Crimewatch always has, and always will, scare the bejeesus out of me. The shoddily filmed reconstructions made the fact they were based on true stories even more realistic, like someone had filmed the crime themselves for shits and giggles. This is what Oliver S Milburn’s The Harsh Light of Day instantly reminded me of…well for half of it at least, before flipping entirely on its head and becoming a surreal revenge film I did not at all expect.
Daniel Shergold (Dan Richardson) is a writer, and after celebrating the launch of his book, he returns home with his wife (Niki Felstead) only for it to be invaded by a trio of masked thugs who brutally murder her and film the grisly events. Confined to a wheelchair after the attack, Daniel suffers badly from the incident. Brutal daydreams of the killers and painful memories of his wife taunt him daily as he struggles to come to terms with what happened. Now under the care of Fiona (Sophie Linfield), he shows no signs of recovery both physically and mentally until he accepts a visit from a mysterious man who offers him a chance of vengeance and redemption none too different from the occult that appears in his books.
Feeling like a strange concoction spanning several genres and clearly inspired by a number of films, from Dead Man’s Shoes to Blade 2 to The Blair Witch Project, The Harsh Light of Day is certainly a strange one. Initially feeling like a simple and bare bones revenge movie set in the English countryside, it suddenly takes a sharp left into Supernaturalville, hoping a Hellraiser style scene of abstract gore will bridge the gap. I honestly can’t decide whether it does or not; while it was somewhat of a pleasant surprise for Oliver S. Milburn to take the narrative into such a radical direction, it just felt odd to witness such a monumental shift in genre with such little explanation.
It is more than watchable though, which is quite a feat for an independent film made on a meagre budget, and while it obviously looks and sounds like the entire monetary allowance could fit snugly into the hand of a child, there a few things that are actually quite impressive, with the editing especially being a major plus point. The intruding frantic cuts of what’s going on in Daniel’s head are executed very well indeed and truly add an elevated sense of style to the film even if Milburn becomes a little too reliant on them. There are a couple of stand out sequences too; one towards the end of the film shot entirely on a handheld digital camera is particularly haunting. Although not being original in any sense, it really does heighten the tension setting up for a genuinely gripping finale.
Of course the film looks cheap (mainly because it is) but when the action is at its most dormant, you can really tell. The ugly effect of the digital age creeps in and becomes a little jarring in certain scenes, but then there are others where it works perfectly. When it needs to be rough, raw and brutal, the disadvantage of using such limited technology really helps the film, but when it’s something simple, like a conversation in a brothel for example, it looks a little too much like a student’s second year Uni project. Obviously this might be classed as unavoidable, but a bit more time on lighting the scene with a bit more flair would’ve really helped at certain points I think.
The acting is a bit ropey for the most part, but that’s expected for a micro-budget Brit-flick. There are a few moments of clever creativity, Daniel’s detective work was especially great to watch unfold, and while it’s not the most originally constructed film in the world, there are enough decent moments for it to be classed as a solid effort for the fans of budget British horror…and Crimewatch reconstructions.
