Reply to Topic
Nightcrawler, 2014
Dir: Dan Gilroy
The character of Lou Bloom, an ambitious, perseverant, detailed, manipulative and most likely sociopathic budding news cameraman, is interesting to watch in itself. But what makes following the evolution of his career, as well as the degeneration of his sanity, as engrossing as the graphic news stories he records and sells, is the intricately detailed and absorbing performance by Jake Gyllenhaal.
The main problem with the plot is that, despite the advantage of having such an interesting main character at its disposal, it always maintains its distance. It might be interpreted as an intentional reference to the explicit footage Bloom works with; they reveal the facts visually, but there is still a large gap between what is caught by the camera and the much cruder reality (which the film suggests constantly; most images of violence did not feel shockingly disturbing, probably due to Bloom’s and the audience’s unfamiliarity with those subjects, as well as them being displayed on a camera or a television screen). But in my opinion, if something lacked, it was a more in depth dissection of this disturbed man.
Still, this doesn't discredit the movie’s efficacy at evoking suspense, both for the crimes Bloom hastily chases and for the escalating corruption of his already-dubious psyche.
7.5/10
Dir: Dan Gilroy
The character of Lou Bloom, an ambitious, perseverant, detailed, manipulative and most likely sociopathic budding news cameraman, is interesting to watch in itself. But what makes following the evolution of his career, as well as the degeneration of his sanity, as engrossing as the graphic news stories he records and sells, is the intricately detailed and absorbing performance by Jake Gyllenhaal.
The main problem with the plot is that, despite the advantage of having such an interesting main character at its disposal, it always maintains its distance. It might be interpreted as an intentional reference to the explicit footage Bloom works with; they reveal the facts visually, but there is still a large gap between what is caught by the camera and the much cruder reality (which the film suggests constantly; most images of violence did not feel shockingly disturbing, probably due to Bloom’s and the audience’s unfamiliarity with those subjects, as well as them being displayed on a camera or a television screen). But in my opinion, if something lacked, it was a more in depth dissection of this disturbed man.
Still, this doesn't discredit the movie’s efficacy at evoking suspense, both for the crimes Bloom hastily chases and for the escalating corruption of his already-dubious psyche.
7.5/10
