The rating is slightly overestimated, but only because I have not looked at anything of this kind for a long time. Of course, the movie was made to "get off." A lot of improbability and absurdity, but overall dynamic. Not "Island of the Damned," of course. For once.
I watched the film based on recommendations. Expected to see a picture in the style ' Interrupted life', with notes of sapiens, but in the end, all two hours watched the boring, stupid drama.
Many scenes are filmed on a phone camera, which is not justified either in terms of plot or aesthetics. The camera work is terrible: the plan jumps strongly, hovering now on the back of the heads, then on the shoulders of the heroes.
Claire Foy plays convincingly, but her heroine, initially poorly spelled, because of which the image is flat and even annoying.
The plot of the film is the weakest side of the project, it is entirely built on convention. The assumption that the heroine is in captivity, that the staff of the clinic and the police are negligent in their work, that patients have the opportunity to keep forbidden items, that the heroine’s mother does not know what her daughter lives and who should be feared. The plot will crack at the seams if you ask one question. The main intrigue of the story (can we as viewers trust the main character) collapses in the first half of the film.
There is no atmosphere of horror, and even up to the thriller & #39; Not in itself & #39; does not reach, the detective element becomes irrelevant already in the first half of the picture.
On the air our traditional rubric "Soderbergh - chort geniuses". I watched "Not in Myself", almost completely shot on the seventh iPhone in 10 days.
It is clear that the post took much more days (or even weeks), but the pre-production was spent a lot. The film is clearly thought out, built and even a little cold (despite the declared genre of psychopathological horror).
But, in fact, this is the main deception that has baffled many critics (and some respected viewers) who missed the content behind the form.
Of course, Soderbergh, made a social pamphlet, masterfully and without much effort, packaging it in common genre canons. The key pain points are easily read – here the production harassment, the totalitarianism of the bureaucracy, the callousness of the system, and, most importantly, the evil that sits in us, the passion for power and the violence that engenders this power.
And that's the key victim complex, which inevitably leads us back into a vicious cycle of violence. As long as we are victims, there is no way out.
Soderbergh to everyone (static plans, frame deformation, even a sudden cameo by Matt Damon) demonstrates the creator’s healing detachment. Looking at yourself from the outside is what we all lack. And we must remember that an advanced smartphone camera, which is so familiar and pleasant to use for a spectacular selfie, does not guarantee it.
Steven Soderbergh makes entertaining but clever films (Ocean's 11 Friends' Logan's Luck), built on some particular mix of genres. In Friends and Logan, the plot is based on a scam, so the mixing of genres is not conspicuous. “Not in Myself” is billed as a thriller. In fact, it is.
Or not?
Or is that true?
Or maybe not?
I am familiar with the acting of Claire Foy thanks to the TV series “The Crown”, where Claire plays Elizabeth II. Of course, to look at her in the image of an office employee who accidentally finds himself in a psychiatric hospital is interesting and worthwhile. It is also interesting that the film is almost entirely shot on an iPhone with elements of pseudo-documentality.
The story itself: someone gets somewhere out of his will, someone pursues someone - how often this happens, how often they talk about it. But the main character Soyer Valentini notes that someone who does not like details can not be trusted with difficult work. And Soderbergh is attentive to detail.
“Not in itself” skillfully uses the techniques of the thriller, in detail sewing into itself implicit, controversial issues. It seems like a simple, passable picture. Yes, with thoughtful scenes, with original humor, but still an ordinary thriller, and there are, say, thrillers and better.
Or is it not a thriller at all, but an author’s movie dressed in a thriller costume?
Or is it a movie that pretends to be an author?
The film is like Soyer Valentini: on the one hand, he believes in his own mind, knows that if he behaves insanely, there are external circumstances, and on the other - he is afraid to admit - the brain is glad to be deceived.
It remains to answer the last (mainly rhetorical) question: are we in ourselves or not in ourselves?
Or is it?
Or is it?
7 out of 10
A dull girl becomes a victim of a very meticulous and obsessive boyfriend, and to get rid of him, she moves to another city. But the situation has shaken her psychological balance, and she has to visit a therapist. After another session of therapy, the girl does not voluntarily find herself in a clinic for the mentally ill and tries to convince the medical staff of her sanity. . .
This thriller is primarily famous for the fact that it was shot on the iPhone 7. You can consider this as a marketing move of a large corporation, and just the fact of the new era of cinema, when movies are now shot even on the phone and achieve success with it.
The plot revolves around a rather hackneyed topic when a healthy person arrives to stay in a mental hospital. But thanks to an interesting and elaborate script, the film looks on one breath, and after the first plot twerk, the level of tension and nightmare in reality increases. The director purposefully directs the viewer in false ways, and then shamelessly cuts them off, discouraging with his simplicity, but this paradoxically works for the picture only in a plus. And the topics of bureaucracy in clinics and restless persecution are more relevant than ever in the realities of the modern world.
In the plot, however, there are some insignificant holes and illogicalities, and handicraft shooting on the phone is more inherent in films of category “B”, however, the tape leaves a pleasant impression after watching.
Moral: If you are followed by a persistent maniac sigher, shoot him in the knees and then he will definitely not get to you.
As a result, a psychological thriller that will take its place on the shelf of films about random “fallouts” in a mental hospital.
7 out of 10
I don’t know what moved Soderbergh when he decided to make a movie on iPhone. Maybe he wanted to show the world how good he was, or maybe he just wanted to be the first famous director to make a movie on a phone. But the fact that the shooting was conducted on the phone - not that noticeable - it catches the eye literally in every frame, and while watching the film does not leave the feeling that you are watching the screen.
And this is even more sad, because the story in the film is very good. Of course, the film accelerates closer to the middle, and the plot will not be much surprised, but the story is still strong and fascinating. Actors also try, but their efforts can go unnoticed due to the technical aspects of shooting. In general, shooting on the phone is not only a dark blurred picture, it is also a conscious rejection of camera delights.
The film constantly understates something and does not show - forcing the viewer to think it up, there is nothing wrong, but what the film shows is very simple, I want to even say as if on the phone - but the film was actually shot on the phone. Of course, everything does not look as artisanal as amateur films, but the overall impression is very spoiled.
“Not in himself” is a mediocre non-thriller that intrigues and arouses interest only at first, but the further into the forest, there he catches up with more boredom. In the center of the story is an unremarkable girl, whose name I never remember, experiencing nevertheless not the best of times. The girl escapes from a stalker - an irrepressible guy who has been chasing her for a year (seemingly) and brings her to hysteria with constant calls and all that. Everything comes to the point that the heroine has to change her place of residence and constantly change her usual routine, so as not to leave the stalker any chance to find her somewhere. Against the background of constant nervous tension, the girl develops obsessive paranoia and some mental problems. And here comes the second storyline - a mental hospital. By the will of the screenwriter, the main character is in fact a hostage in a respectable psychiatric clinic, where most of the timekeeping takes place.
