuses details of the patriarch’s ailment also raises her suspicion. She even starts to feel a kindred sympathy towards the housemaid Lucy (Shaniece Williams), and the feeling becomes mutual. As the maid tries to warn her to walk away indirectly, she chooses to stay, in part due to the politeness mentioned earlier and partly due to her being a trainee nurse, and as Izzy wanted her to check on her ailing father. As the movie progresses, she also starts to get nightmares about ritual sacrifices and gets sicker, which again, may have something to do with the family. 

The thing about Onus is even if its inspirations may or may not be intentional, it still plays a lot like the movies that came before it. And when there is a mention of lost fortune, and we get to see the sick patriarch, it confirms that feeling you already had about where the movie is going to.

The movie looks like it had to work around a lot of its budgetary restrictions, but under the circumstances, Alec Secker, the director has managed to make it work with what he had. The nightmare sequences that Anna experiences throughout the movie also has a disconcerting quality to it. 

Among the cast, Shaniece Williams, who plays Lucy, the long-suffering maid of the family, is fantastic as she struggles with the loyalty towards the family and her concern for Anna’s inevitable fate. As Anna, Daniella Faircloth has also done well as the vulnerable girl with a disturbing past, implied to be why she was the “chosen” one for whatever the family has in store for her. 

The main gross I did have with the movie is the third act. What would usually be the climax of many horror movies of the same genre almost feels like it would go on forever. Maybe it was an attempt to subvert the genre expectation, but it did feel like it would never end. Until it actually does. I’m trying hard not to spoil things here as it would make it difficult to explain without giving away that ending. But for a sophomore effort, which certainly had its budgetary limitations, it is a decent effort in the horror genre.