I want a basta, or a dog's death! From the first frames of the film - hypertrophied complex, difficult teenager, Kes Madigan (Luke Edwards): not by age reasonable and logical, but arrogant and withdrawn. Too vivid allegories and parallels (a frog abandoning its children), and too vivid hatred. By the way, at this age, all emotions are brighter... The difficulty of this teenager is unmistakably conveyed! Throughout the film, we see how he struggles with himself, speaks and thinks different things, resists, but still succumbs, because his love for his mother takes its toll, despite the consequences, which he simply does not understand.
The boys were cool, especially the youngest, Ben Madigan (Joe Zimmerman). Watching the amazing acting shown to us by child actors, you involuntarily wonder: how do they manage to draw their character so deeply and emotionally, in all the details and details of character and actions – it can not be done simply, because the director asked! It begs, perhaps, the only true answer: children feel the emotional situation better, and are able to play it more subtly - which, unfortunately, cannot be said about most adult actors, otherwise film awards would not be enough for everyone.
Too quickly, I think, the viewer was immersed in the essence of what was happening. The background of the events is shown very blurry, in the form of a half-dream or a boy's thoughts. Perhaps, without knowing the plot of this story in advance, not all viewers will immediately understand what the matter is. Initially, the background of Judith Madigan’s actions and actions is not clear: it would be useful to explain what her motivation is. I believe that a slight increase in the timekeeping of the tape – five minutes dedicated to the disclosure of the character of Judith, would only benefit.
Meaningful oversights: Why, in the room for non-smokers, on the table of a non-smoker, there is an ashtray!? – in order to emphasize the burrows of the main character, who declares her determination and cool disposition, violating small “school” rules?! “Outside” is understandable, but “inside” is attractive. I don't believe it.
In the film, interesting camera work: the angles “below” (a shattering aquarium) and “from under” are very original, especially “from under” those objects, the bottom of which, in principle, is not transparent (the layout of the building). Very unexpectedly, but beautifully performed "scaring" - a couple of moments in the film, which would remain just moments, if not for the cameraman and engineer. Great!
In general, I cannot but note the entertaining and thoughtfulness of the visual series of the film. The contrast of temperaments and ideologies of the heroines, allegorically and so subtly demonstrated to us in the contrast of their cars, is magnificently drawn: the “quiet harbor” of all American housewives and family men is a beige Volvo wagon, against the predatory, aggressive and rapid coupe from Mercedes. Such Cruella DeVille, who wants, at any cost, to get puppies, and Anita - from the fairy tale about 101 Dalmatians!
The topic of countering invasions of privacy (or home) is very much loved by Americans who cherish their legal system, with all its injunctions, the sanctity of private property and the judicial “cutting” of children. High-quality films on this topic are not shot so often, and, having a common general line, can often have a slightly different subgenre focus: "Hand rocking the cradle" (USA, 1992, by Curtis Hanson), "Illegal invasion" (USA, Japan, 1992, by Jonathan Kaplan).
About the death in the title of the review is hardly a spoiler, because all such films end similarly, and their finale is easily calculated, many plot twists before its onset. However, such semantic transparency does not take away intrigue and tension from the film, forcing you to empathize with the characters until the very end.
10 out of 10