And now I'm writing it all down and I realize how bad the story is. We have two great ideas for a thriller - the topic of stalking, very relevant, even if the idea already found reflection in the movies, and the eternal theme of mental illness, the loss of one's self and other things. There is nothing wrong with combining these two stories into a single story. But the problem is, it doesn’t work here. The film very quickly destroys the intrigue of what is happening in reality, and what is only in the head of the main character. There is no suspense, no interest, there is a straight story as a stick, against which another story as straight as a stick develops. I do not understand how it was possible, with such powerful ideas, which in general are not so difficult to reveal, to merge all the potential.
“Not in myself” also has an extremely boring narrative, which looks even more boring due to the complete absence of any directing or interesting camera techniques. Well, yeah, but the tape is completely shot on the iPhone. It is a pity that this does not add absolutely no pluses to the film, and the picture looks extremely poor and empty.
Except that the caste is not bad, although completely unfamiliar to me. The actors are good in their images, they play well, and in general that is all that can be said.
As a result, “Not in myself” is a frank empty and uninteresting film. At first, the story actually causes a certain intrigue, it is interesting to watch the heroine, but, again, closer to the middle of the tape ceases to cause these emotions. Too bad, the potential was really huge.
The truth of an adequate person or the fiction of a broken psyche?
Steven Soderbergh is rather squeamish about the so-called mainstream, not always providing his services for the shooting of blockbusters. At the same time, Soderbergh is always in a creative search, surprising many with his enthusiasm and efficiency. It is also respectable that he is sometimes not one of the main functionaries in the creation of films with his participation, taking on purely technical duties. And so, getting involved in the field of experimental cinema, Soderbergh became interested in the plot from the duo of screenwriters James Greer and Jonathan Bernstein (by the way, they are better known as the creators of comedies, such as ' Kiss for Good Luck' (2006) and 'Spy next door' (2009)). The project, called 'Unsane' (we have a rental name 'Not in itself'), was widely exaggerated in the near-cinematic media and had good marketing, because the picture was the first shot with the camera gadget 'iPhone 7 Plus' (note that this is not 'production'). Here is another experiment from Soderbergh.
The plot is based on a terrible period of life for a lonely woman named Sawyer Valentini. For her excellent and enthusiastic work, she is about to get a long-awaited promotion. Of course, she is happy with this event, because it will change her current state of affairs, but it is not able to correct the psychological state of the heroine: once she was persecuted by a mentally unstable man and is now constantly under stress, which does not even allow her to have romantic relationships with other, probably normal men. In order to correct the situation and not of her own will, Sawyer goes to the doctor, but for unknown reasons she finds herself in a ward with half-crazy people. She is looking for all possible ways to get out of there, but someone more and more convinces her of the abnormality. Suddenly, the horror of the past appears before her eyes. Left alone, unable to get out of the dungeons of the hospital, where no one believes her, she is forced to fight for her life. But maybe all that is happening is just the ravings of a woman finally touched by her mind?
If you postpone the analysis of the plot, then, of course, the first thing that catches your eye is a non-standard picture. At first, it is somehow difficult to perceive the action of the film, which is conditionally shot on non-professional equipment. And while the eyes get used to the unusual presentation of visual information, the initial development of the plot is slightly overlooked. Therefore, the viewer who tried to watch the new film from Steven Soderbergh, you need to prepare yourself in advance, that ' Not in yourself' is an atypical video that can immediately alienate some. But still, it is worth pulling ourselves together, since further plot development (here we came to it) forces you to closely monitor what is happening, while also making the brain work hard, because we so want to draw conclusions, pump up the current circumstances, draw analogies with similar pictures and come to a final decision about what actually happens to Sawyer Valentini. And, by the way, for puzzle lovers, I can say that there are several prefinal versions that can be built. In addition, the action ' Not in yourself ' gradually changing from a psychological thriller to a horror film, where, such a feeling, will begin gore-elements. But still, personally, the climax and denouement ' Not in myself ' disappointed me with the banality and lack of intrigue, since everything lay on the surface, it was not even worth looking.
The role of Sawyer Valentini was chosen by the British actress Clair Foy - quite titled, but the vast majority of awards and nominations for Foy lie in the plane of work on television. Foy, you can say, coped with the difficult task: her heroine seems to be torn between powerlessness and despair, between perseverance and detachment, between anger and panic. The emotional spectrum of the heroine Foy played well, sometimes for Sawyer even very worried, and in some places imbued with respect for the strength with which she clutched at the straw of life. In general, Clair Foy for playing the role in ' Not in himself ' deserved high praise (but there is a spoonful of tar in this barrel of honey - sometimes it felt like Foy was overplaying). There's an actress like Juno Temple in the movie, if you haven't forgotten who it is. She has an expressive supporting character, but before the play that Angelina Jolie demonstrated in the drama ' Interrupted Life' where her character was also in a psychiatric hospital, but was not the main one, Temple is very, very far away. So Temple did occupy her cinematic niche, despite the advances she was given so generously (I personally believed otherwise). Joshua Leonard was not bad, but the character was easily guessed and he could not convince anyone of his harmlessness behind the mask of a bearded overweight, a kind of urban incarnation of a native of the Rednec dynasty.
Of course, for the desire to open a new milestone in the history of cinema, Steven Soderbergh can be shown a raised thumb, but still the visual part of the film is hardly perceived and you need to get used to it. The plot is written well, but still it is lightweight and does not have virtuoso shake-ups that change all perception to what you see, as is typical of the genre of horror films, embedded in the framework of a psychological thriller. And the characters, except for the central heroine, do not cause special attractiveness. Quite mixed emotions came from 'Not in itself' And carefully weighing all the pros and cons, it turns out below the following assessment:
6 out of 10
A pretty girl with the appearance of Claire Foy and a strange name Sawyer Valentini falls by misunderstanding into a mental hospital, where she came to complain about phobias and hard life. The carelessly mentioned “suicide” – one-time thoughts about it – forced doctors to take action and lock the girl up just in case. The motives were not to say noble - but the main thing is not that. The main thing is that the "stalker" got a job as an orderly in that place, from which poor Sawyer barely took her feet. He's right here. But is it a hallucination or a nightmare reality? In a madhouse you will doubt.
This description exhausts, in fact, everything that can be said about the painting by Soderbergh. The new-fashioned tendency to shoot on an iPhone gave the director the opportunity to show off, shoot from wonderful angles, demonstrate the large and expressive eyes of Foy - but only. Since the rest of the movie is a helpless low-budget thriller, not a bit scary and not a little mysterious. A specific camera creates some sense of absurdity, claustrophobicity, shifting boundaries – but it is completely useless in the hands of a person who does not know how to use it. The iPhone is certainly not a problem. It doesn't matter what - but how it's filmed. It is amazing how blind and arrogant you can be without noticing the lack of folding, fascinating – even the elementary psychological nature of your own work. This, of course, is an experiment – but in its aesthetics it is so amateurish, artificial and boring that for what, one wonders, was it to experiment? And, if not for a good actress trying to play something here, there would be nothing to look at.
2.5 out of 10
The new work of the eminent director plus the genre of psychological thriller that is in demand today is an event in the world of big cinema at least intriguing. And the information that the picture, among other things, shot on a mobile phone only enhances the effect. So Ocean's best friend Stephen Soderbergh presents his new painting 'Not in himself'
The plot introduces the viewer to the main character, who got into a psychiatric clinic against her will, in which she will face the greatest fear in her life. Is the horror that haunts the heroine real, or is it a figment of her imagination? This girl has to be sorted out.
