
Like many Hollywood screenwriters, Marcus Dunstan and Patrick Melton - the writing duo behind Feast and the arguably lesser batch of Saw sequels (parts IV-VII) - were finally given the chance in 2009 to hone their own brand of macabre mayhem into a fully-fledged feature independent of the films that helped give them their start. At one point serving as a potential prequel to the successful franchise, The Collector was instead retooled into a stand alone story about a would-be thief (Josh Stewart) who undergoes a significant change of heart upon realizing the home he’s chosen to burglarise has also become occupied by a madman, one that appears to be holding the resident family hostage by means of an assortment of gruelling traps and other grisly home-made devices of disfigurement.
But before you can say “isn’t that the same gimmick they used in the Saw series?” you might want to take a step back and give those films some serious credit. For you see, the motivations of the Jigsaw killer are rather detailed and morally complex by comparison, at least with regard to John Kramer’s plight and underlying philosophical intentions toward his ‘subjects’. Not only that each films’ plotline is carefully weaved from beginning to end with the objective of revealing a significant story arch by the time the closing credits roll over, thus bringing to light a greater context for the events witnessed by the audience.
In the case of The Collector (*POTENTIAL SPOILER ALERT*) there is no framework of circumstance whatsoever nor is there so much as a potential hint toward the killer’s meaning or motive or a disclosure of his/her identity. And while back story and/or a direct grounds for madness isn’t always necessary for films of this ilk (in fact many times it can be detrimental) The Collector’s complete absence of it may leave many viewers eternally aggravated and ready to crack their DVD in half.
The reason for the comparison is simply to illustrate the significant change in direction undertaken by Dunstan and Melton this time round, especially for a typically story-driven writing team. Thus, when one decides to take away the twists and turns in a serial killer flick, what are you left with? Well, ultimately The Collector is nothing more than a grisly house-of-horrors movie, much like the experience of going on a ghost train at a carnival and being bombarded by shock after shock without the inclusion of context or purpose. Once the films' brutality begins it almost never lets up as the entirety of the second and third acts consist purely of one sadistic mutilation/death after another, some more creative and ghoulish than others but all equally as bloody. Props must be given to cinematographer Brandon Cox and the FX team, however, for creating some of the nastiest and most mean-spirited kills in recent memory and doing so with a sense of energy and vigor that help elevate the film above its modest budget; something not easily achieved for a film so heavy on the grue.
It’s difficult to offer up much more criticism about The Collector, simply for the fact there’s not a lot else to say about a film so sparing of anything resembling a significant story. If Dunstan and Melton’s mission here was to deliver an endless parade of nonsensical violence and entertaining, albeit mindless bloodshed then they did so in spades. However, if it were also their aim to provoke sincere emotion and suspense within that cruelty then they clearly forgot to sharpen the blade well before it sliced the skin.

Dir: Marcus Dunstan
Writer: Marcus Dunstan & Patrick Melton
Cast: Josh Stewart, Michael Reilly Burke, Andrea Roth, Madeline Zima
Country: USA
Run Time: 90mins
Rating: R18+
I really liked this movie. I heard they started shooting the sequel in October, can't wait for that. Love this blog, buddy.
ReplyDeleteCheck out my blog when you get the chance!
http://grimmreviewz.blogspot.com/
Cheers!
This is one of the few movies to come out recently I actually enjoyed. In my opinion, the lack of story and character development added to the fear and shock of the movie.
ReplyDelete@Roulemoure: I agree. I found it a strangely conflicting movie, mainly because I couldn't decide whether or not I actually liked it as I watched it. In the end I found it unusually entertaining.
ReplyDeleteThe idea here is to create a sympathetic anti-hero (in Arkin). The story is about him. That's a different twist than most horror films where the killer is more interesting than the others. Here the killer remains anonymous. Why humanize the killer? If a killer invaded your home, he probably wouldn't stop to provide you with backstory. I understand how some are frustrated by this because the movies have trained us to expect all the hackneyed exposition but I think the writers wanted to create a scarier villain. A killer who seemed impenetrable. A villain who couldn't be talked to or reasoned with. And maybe they're saving it for the sequel. Or maybe not.
ReplyDeleteThis movie was great the plot everything. The fact that we don't know the killers intentions or motives at all just ads to the suspense and make it worth the watch. I can't wait for the sequel <3 best movie ever
ReplyDelete