Sign in for Go out ?
At VonGuru, you know, we love horror cinema (Bewitching 2, The Witch, Our favorite horror films, the best of Tim Burton...) and a film that is different from other filmsor at least one that tries to distance itself from the code that is supposed to define it (recently Heavy Or Sulfur For example). THAT phenomenal success Go out therefore making it noteworthy in our eyes, not only because this little indie production ($4.5 million) made 40 times its initial investment (!), but also because American critics immediately praised it core intelligence (to the point of giving it a 99% positive opinion on the aggregator Rotten Tomatoes) and especially because it is the first film directed by Jordan Peelenamely… a comedian who is very famous for his series of sketches Lock & Peelhis work on MAD tv, long before his participation as an actor in the flagship series Fargo. In short, the last person you'd imagine leading an indie horror film sensation.
Does the story of the decline of a young African-American man in the clutches of his loved one's white family have the social relevance and terrifying intensity that we associate with the story? You'll find out soon enough… but of course don't hesitate to express your differences in the comments column of the article, criticism is enriched by the confrontation of differences of opinion!
Black among whites
Go out is remake almost confessed Stepford Wives, Bryan Forbes' classic (1974) adaptation of the novel by Ira Levin, in which a husband and wife discover in the suburbs a society that is almost idyllic because of the perfect understanding displayed by husband and wife. But the hero is increasingly embarrassed that this harmony is based on a woman's unconscious and happy submission to her husband, and begins to suspect that something is up… Frank Oz has taken care of it. remake (pretty bad) Stepford Wives in 2004 (with Nicole Kidman and Christopher Walken), it wasn't satirizing feminist pretensions about self-righteous white patriarchy what Peele wants to convey here. The issue of sexual domination is in fact transferred to the racial realmwhich of course becomes more important as clashes increase in what we believed to be a peaceful country, decades after the official end of segregation.
Or Chris, a young black photographer who is about to meet for the first time his cherished and beloved Rose family, a rich and white family, who are unaware of the color of his skin. Full of worry, but she was welcomed, the couple consisting of Rose's parents did not show the slightest surprise and even tried to calm her down by reaffirming their tolerance.
After one a technically imperfect pre-credit scene (a quasi-sequence shot that makes one wonder why it's only quasi) and very stereotypical, this beginning effortlessly manages to convey contradictory impressions to its viewers and thus captivates them : we know (from posters, titles, film promotions, synopses, trailers, etc) that it will be wrong, and we are all over it accept the slightest manifestation of tension. With quite delicious subtlety, Peele, for example, has his character repeatedly repeat that the father would vote for a third Obama term if he could, to the point that one wonders if this pious wish doesn't mean he would too. didn't vote for him the first two times; similarly shows Chris a photo showing his own father (Rose's grandfather), an athlete who lost to Jesse Owens in the 1936 Olympics in Berlin, showing admiration for the insults inflicted on Hitler's racism, but adding that his father told him almost sorry for this win…
This is what I want to see : the small-scale eradication of latent racism that believes itself to be highly tolerant. It functions like a misogynistic or anti-Semitic joke; in small doses we perceive it (unfortunately) as a manifestation of black humor or a little daring, without questioning the morality of its transmitter, while its excess quickly gives rise to discomfort, as well as an avalanche of helpful comments and a priori The sincere comments Chris receives about the color of his skin highlight the racial differences between white people (who admire black people) and black people (admired by white people). Even more positively, discrimination is enough to isolate individuals, and in a film promises to guarantee certain sensations the atmosphere was incredibly tense.
From Guess who's coming to dinner to gothic films
Thanks to the curiosity aroused by an overly relaxed start, barely disturbed by the touch of unease we just mentioned, The first half hour passed like nothing. After an hour, when climax started, but I found myself wishing for it Go out thinking about the work of the atmosphere rather than revealing all its advantages at once. Others will no doubt criticize it for being too slow, but at a time when cinema doubles down on action-horror, where something is always happening, it's brave (however moderate) to convey something through dialogue and take your time building it up. the characters and moments of hardship have something so delightful that we wish they were longer, more surprising. On the other hand, Go out it ends up turning into a gothic film in a rather strange wayand I'm not sure I'm convinced by the introduction of a new theme about the ending.
Go out No Medicine for Life (Medicine for Health in vo), a film that interests him precisely from the extraordinary generosity of its mixture of tone and image, visual and genre. Here, it is perceived more as an impurity it doesn't make the narrative any more unpredictable. The central twist, quite anticipated, is satisfying as it is also highly desired, but overall the audience quickly gets ahead of the course of events, and this lack of surprise is reinforced by the absence of dread.
Go out sold like a horror film, but despite its mysterious, chilling atmosphere for the first two-thirds, the label is harsh. It will not make us jump except blessings tiring way out for extra-diegetic sound (a sudden, loud noise gives us a heart attack, which the characters don't hear), which I didn't even notice anymore in the long ending because the outcome of each scene is clear. This doesn't take away from Jordan Peele's talent for directing, but perhaps he should have been more careful with his promotions. Go out, the promise of an original horror film can only be doubly disappointing with the increasing loss of surprises and the decline of scares in favor of uninhibited pop and horror tones, no doubt enjoyable, but below the standards set by the film it emulates and its intended thrills.
Go outSocial horror film or standard entertainment?
Almost perfect in its early days, Go out ultimately forgetting the greatness of the social statements they claim to be, and sometimes disappointing in giving audiences the spectacle they want, sometimes by allowing for some truly unjustified inconsistencies. The skepticism he ultimately left me with stemmed essentially from a quality he sometimes displays in his writing and direction, and which makes it difficult to understand the blunders that plague the final half hour. It fails to be truly scary, and even fails to make you laugh in a few scenes involving Chris's father, who is more buffoonish than the witty humor I'd expect from a well-known comedian, or from a film primarily focused on moderation – the fact of having seen the duo of Key and Peele in Fargo It could have made me believe that wrongly Go out will follow a better comedy. Go out still no less a truly satisfying experience, and its first half hour is enviable. Just don't expect as much success as it promises us…
As a rant, watching this film has another benefit, namely that it highlights the absurdity of the American studio system: Jordan Peele was approached to direct the adaptation/remake from manga/animation Akira by manufacturers who are tempted by Go out. There is no doubt that they would have completely ignored the director if they had seen the film but the film did not have the same success, the sound of the dollar wad of a film making 40 times the profits certainly convinced them better than the director's love for the film. Akira or general points in between Go out and the manga!
C.de G. 2: magazine Premiere title “ Go out : the best political horror satire since Carpenter ”, which made me react. Strangely, the journalist only quoted Halloween (which is no more satire than political satire, unless it is twisted in all directions), while the comparison with They stayboth in its qualities and in its faults, it will make more sense, even to the person who owns it Prince of Darkness… Well, just leave Carpenter's mane alone, and look In the Mouth of Madness !