What prompted Steven Soderbergh to take up this picture: a craving for genre diversity, advertising the iPhone 7 or a desire to be in trend and prove that he can also make a movie on a mobile phone in the spirit of a teenager riding a bicycle & #39; Look, now with no hands & #39. ? This story, alas, is silent, leaving viewers and fans of the director to solve this puzzle on their own. But one thing can be said for sure: such a technique perfectly fits into the concept of the picture, authentically recreating the effect of presence and inflating the paranoid atmosphere surrounding a person isolated from the outside world. The whole suspense is built around the victim of the persecutor, trapped in which there is no escape, whether it be the walls of a wellness institution or the boundaries of the human mind. But, unfortunately, true connoisseurs of the genre may not feel full immersion, because the picture definitely lacks dynamics and the superficial work of screenwriters of such projects as ' Spy next door' and ' Kiss for Good Luck' clearly goes against the hands of a new genre for writers, which is clearly noticeable in a number of plot flaws, logical inconsistencies and a rather trivial finale. As a result ' Not in himself' is an example of excellent directing and great play by Claire Foy, but at the same time a standard thriller, taking its place ' in the middle' among a great many similar representatives of the genre.
It's not a mystery movie. The film is about the viewer’s feelings while watching. This growing horror, it seems as if not for the heroine, and you are being watched from all sides. In previous reviews, there was already a comparison with the thriller 'It follows' in my opinion, very correct. The whole movie doesn’t leave you feeling like someone’s behind you. You look at the frame, waiting for this face to slip, which you, like the main character, are already incredibly familiar.
By the middle of the film, you know what’s going on and you don’t solve any mysteries. You just wait for this nightmare to finally end for Claire Floy, and you exhale with her at the end of the movie.
Although the plot is predictable, it is impossible not to notice the talented work of the writers with plot twists around Claire Floy. Control of plot turns is given to editing, color scheme and soundtrack.
High-quality, pleasant to the eye and hearing thriller. Not intimidating - but leaving a sediment of real paranoia.
Soderbergh’s films: “Out of sight”, “Not in himself”. Not to be confused with Out of Self, another cult director. There was so much mystery about the story that I was waiting for the final twist again. Of course, he was - in such low-budget films it is accepted. But not so much. Since the picture does not explain everything, I am ready to interpret the final in my own way. For example, a girl always seems that she is pursued by a maniac and she identifies any man sooner or later with her stalker. For example, in a scene in the middle of the film, when she attacks the orderlies, it is not entirely clear from the footage that she beats her pursuer or the second orderly, and whether she does not think that it is him. Further developments dispel my suspicions, but still, still.
Soderbergh shoots on the phone, it’s like a Dogma project, so he tells new directors that if you have ideas, then shoot and don’t wait for offers from great producers. You'll be noticed!
In recent films, the director walks and tramples on the US medical system, so it was in Side Effect, for example. For the tense plot of the main line, I did not forget to kick insurance medical firms and private hospitals. In Side Effect, drug sellers were obstructed if they did not alter memory.
There are no world stars. Soderbergh alternates between Ocean's 11 Friends with 11 stars, then Claire Foy. The director made Gina Carrano an action star, shooting her in “Knockout”, now we expect the same from Claire Foy. The film is again divided into 2 parts - in one there is intrigue, in the second it seems not. That's how some Jallo movies are built. When the maniac is already known and there is only a confrontation between the maniac and the victim.
Still, I come back to the film again and again, how the heroine behaves at work in the bank - is this what she can be sent for a promotion? Didn't she make up the whole story for herself? What they see in the bank is clearly not conditional. In general, puzzles can be solved. I think we can argue about the final. The talent of the work is that everyone gets from him what he expects!
Soderbergh once made memorable films (' Friends of Ocean', ' Erin Brockovich'), but recently he has slipped to just remarkable pictures slightly above average (' Logan's Luck', ' Infection'), and often he is also the operator. ' Not in Self' - from the second category. This is a good thriller about a girl with a broken psyche who gets into an extremely unfortunate situation - it is very difficult to prove that you are not a camel, spitting at anyone who points a finger at your hump. The atmosphere of helplessness and tightness in the grip of circumstances is perfectly conveyed - the degree of Kafkaianism is such that you really feel for the heroine. Especially well managed the feeling that you already doubt what to believe, like ' Beginnings' or ' Islands of the Damned'. If it was still filmed not on the knee and not on the budget of the district housing and communal services for the painting of curbs, it could be a great movie, three-quarters Formanovskaya & #39; Cuckoos'.
6 out of 10
I like it if people who are mentally knocked out cause you empathy. Analogues are much better - ' Flying over the Cuckoo's nest', ' Interrupted Life', but the closest comes ' Resident of the Damned' (this is the place where the translators of this name should live, in the original 'Stonehearst Asylum'), which I also strongly recommend to see.
kinobalashow
The director Steven Soderbergh can be called one of the main experimenters of modern cinema, who always experiments with the form and content of his paintings. Leaving behind the biopic “Eric Brockovich”, the television series “Knickerbocker Hospital” and “Mosaic”, the crime comedy “Ocean’s 11 Friends”, the action movie “Knockout”, the melodrama “Super Mike”, the film “Infection” and much more. Another experiment of the director was this film, which at the stage of production became the subject of close attention of fans of the director and ordinary viewers.
The plot of the film tells about a young girl Sawyer Valentini, who became a victim of manic love and persecution by a certain David Strine, who pursues her everywhere. Determined to get rid of his stalker and Stalker, Sawyer decides to start life from scratch. Moving to another city, changing the place of work and environment. However, accidentally being a patient of a psychiatric hospital against her will, she could not even suspect that her pursuer would find her there.
If we take as a whole, this film is a symbiosis of “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” by Milos Forman and “The Interrupted Life” by James Mangold with minor changes and remarks in favor of the author’s vision and style of director Stephen Soderbergh.
The plot of the picture develops absolutely not trivial and fresh. Soderbergh deliberately ignores all the rules and patterns of building psychological thrillers. It’s like putting a picture in a certain direction from a self-evolving story, interesting dialogues and multifaceted characters devoid of cardboard. It is inside this and laying the main intrigue of the tape, which keeps in a state of tension for the most final credits. Making you think about whether the main character of the tape really sees her pursuer David Strine in the flesh, or is it all the fruit of her crazy fantasy?
One of the main features of this tape is that the entire film is shot entirely on an iPhone. Such experiments are far from new and something similar has already been done in their directorial works by Park Chang Wook, Olivia Wilde, Gary Oldman and others. However, if in these cases it was about short films, then this film directed by Steven Soderbergh is the first example of a full-length film in this format. Moreover, it was this experiment that gave the picture an extremely authorial character.
