jadavix
It's hard to know what to say about a movie like "The Collector", because it can be summed up so briefly. It's like a low-rent version of "Saw".The movie is about a guy who intends to burgle a house he has done some handyman work at to pay a debt to some loan sharks. He breaks in there, but finds another criminal has already visited the place and filled it with traps.That's basically it.The comparison to the "Saw" movies, I feel, is going to be unfavourable from most people in the audience, because the traps in this one aren't nearly as creative.One weird detail is that the shiny-eyed, masked serial killer in the movie is played by Juan Fernandez, the Dominican actor who Charles Bronson attempted to make eat his own watch in the sleaze classic "Kinjite". In any other horror flick the masked killer is always played by a stunt-man, but here, they chose a fifty-something year old actor, who never takes his mask off?Weird.
torstensonjohn
When people render film reviews many will go into who played what and why or talk about the personal biased towards certain performances. I try to avoid the whole realm of your typical film reviews.The truth about this movie is it is simple. Not truly scary or in the Genre of Horror- it has a draw from SAW but that is where it ends. The basis for the plot is generic at best, a man goes to rob a place to pay off loan sharks for wife and gets caught in a web of sadistic torture. The house this takes place in, come on, way to small of a house to hold that many traps, and when did this killer have the time to set up these traps when the sub text this was all supposed to take place within a day. Although I did like the story itself, Josh Stewart was terrible acting wise in this. To many things seem to get swept to the side, and there are obvious points the writer and directors left out for speculation. The traps were interesting as they were to inflict the most pain. I give this a somber 5
jessikinley
It starts a terrible film, it's all been done before. However, as the story went on it got more, and more gripping! It had the signs of a normal 'horror' over the past 10 years. The stupid people who don't get it and end up getting themselves killed and the gore.It wasn't entirely original but it pulls you in. I loved how the ending wasn't all sunshine and rainbows, getting a bit sick of films where everyone's happy families at the end.
MaximumMadness
Being a fan of horror can be a bit rough sometimes. Because on the whole... this is a fan-base that can never quite seem to completely agree on what works and what doesn't, and the in-fighting is rampant and sometimes disheartening. I think it's because ultimately horror and terror are subjective experiences. There's no one thing that scares everyone, and what might work wonders for certain audience members will feel tacky and dull to others. You see it every time a film comes out that builds some serious buzz... It will be simultaneously hailed by one side of the fan-base while being derided and ridiculed by the other. And director/co-writer Marcus Dunstan's 2009 home-invasion freak-show "The Collector" is certainly no exception.Having followed Dunstan's work alongside his writing collaborator Patrick Melton for some time, I went into "The Collector" excited to see what sort-of insanity they could cook up. And I wasn't disappointed. Wild, subversive and very wicked, I found the film to be a refreshing and endlessly entertaining trip into depravity and I absolutely adored it. And yet, just like so many other horror films I've admired, I see it to be a hotly debating and polarizing experience for many viewers. Which is a shame, because I think it's well-worth checking out. Yes, you can pick apart the film's liberal use of suspension of disbelief and sometimes cartoonish atmosphere, but what's the point? The film knows exactly what it is aiming for and is never taking itself to be a completely grounded and realistic film. It's a trip to Hell, where the worst-case scenario is playing out for the sake of entertainment and suspense.We follow ex-con Arkin (Josh Stewart), as he goes on that mythical "one last job" we hear about so much in the world of film. In this case, robbing the house of a wealthy jewelry dealer in order to pay- off loan-sharks that are threatening the safety of his wife and daughter. Knowing the house inside and out from his day-job there as a carpenter for renovations that are being done, Arkin sneaks back inside one night to relieve them of a precious ruby they have kept, locked away in a safe. But things aren't what they seem, and it soon becomes apparent that Arkin isn't the only one who chose this night to break in. A devious and torturous madman has broken in and is keeping the family hostage, having rigged the house with dozens of booby-traps to keep them from escaping. And so, Arkin must set out to save the family he originally intended to burgle.The game is essentially a prolonged 90-minute game of cat-and-mouse where the stakes are torture and death... and it's so much fun to watch. Director Dunstan has a knack for building suspense, and his smooth, slick camera-work helps build a tremendous amount of dread and terror. The camera often feels like a viper, ready to strike at any second, and the sense of flow and composition lends well to many breathtaking sequences of tension. The script by Dunstan and Melton is also a blast and a half, and once it gets going, it never lets up. The stakes rise with each and every passing scene, the atmosphere builds consistently from beat to beat, and the characters are all instantly defined and established with ease. I also appreciated that the duo injected some much-needed black humor into a few key sequences so that the suspense is never overpowering and doesn't lose its edge.The adversary of the film (the titular "Collector") is one heck of an antagonist, and makes for a great modern contemporary of classic horror villains. He's kept mysterious and vague, but also gets just enough screen time that you get a sense of personality. He's a great foe for our anti-hero Arkin to face, and I could definitely see the concept being used for an ongoing franchise, because there's great potential there. Speaking of which, Stewart makes for a compelling and both troubled but sympathetic lead. He gives Arkin a heart beneath his dark surface, and you totally believe him in the role. It's nice to see Stewart getting a starring vehicle in a major film. Supporting roles by the likes of Michael Reilly Burke, Karley Scott Collins and Robert Wisdom are also very well-played and flesh out the cast well.The only thing I can say to the film's fault is that it is very much reliant on the good-will of the audience... something that has clearly turned many off. As I brought up above, the film uses (and sometimes abuses) the concept of suspension of disbelief, and unless you're willing to give yourself over to it, you may find yourself drifting from the narrative. I personally never had a problem with it, but evidently others have. Still, beyond that, the movie is clearly striving to be one thing above all else... fun. And I think it's a lot of fun. The villain is menacing and eerie. The protagonist likable and charming. And the twists and turns and sense of dread completely enthralling. I was very engaged with the film the first time I saw it, and have revisited it several times since. And it's never gotten old. It's sharp, witty and incredibly intense. And for that, I give it a very good 8 out of 10. I'd say give it a shot, and be willing to cut it some slack. It's definitely an underrated and under-appreciated film of the genre.
