This deeply metaphysical short film realizes mankind's eternal desire for good to triumph over evil while on a more existential level it is kept in stasis, made concrete by the fact that in nature no one ever "wins" or "loses" per se. Instead (see: Ethical Subjectivism) there is a sense of vanquishment rewarded with acts of tribute and kindness from that populus who's sentiments are in accordance with the alleged "victors" These binary oppositions(winner vs loser, good vs evil, antagonist vs protagonist) become unbound at certain points within the film and our own preconceived notions of such abstract concepts are now made askew. Braxtan's unobtrusive camera style gives the viewer the freedom to meditate on such articulations.
Upon closer scrutiny, the film's veritable style unveils its objective slant which, at times, beckons the viewer to empathize with so-called "antagonists" of the film. For example, Chuck Branson, who, on a superficial level, appears to be a self-absorbed lazy bum, mooching off of his roommate. When he inadvertently becomes the victim of Freddy's cruel games, resulting in a most gruesome death, it resonates deeply within us all.
Fast forward to Neil Anderson's reaction upon witnessing the aftermath of Freddy's rampage. Not a single tear, not even a hint of affliction. One is forced to ask himself just how heroic our protagonist may be if he fails to display basic human emotions? How are we to relate with this character that is so insufferably mechanical? His thoughts and actions become intangible for us and the viewer thus dissociates his or herself from Neil and Hollywood's formulaic protagonist/antagonist dichotomy now comes full circle. We find ourselves cheering for Freddy after all.
The question we are left to ask ourselves after viewing this 35 minute work of pure cinematic brilliance is not that of "who won" or "who lost" but they are much deeper questions pertaining to our own faith and spirituality, internal conflicts and their external manifestations, modern society's compulsory perception of the ethical and of the obscene, etc.
Buy, rent, borrow, download or steal this movie!
Upon closer scrutiny, the film's veritable style unveils its objective slant which, at times, beckons the viewer to empathize with so-called "antagonists" of the film. For example, Chuck Branson, who, on a superficial level, appears to be a self-absorbed lazy bum, mooching off of his roommate. When he inadvertently becomes the victim of Freddy's cruel games, resulting in a most gruesome death, it resonates deeply within us all.
Fast forward to Neil Anderson's reaction upon witnessing the aftermath of Freddy's rampage. Not a single tear, not even a hint of affliction. One is forced to ask himself just how heroic our protagonist may be if he fails to display basic human emotions? How are we to relate with this character that is so insufferably mechanical? His thoughts and actions become intangible for us and the viewer thus dissociates his or herself from Neil and Hollywood's formulaic protagonist/antagonist dichotomy now comes full circle. We find ourselves cheering for Freddy after all.
The question we are left to ask ourselves after viewing this 35 minute work of pure cinematic brilliance is not that of "who won" or "who lost" but they are much deeper questions pertaining to our own faith and spirituality, internal conflicts and their external manifestations, modern society's compulsory perception of the ethical and of the obscene, etc.
Buy, rent, borrow, download or steal this movie!