The film is very unusual and at the same time stylish. Extremely unusual angles for shooting, an abundance of long frames (without editing glues), minimal camera movement, an unusual visual shade of the picture and much more became a real tool in the hands of the director Steven Soderbergh, who effectively operates this and sets a somewhat paranoid and restless atmosphere of anxiety, hopelessness and madness. It is this that fuels the main intrigue of the tape and recreates the atmosphere of being in a psychiatric hospital. Separately, I want an extremely unusual and for the first time in my memory a purely electronic soundtrack of the brilliant composer Thomas Newman, which allows you to look at his work from an absolutely unexpected side.
Became a real discovery after the series “The Crown”, Claire Foy continues to grow as a talented dramatic actress and in this regard, the image of Sawyer Valentini became a real gift for her. The character turned out to be very ambiguous and complex, and all this allowed Foy to show all the acting skills on the screen. Some scenes are so impressive very, very much. His best role was played by Joshua Leonard, who seemed to become his character on the screen. Extremely convincing in the image of a crazy patient was Juno Temple. Separately, I want to note the regular film Soderbergh Matt Damon, which decorated this film (even in the form of a cameo) with his participation.
8 out of 10
Not in himself - this is another experiment of one of the main experimenters of modern cinema Stephen Soderbergh. Not only by the fact that the film is completely shot on an iPhone, but also by how fresh, authorial and unusual Soderbergh presents the genre of a psychological thriller throughout the entire screen action. The movie is definitely worth watching.
Films that question the sanity of the protagonist, make the viewer think about the reliability of the narrative, which, in the end, makes any such project attractive to view. Such films, if, of course, they are made with straight hands, can give an unforgettable cinematic experience. Thankfully, Steven Soderbergh’s hands are generally gold, so his second post-retirement film, titled Out of Yourself, offers a good play on viewers’ nerves. Although the ending and the third act of the picture, in my opinion, are very long, this tense thriller is worth watching, because its main feature is filling the script with small twists and intelligent use of the legacy of such projects as “Island of the Damned” and “Misery”.
Claire Foy plays Sawyer, a thirty-year-old woman who moves to a new city for a new job. Despite his career successes, Sawyer’s personal life is sad. She is prone to hallucinations due to the fact that for some time she was pursued by an obsessive stalker. Confessing this to a psychotherapist, Sawyer is put in the clinic.
"Not in himself" likes to keep the viewer in a state of perplexity. Both cinematography and story decisions increase uncertainty, especially given the fact that the plot is presented from the perspective of the main character. But it's still not "female." Island of the Damned. The script, despite all the ambiguity of the plot in the first acts, does not have ambiguity, unfortunately, and to the culmination, the seemingly difficult game with reality is solved quite simply, almost by itself. A clear representation of the question of objectivity has always existed in Sawyer’s mind, and the film has adhered to this; the viewer is not alienated from what is happening. On the other hand, about half of the film is a great puzzle for the viewer.
For Soderbergh, perhaps, any film is not just a film; it is a way to explore a topic in a new way. He is perhaps the most notable class A director, working in such a way that both the box office collect and the creative potential to unleash. “Not in himself” is his next fantasy, realized in the form of shooting on the iPhone (7 Plus, to be exact). Although the quality of shooting may not be suitable for traditional cinema, random distortions, unusual aspect ratio, number of frames per second and, of course, the soundtrack perfectly harmonize with a story that questions the common sense of the heroine. In many ways, this is a great way to convey the themes raised in the picture, but ... well, to be honest, I thought it was not so necessary. Shooting on the iPhone, of course, cool, but it worked more as a way to attract the attention of the public, not a forced creative move. But the refusal to participate in the project of famous stars rather works on the perception of the film than the notorious manner of shooting.
The significant success of "Not in Himself" lies in Claire Foy. The actress is present in almost every scene and shows an astounding range: from a quiet depression to a person collecting fragments of his sanity. In addition, it perfectly depicts bouts of hysteria.
As for the “Not in Yourself” approach to horror as such, Soderbergh’s first experience in this genre focused not on blood or corpses, but, as in Hitchcock’s Psycho, on a slow build-up of horror. Thus, it is unlikely that this “Not in itself” can be attributed to the genre of “horror”, but this is a first-class psychological thriller.
The master of cinematography Soderbergh was able to create the tension and atmosphere of a cold thriller without resorting to ordinary techniques like screamers, but in general, the uneven narrative does not allow the work to be magnificent. Shining plot holes sometimes come to light, but in general, the work shot without frills, overloaded with interesting directorial finds, is full of dark humor and clever conspiracy theory. Overall, Soderbergh seems to have outsmarted himself, and I think the director’s desire to experiment with the iPhone won the film’s design, but it didn’t give any grounds for this way of conveying the story as the only one. “Think of your mobile phone as your enemy,” he said. Alas, Soderbergh did not listen to his character, so "Not in himself" will remain a fascinating and curious experiment.
7 out of 10
Thriller & #39; Not in itself & #39; is a kind of experimental film: probably many are very interested in what style it was shot. And, perhaps, those who actively follow the work of Stephen Soderbergh. The trailer was released such that after its completion, it really becomes somehow out of place.
So what makes this movie attractive? It's shot on an iPhone. All of it. And in just 7 days. Maybe the fact that the thriller was filmed with a phone, not too many will be surprised, since this idea is no longer new (a pity!), but the timing of the work on it can not but cause sincere amazement. It remains only to realize that these are real professionals, absolutely confident in what they are doing, and aimed at a specific result.
Claire Foy played very well, her character turned out to be psychologically difficult. Constant moving to different cities, changing phone numbers, virtually absent accounts on the Internet - which only Sawyer did not do to hide from her pursuer. Apparently, this partially broke her, and when she signed the so-called "Help #39" papers, she didn't fully understand what she was doing. But the worst part is not that she was forcibly placed in a psychiatric facility, but that someone she had been trying to protect herself from had caught up with her again. And Sawyer sometimes even seriously begins to wonder, is it sure she has not gone mad? Joshua Leonard amazingly played the role of the same pursuer (David), who can not leave Sawyer alone. This can be called an unhealthy obsession. At the same time, if the viewer believes to the last that Sawyer can still be sane after all the experiences, then at the sight of David, there is no doubt that he himself should be sent to ' Fool'. Also in the film lit up: Juno Temple, coolly played a psyche, Amy Irving as Sawyer's mother and Jay Faro - a patient who is trying to somehow help Sawyer. Also Matt Damon will please his episodic appearance of those who like his work.
I would like to draw your attention to the fact that for those who prefer unusual methods of filming, this film has everything: unusual angles and close-up scenes with actors. I won’t spoil, but the denouement reminded me of the end of one of the most famous films of the 90s, also a thriller, only the characters there were reversed.
' Not in himself' - a psychological thriller with a brilliant idea, conveyed to the audience without a single loss. I would definitely recommend it.
I love movies about mental hospitals. Any kind: paranormal, psychological, documentary. Psychiatry itself is a very interesting and interesting science. 'Chamber', 'Grave Seekers', ', 'American Horror Story' are just some of the good movies that come to mind. This film is very difficult to call successful.
First, I, like many commentators, didn’t understand the need to make a movie on an iPhone. This is far from new to them to trump, and the image quality sags strongly. In my opinion, this is a questionable savings.
Secondly, a weakly fluid, sagging plot. Uninteresting cats are mice with a bunch of logical joints. Throughout the film, I had one question after another. For example, how, after reading the contract, did a girl not find a line about hospitalization? And why, after a few days of her absence, absolutely no one, not even her mother, is sounding the alarm about her missing? And there are still a lot of such questions. . .
There are a lot of questions about the cast as well. Personally, I didn’t like the way she played. Her character was supposed to be half crazy, half normal, as the trailer and synopsis tell us. Instead, she is simply a slurred woman who is either in a state of complete amoebia or hysteria.
In the end, we get an extremely average thriller with a long story and a predictable ending.
In its style, this film reminded Knight Shyamalan’s “Visit”. Not in the manner of shooting, but in style: with long measured scenes, where it seems that nothing happens, but a slight sense of anxiety does not leave. The horror film It also came to mind (not about Pennywise, but about a sexually transmitted curse), where the creepy creature slowly but surely approached its victim in the background.
A girl named Sawyer Valentini (Claire Foy) comes to a psychiatrist for a consultation and, as is often the case, signs formal documents without really going into details about what she signed. Finding herself due to her own inattention in the walls of the hospital, she will face the fear from which she fled to another city and began life again.
Unlike many horror films, where the elements of intimidation are dark corridors along which people wander, running into trouble, as well as creaking, strange sounds and rustles, “Not in yourself” focuses on the peaceful environment of a psychiatric hospital, which is fraught with threat and danger.
The manner of shooting from different angles, in particular from the side from above, resembles such projects as “Paranormal phenomenon”, where the demonstration was from the side of the camera installed by the heroes. When watching Out of Yourself, you get the impression that the heroine is constantly being watched by the unblinking eye of a hidden camera (well, just like in The Truman Show), and even when Sawyer looks directly at the lens, she does not see the trick, continuing to behave as usual. If she talks to someone on Skype or spends time in a bar and the camera shoots her from the side, you might think that someone is watching her.
This circumstance fits perfectly into the concept of the film about a maniac stalker, as if he relentlessly follows his victim and experiences pleasure comparable to erotic from what he observes, but no one notices it.
I wouldn’t say it’s a masterpiece (even though it was shot on a phone). It is quite interesting to watch, once again amazed at how a healthy and balanced person can be turned into a madman in an instant and make him doubt his own stability.
But look at you. I do not impose my opinion on anyone.
General impression: The film was shot on the iPhone 7 plus in 4K quality using the FiLMiC Pro app. Why would you shoot like that? If someone considers this an innovation in cinematography, this is not the case. Before Soderbergh, the so-called "new" has already been tried. But the director was looking for some “new” solutions and here’s the film “Not in yourself”, shot on the phone for dear viewers. And here's Soderbergh and the director and the cameraman and the editor. What economical, if still skillfully made, the price would not be.
Many people praise this film, I will scold now. It seems that the creator of the tape was looking for himself and decided to shoot this way for the sake of experiment (and budget savings). So awful! Cons enough, of course, to guess that the film shot on the phone is difficult, if not to talk about it. But if you know, then you start looking for pitfalls. Angles - shooting the film takes place from different angles (and constantly!) It's a move like this, Soderbergh says, "Yeah, me!" Ay, yes, well done!: then we see the nostrils of the heroine, then almost face the forehead, then open eyes on the whole screen with horror. There's an episode of the heroine in the bathtub, and why do we show the view from above, the view from below, the view from the side, the view from the other side. All angles. You haven't seen everything yet! Why? For what? The director must have decided. Originality on the face! i.e. it is not! A terrible picture in dark colors, where it smells of frank cheapness - that's what this film is! I was particularly disappointed by the scene in the woods. The technology of shooting night scenes in daylight has been used for a very long time, and you can often see such shooting on a small budget. But it was the imposed filtering that distorted everything! The color correction of blue is disgusting! Seems like they overreacted and this is how it happened. But we decided to leave this misunderstanding. And the scene goes on for a few minutes and you want to close your eyes because you see this filter that distorts your perception. There are pictures with a small budget, which also uses such shooting, but there is no such terrible presentation!
Now to the genre: What is it? Bulldog and rhinoceros? Let's reflect. The picture is presented as a crazy thriller. The basis is laid, beaten and licked from head to toe the topic of mental hospitals. Perhaps this is all that is related to at least a small part of the genre. Next Thriller - did I have anxious expectations, worries? Nope! It's off. Horror? The effect of suspense is not found, there are no bloody-nasty scenes either. Maybe this is a drama about a sick woman captured in the clinging paws of doctors? Not either! So what is it? And this is an obvious experiment that does not cope with any genre variety.
Our attention is constantly captured on one character, a girl who behaves illogically in moments. Signing is not what you need and often behaves inadequately. However, there was no interest in this hero.
The narrative in the film is impeccably heavy. Not only is it predictable, but it also stretches like jelly. You can go out and eat for half an hour and nothing will change. The director knows how to "bewitch."
I give the tape 1 point, for a good performance of an actress who showed surprise and paranoia, where she was scared. And 1 point for experimentation, still decided on this. But to watch an experiment that is stuffed with some disadvantages I do not recommend.
2 out of 10
I like movies where there is a manic persecution of the victim in all its glory. The plot, overall balanced, does not go away. Without much rocking, the viewer immediately plunges into action, together with the main character, who, by her own mistake, turns out to be in a mental hospital.
Being normal, imprisoned under the influence of doctors, the heroine finds that even here, within foreign walls, she is all in the attention of her obvious pursuer. What attracts is that Cyver Valentini knows his opponent very well, from whom you can expect anything. Everything works against her, but even in such difficult circumstances, she accepts the challenge.
Actors. Claire Foy - the main star of the picture, adequately embodied the image Siver Valentini. It is not easy to resist the circle of faces that surround it. Even the viewer himself, watching nearby, may not believe her, but Valentini lays out his obvious trump cards when necessary. I liked Juno Temple, who got a psychotic Violet. A daring girl on different words, receiving in full, in her direction from Valentini. Characters of the male plan, such as the "persecutor" himself and the partner in the hospital for the main heroine, by the name "Nate" are also colorful, whose actions are perfectly captured during viewing.
'Not in Yourself' is a 2018 psychological thriller from Steven Soderbergh. I think the project was a success. The director is experimenting with genres and he is not bad at it. In general, the film is about fears and threats that can come from outside. And only by looking to the very end, you can see whether Valentini is in himself or not.
7 out of 10
Nothing unusual in the choice of Stephen Soderbergh I do not find, experimental cinema was and is a characteristic of any experienced director, and "Not in himself", in addition to the technical side, filmed quite in the spirit of the director, especially it can be observed how the director is able to develop secondary storylines, and his individual style has been preserved in this film.
In history, a young girl who imagines her pursuer almost everywhere she steps, and once her voluntary hospitalization turns into a real nightmare for her - her "beloved" allegedly works in this very medical institution. The advantage of the film is that it flirts with the viewer almost to the last scenes, so for the viewer the fact of the existence of an internal or external monster does not matter, because all together works out a good effect.
Here, in addition to what the main character faces on an individual level, the bureaucratic system is rigidly shown, with which the heroine also has to fight. All these plot faces cause the viewer a whole bunch of questions, how and how this whole story can end. What else plays in favor of this project is that, contrary to the fears of the turkey and expectations before viewing, "Not in yourself" does not go into a narcotic trance and is quite understandable and atmospheric thriller, with its promised portion of impressions.
I believe that Soderbergh wasted no time and did not lose fans with this tape, "Not in yourself" - in addition to the exclusive form of camera shooting, a quite high-quality genre film about the persecution, with a high-quality atmosphere and an interesting plot.
' Not in himself' - a new psychological thriller from the famous director Stephen Soderbergh. To be honest, my expectations were high, but the result was a pretty mediocre story without any surprises, although the beginning was certainly intriguing. According to the plot, the girl is placed against her will in a psychiatric clinic, where a 40-year-old maniac-virgin overtakes her already within the walls of the hospital. The main character is simultaneously trying to escape from the tenacious clutches of a medical institution and at the same time protect herself from a pervert. To me, the beauty of the film is that it is almost entirely shot on the 7th iPhone. Due to this, during viewing, a special effect of perception from the picture is created. As for the actors, everything is fine here.
Soderbergh knows how to work with actors, so in this case there are no complaints and distrust. As for the structure of the project, I would say that it is more like pseudo-documentary, like an operator, is part of the ongoing story that follows the heroine everywhere. Personally, it did not bother me, but even more attracted my attention. For me, as a viewer, the disadvantage of the project is its finale, which gradually turns into a cheap thrash, although it was possible to squeeze a bright ending out of the ending. In any case, the film is worthy of attention, although it is a completely disposable movie for home viewing. Fans of the director must watch, as, according to official statements, this is his first ala psychological horror, although the film, in itself, is far from the genre of horror, but within the framework of the standard thriller very much nothing. Have a good time.
I will immediately say that the film is stated as a horror film, which is not in any component. And yes, it is a thriller in all its forms.
About what. A young and ambitious girl lives a normal life in a big city. Classic white or grey collar. Lonely. Mom's Skype. Lunch in the park. Something's wrong with her, though. She's scared. What? Just hints. There was a stalker. Probably. I need help. She goes to the clinic and stays there. It would be fine, but in the clinic she is not of her own free will. I'm not making spoilers. I will only say that the reasons for such imprisonment are very pragmatic and very American. You only need to stay in the clinic for 7 days, but it will be a long week. The hero will fight and fight against everything. It would seem that we are actually dealing with a simple medical thriller about the confrontation of a certain medical system and a loner. Ahn no. There will be an ace up the sleeve, which will turn the film into a rather claustrophobic suspense with obvious references to the work of Hitchcock. But shut up. You'll see for yourself.
Heroine. Claire Foy. English rose. Young Elizabeth from the series The Crown: touching soft and strong at the same time. It is hard to imagine her in such a role. The thorny and irreconcilable heroine of Soderbergh's film. I got it. I made it 100%. She's not a victim. She's an equal player to villains. Capable of deceiving, deceiving, and striking and... even more. The fear, the hatred, the anger on her face is very convincing. The film is based on the heroine’s close-up plans. Rose clearly with steel thorns. Now I understand why Foy became the new Lisbeth Salander in the sequel to Stig Larsson’s Millennium. It could take the franchise to a new level. Before that, Hollywood clearly failed great Swedish material, shooting “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” in the version of Fincher. How he (the most powerful director of the suspense genre to date) managed to make an unfunny comedy from a gloomy social thriller.
Why? Great question. Soderbergh, declaring himself an adept of modern technology in the cinema, continues to experiment, this time shooting the film entirely on the iPhone 7 Plus. All right. What's next? This “reception” did not give the film anything either as a frame or in the perception of the viewer. Nor did it produce any special effect of ownership and credibility. Just a movie in certain color accents. I don’t understand it, but I write as a spectator. Of course, you can and should try new things. Why not make a movie on your phone? This is an idea with a long beard. On the iPhone for a long time removed clips and no one considers it a modern move. The director was obviously late with his idea. To put it in modern language, "Haipa failed."
Conclusion. Actually Soderbergh shot not a bad quite atmospheric thriller about the fears of modern man. The heroine experiences it all the time. That's her reality. She even started getting used to her. Can we really accept that we live in a state of constant threat from outside and beyond? Maybe we shouldn't fight it. Real and imaginary threats have already become an integral part of our existence. You can't even tell them apart. The psyche is real. Even a non-existent danger to a person is all dangerous. The hero of the film no one believes, does not trust her and the audience. The director skillfully resisted the temptation to transfer all sympathy and sympathy to the side of the heroine. Maybe she's really not herself. I really don't understand. Waiting for a catch. The frustrations of individuals and society as a whole have confused everything. We all got a little crazy. I would like to end with the phrase: let us trust and help others. But I don't believe it myself. Let's at least think about our loved ones.
How do you convince others and yourself that you are not crazy?
The choice for this film fell by chance, because I did not want to go to Spielberg’s fiction, and there was nothing else decent at the box office. But I certainly didn't. So... At the beginning, the plot is not particularly catchy, and the main events unfold after the ' formal' signatures ... At some point, the atmosphere of despair of the heroine recalled the plot ' The Flight Illusion' with Jodie Foster. Try to prove to everyone that you're not crazy! What a challenge... And the atmosphere of hopelessness of the situation, an oppressive sense of doom and the corresponding musical accompaniment give the film special tension. That Soyer did not break under this pressure, but continued to fight hard for the truth and rebel against this system, arouses respect and speaks of a very strong inner core and strong psychological health. Although given the background, paranoia could settle in her head firmly and for a long time. From the second half of the film, the plot begins to accelerate and after a couple of unexpected turns, it becomes difficult to predict the finale. I don’t want to spoil it, but it’s definitely worth watching and appreciating. It is strange that the picture received such a modest cash register (probably against the background of Spielberg’s gambling fantasy), with quite flattering reviews. Not a horror movie, but a psychological thriller. What is scary here is not from the effects 'booh' but from the realization that once trapped in a well-established system, will there be enough courage and strength to get out of it? And if not? Conclusion - do not turn off common sense, read small text and do not sign ' formal papers ' without reading.
A new life and a new job in another city - turns out for a young girl Sawyer Valentini (Claire Foy) - a "return" to the past, which you want to forget: sexual harassment through text messages, and unexpected meetings. And the usual trip to the medical center for psychological prevention turns out to be what she has been preparing for all this time: to prove to doctors that she is sane and justified in her suspicion. A fairly standard story about the internal and external struggle of the “victim” before imaginary or real persecutors, quite has its “nerve”, while revealing the “dark side” of the work of psychiatric institutions, which, just earn on the “image” of their patients, and let them go – when they run out of money on their insurance. Shooting a film on an iPhone gives its manic “charm”, and the effect of “claufstrophobia” of medical corridors. Before us, rather a version of “Collector” Fowles, and all the related stories about maniacs, only in a more extensive plan (although, here the final scene takes place in a closed room with soft walls). And even, and you can not say that the director here – Stephen Soderbergh, who in recent years the profession of “director” – managed to slightly transform, continuing to shoot decent stories with minimal funds.
About what?
About a girl hiding from an annoying pursuer, accidentally getting into a psychiatric hospital.
About what?
If you have a new iPhone and talent.
Stephen Soderbergh's new film ("Friends of Ocean") is a technical experiment, the main star of which was the iPhone. All other aspects of the picture fade into the background. But despite the general secondaryness, this is an interesting picture with extraordinary techniques and concepts. Let’s go from the opposite to getting to the main “chip”.
The weakest part of the film is the story. At first, the story of a young girl Sawyer Valentine (Claire Foy), suffering from an obsessive stalker, is intriguing. Change of phone numbers and work, police bans on approach, did not bring results. She takes a radical step and moves to a new city where there are no relatives, friends, or even acquaintances. Constant loneliness aggravates the feeling of incessant anxiety, and the pursuer begins to see in everyone he meets. After a session at a psychological support center, Sawyer signs hospital forms without looking and turns into a psychotic patient.
This paragraph tells only the first 10 minutes of the film, and then we are waiting for a mix of banal stamps and boring conspiracies. As the plot develops, the intensity of idiocy increases, and the dialogues bring to hysteria not only the heroine, but also the audience. In fact, we have the plot of category B, but from the category of “so bad that good”. On the other hand, the taste of the thing is very subjective and most of the picture may seem too protracted, formless and stupid.
The actors' play here is ambiguous. The whole action is based on the confrontation of two heroes performed by Claire Foy and Joshua Leonard, similar to a slightly thinner Zach Galifianakis. If everything is fine with the main character and the future “girl with a dragon tattoo” perfectly fits into the image of an unbalanced hysterical losing control, then Leonard turned out to be a very caricatured and voracious image of a madman, closer to the end going into grotesque and absurd. The person you should be afraid of is more like a crying teddy bear trying to punish others for personal offenses. This causes only unrestrained laughter from the absurdity of the persecutor.
The music is just there. Typical disturbing and sometimes sharp motives that can be heard in any psychological thriller.
And now the main thing, distinguishing the film from the total number of the same type of thrillers. “Not in Myself” is completely shot on the iPhone. Controversial at first glance, the decision turns the standard narrative. I do not know if there was any additional optics, but the picture looks full and original, and most importantly not annoying with its mediocre quality.
Another distinctive feature was interesting operator solutions (Soderbergh is also the operator). The first thing that catches the eye is the angles of shooting. If the more massive equipment is not able to shoot all the close-ups and put a number of restrictions before the directors, then using the iPhone Soderbergh changed the approach, turning the viewer into an accomplice. This is especially well conveyed in episodes of alleged surveillance of Claire Foy's character from behind bushes. Achieving a common emotion was largely due to the pseudo-documentary effect. In fact, the choice of artistic expression transforms the standard thriller, working in addition to the picture and its narrative, highlighting against the background of similar ones.
As a result, Soderbergh turned out to be a purely technical film, headed by the iPhone, which allowed the author to apply new approaches to mediocre material. If you’re not embarrassed by a silly (but funny) plot, you can find out what happens if you take a phone and have talent, and evaluate the level of current production. Now people will no longer have excuses and I hope Soderbergh’s new work will serve as an inspiration to more than one young director.
How do you prove to others that you are not crazy? This is one of those theoretical questions that people usually don’t think about in real life. But once you are in a psychiatric hospital, it is not clear what to do or how to be. After all, according to one version, even the healthiest person, once in the place of the patient, will not be able to prove to doctors that he is not mentally ill. But not only this is remarkable the topic of a person in a mental hospital, which is often resorted to by writers and directors. The mental hospital, with its white walls and the door to the key closing behind its back, is a very strong image that can be used and interpreted in completely different ways.
Stephen Soderbergh in his new film “Not in himself”, manages to show all those attributes of such an institution that suppress the personality of a person, deprive him of his rights and freedoms and force him to follow certain rules. This helps him well selected color palette. In a number of scenes, using yellow filters and close-ups of actress Claire Foy’s face, the director creates a sense of unreality. Cold blues in other episodes highlight emptiness and loneliness. The uncertainty and confusion of what is happening for the heroine herself, who in the course of the film wonders whether she is in herself, is complemented by a slightly strange image, as if we are looking at the screen through the eyes of a person who has fallen into bed from a high temperature. This effect was either despite, or thanks to the shooting of the entire film on the iPhone.
Soderbergh loves to experiment not only with the method of shooting, but also with the form of distribution of his creations. So, in the case of Logan's Luck, he was able to bypass the studio rental system. Using the iPhone 7 Plus to film "Not in Yourself" Soderbergh showed how far technology has advanced. Now the iPhone, and in principle any other smartphone with a good camera, acts as a full-fledged tool in cinema, with its advantages (efficiency, miniature) and disadvantages (focus work, stabilization, lenses).
But not only for the sake of technical and visual research, it is worth watching this tape. The main character gets into a psychiatric hospital, running away from her pursuer. The film touches on the most controversial topic of sexual harassment. At the same time, I must say that the shooting took place even before the notorious story with Weinstein. In addition, the film reveals the peculiarities of the insurance business in the medical field, and, according to Steven Soderbergh, are true. Thus, absolutely any viewer with different taste preferences will be able to enjoy this picture, which combines social drama, psychological thriller and even horror.
In conclusion, I would like to note the beautiful play of Claire Foy, who perfectly coped with the difficult role of the magnetic Joshua Leonard, the colorful Jay Faro, as well as one of the most charming and charismatic stars of the first magnitude, who appeared in a small but funny role, which should not be called, in order not to deprive the viewer of the pleasure of watching.
7 out of 10
After watching the movie, I had three questions:
The first question is, “Why did I have to make this movie on iPhone?” Just what did it do to the creators? You didn't spend any extra money? Perhaps, but we (the audience) did not give anything but a bad picture! And if this was the first film shot on an iPhone, then it could be at least somehow justified, but not in the 21st century, when there are films that can be influenced by sitting in the cinema. That’s why it’s a bad idea.
The second question, "Matt Damon - why?" is the role your acting biography needed? Or are you running out of money to go into episodes? Fat minus the actor, and casting of course plus. But... minus the advertising campaign, because I only learned about the existence of Damon in this film after watching him.
My third question is: 'Dear colleagues, why is the average score 6?' - this one really likes? Is this really innovation? What's the grade? For the director's name? Everyone has failures - this is his failure, I hope in the comments there are like-minded people.
The short conclusion: the film is not interesting to watch, because the question: “Who is hunting the main character?” we get the answer immediately and we learn the motives immediately. Don’t look for something interesting and deep in this film – there is no such thing! On the screen of the cinema, the film also looks terrible, you can only compare with Petrov in the image of Gogol, although no, Petrov is better. Summarizing the above:
So different Soderbergh, so multifunctional iPhone
Soderbergh is good wherever you go: a biopic about a strong woman (“Erin Brockovich”), a crime comedy about a robbery (“11 friends of Ocean”), the series “Knickerbocker Hospital”, a melodrama about a stripper “Super Mike”, a kind of thriller “Side Effect”... He shoots in different genres - and turns out to be good at each of them.
Perhaps the frame is not his story. At least a genre framework. After all, this time he shot a thriller on an iPhone.
So what is it?
“Not in myself” is a kind of (obviously not very typical) paranoid thriller, in which several different fears close to each of the audience are mixed in one situation. These fears are taken a priori among the most familiar to an ordinary person in order to draw a parallel and allow anyone to identify with the main character.
After the screening, Anton Dolin analyzed the film in detail (I only had 11 minutes to listen and assimilate), and also broke down the question of fears. It turned out to be as many as three.
The first is fear of persecution. This is one example of paranoia, when the main character seems to be pursued, followed, and therefore she has great difficulty converging with people. And the most unpleasant thing in such a situation is the inability to determine whether the persecution is real or just seems.
The second fear is bigger, even in terms of the number of people affected: helplessness. The probability of clashing with a variety of large totalitarian structures - whether police, state or medical institution - and being defeated: losing a trial, being mistakenly behind bars, losing property, getting into a hospital. In this case, the plot is exactly the hospital. At the same time, the process of interaction with the “sick” staff of the institution is shown grotesquely, exaggerated: in real life, this is an absolutely incredible situation. This exaggeration also plays on the nerves: what is happening seems completely inadequate, then all the actors represent complete normality.
The third fear is not the most obvious. An all-consuming and destructive capitalist regime. That is, with a unit that is actually a living person, they can do anything in a variety of ways, if only they can squeeze money. But not a word about it: look for yourself.
As a result: a collection of fears that help to understand the heroine and her attitude, plus the approximation available when shooting on an iPhone. Approach, camera-worthy surveillance. And the feeling that you're watching, even looking at it sometimes. It turns out poorly, although without fundamental novelty. At the same time, guessing who is in himself and who is not, has almost half the film. Hence the name.
Another issue is the technique we use in our daily lives. We communicate by video, correspond by e-mail, get acquainted in Tinder. Not to mention posting a variety of posts on various social networks. Information about our lives is available to everyone who knows how to use a computer and has access to the Internet. Finding out and tracking is only a matter of time. And in the film, the heroine with paranoia is advised to delete all accounts, change emails, do not get into the frame in any photos and do not place geotags anywhere. You know, right?
Who?
The director is Steven Soderbergh, and his films are worth watching sometimes more than once. You can start with Sex, Lies and Video (1989) and finish with Logan's Luck (released only six months ago). It turns out that the films are categorically different, and each and a half is good.
Important: Soderbergh himself held an iPhone, acting as an operator, and edited his new film. In the genre of “thriller” Stephen shot for the first time. And considering that it turned out well, in this case there are no questions.
The script, however, was not written by Soderbergh. Jonathan Bernstein and James Greer (both wrote the script for “The Spy Next Door”) – among their works, I have not yet found anything remarkable.
The cast is minimal, but we are only interested in a couple of people. In the title role – Claire Foy (Crown, Destroyers, Breathe for Us), atypical, different. You can’t tell right away whether you like her or not, but you can immediately notice that she plays perfectly.
The main character is worth saying that she has an unusual name - Sawyer. That is, regardless of who she was named after, the girl has a male name, and the film also shows her atypical for a female character: near-male. She is calculating, can analyze her condition with a cold head, does not care too much about makeup and skirts, does not suffer from all sorts of compressions.
But for all her masculinity, Sawyer nevertheless overcomes fears.
Everyone can have their own thoughts about this. The simplest thing: a girl with a maiden character could hardly get into such a life situation. Or did the girl situation turn Sawyer into a boy? A certain character is a question of the plot, or is it a question of society, which is subject to strong changes?
Answer yourself.
In addition to Foy in the tape not so fleeting flashed Juno Temple. She's good, really good, whatever movie she's in. Here the girl played a great roommate - like no other.
About what?
A girl moves away from her pursuer and paranoia to start a new life. But it is difficult, and she decides to go to the support center.
From now on, if things were going more or less well, things went awry. But they didn’t really go well.
The film is short-lived, and additional description will entail spoilers. So here you just have to decide whether you are interested or not.
What else?
An iPhone is not a matter of quality. The iPhone is a matter of feeling. That is, a thriller shot on an iPhone is not an amateur “vidos”, because high-quality editing will fix everything.
Mobile thriller is rather an offshoot of the genre. Remember the endless number of “Paranormal phenomena” and some other thrillers, maybe about zombies, about witches, about psychosis or exorcism, specially shot in the format of an amateur video? This gives what is happening on the screen realism, it is easier to believe just because the camera is mainly held by one person, he turns in different directions, without pausing - and this makes you dizzy, he asks with a trembling voice someone about something, as if he is leading a video diary, but does not make a film with behind-the-scenes comments that should help the viewer, what is happening, in fact.
And here's the iPhone. There are no comments, switching from frame to frame is, the quality of the image is not amateur ... and the realism remained.
By the way, the tape “Not in itself” is not the first film shot on an iPhone. You can omit different debutants, but there is one case that can serve as an example. The film “Mandarin” by American director Sean Baker was shot on iPhone 5s and was quite popular at the Sundance Festival in 2015. Especially when you consider that when the final credits appeared technical information, the audience was speechless.
7 out of 10
To this question volunteered to answer Stephen Soderbergh, the director started a rather interesting experiment: to shoot a full-length film on the camera of his iPhone. And although the director is far from a pioneer in this case, other directors have distinguished themselves similarly before him, but taking a full meter on a smartphone is still a test.
But, despite the enthusiasm of the director, no revelations from the tape should not be expected. "Not in yourself" - this is primarily a good psychological thriller. The tape is not something out of the ordinary, but just tells an interesting story.
The plot tells about the girl Sawyer Valentini, who due to growing paranoia turns to the clinic. Everywhere she seems to be haunted by the same person. During the consultation with a psychologist, the heroine signs some documents and against his will becomes a patient of this clinic. In addition, one of the orderlies suspiciously looks like the same persecutor.
The plot of the film is quite intriguing and the director perfectly plays the whole situation. Because more than any monsters and screamers is always frightening, what can happen in real life. The very idea of being a patient of a mental hospital without being able to call or get out is really frightening. The film skillfully keeps in suspense and keeps intrigue until the end.
In technical terms, the film is quite simple and uncomplicated, but it is worth highlighting a couple of interesting points. Due to the fact that the film was shot on a smartphone screen, it is replete with close-ups. This creates a sense of intimacy of what is happening. Also, yellowish tones in which the tape is removed convey the feeling of discomfort that the heroine feels.
But without proper acting, the film would not work properly, and the whole suspense would instantly disappear, but the film is fine with this. The British actress Claire Foy during the hour and a half film demonstrates the full range of emotions, and her character is fully believed.
In the end, if you forget about the technical aspect of the film, we have a good thriller. The film keeps in suspense and sometimes really makes you feel out of yourself. And Soderbergh showed that being a real creator, a good genre movie can be shot without multi-million budgets just on a smartphone camera.
