Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 1/31/2023
New to Theaters: “Skinamarink”
An ominous presence haunts two children in search of their parents in “Skinamarink.” Following its premiere at the Fantasia Film Festival, “Skinamarink” has gradually developed into a viral cult sensation. Writer and director Kyle Edward Ball originated from humble YouTube short film roots before crafting a microbudget $15,000 debut film that boasts an idiosyncratic approach to horror filmmaking.
The narrative behind Ball’s feature is a remarkable tale. “Skinamarink” suddenly leaked online amid its festival run – a development that usually becomes a death knell for most independent productions. Instead, the leak sparked a wave of conversation on social media outlets, including several applauding the movie as “one of the scariest films ever made.” “Skinamarink” successfully parlayed its glowing word-of-mouth into a prosperous theatrical run that’s already cemented Ball as a name to watch in the genre.
As a fan of arthouse films, “Skinamarink’s” success imbues me with genuine happiness for Ball and his achievements. I only wish I could express those same sentiments about the film itself.
Akin to “Paranormal Activity,” “Skinamarink” examines the terrors found in life’s everyday mundanity. Ball conjures a retrograde VHS visual aesthetic that quietly maneuvers through each crevice of an average house. In place of a traditional narrative, Ball presents his avant-garde film as a mood piece embedded inside the perspective of two innocent children who are mystified by disorienting changes occurring in their homestead. Every muffled whisper and jarring environment change act as methods for eliciting fear within the supposed comforts of suburbia.
Ball’s vision boasts considerable artistic merit. He transforms his low-budget assets into a genuine strength across his production, with the lo-fi stylistic imprint delivering a certain allure in its hazy unease. I also commend the filmmaker for striving towards ambitious thematic meditations. The adolescent perspective driving “Skinamarink” forward places viewers in the shoes of two characters engrossed in a terrifying hellscape. However, any understanding of this nightmarish reality lies far beyond their comprehension.
These elements are all thoughtful conceptually, yet the pieces never developed into an immersive whole for me. Adapted from a short film Ball created, “Skinamarink” struggles to justify its excessive 100-minute runtime. Even as someone who prefers more subdued films, large portions of the experience can feel tedious – and judging by the three walkouts that occurred during my screening – I think that effect could be more prominent for general audiences. The film’s meandering approach works in spurts at cultivating a sense of unavoidable dread before eventually running out of steam. I was left wishing that “Skinamarink” captured me with the gripping atmosphere it tries to convey.
Thematically, “Skinamarink” feels equally unsatisfying. Digging into how underdeveloped adolescents’ mindsets can perceive an indescribable phenomenon with paralyzing fear is a great concept. Heck, I bet everyone has an indelible image or two of some seemingly ordinary thing that haunted their childhood dreams. While conceptually promising, I rarely felt that “Skinamarink” developed its ideas with much substance. The film relies heavily on the audience projecting their thoughts and feelings rather than offering a well-rounded thesis from its own perspective.
“Skinamarink” is a film I consistently admired but was rarely enamored by. Still, I can’t help but celebrate its existence. It’s a wholly unique cinematic experience bound to draw passionate and divisive responses from viewers. For me, that is something art should always strive for.
Also new to Theaters: “Missing”
When her mother, Grace, suddenly disappears during a vacation trip, June takes matters into her own hands by piecing together the mystery through an investigative internet deep dive in “Missing.”
As a follow-up to the 2018 hit “Searching,” “Missing” continues the trend of whisking audiences into the perspective of our commonplace phone and smart device screens. The filmmaking approach, better known as Screenlife, is a fascinating stylistic experiment. Efforts like “Unfriended,” “The Host,” and “Profile” extract palpable tensions by trapping viewers in the claustrophobic confines of LED-lit screens. When effectively executed, Screenlife narratives boast an uncanny ability to distort and ultimately reflect upon our habitual relationships with smart devices.
I’ll be honest – I wasn’t a fan of “Searching” upon its release. The fan-favorite Sundance Film Festival title showcased an ingenious mystery hook and a captivating performance from star John Cho. Unfortunately, neither element compensated for a tonally wayward feature that jockeyed between moments of grounded realism and implausible shlock. The juxtaposing sensibilities ultimately floundered at conjuring a nerve-wracking true crime yarn despite boasting sincere intentions.
To my surprise, “Missing” captures the pulse-pounding kineticism that “Searching” sorely lacked. This confident and technically refined sequel delivers the goods in its pursuit of taut escapism.
“Missing” benefits greatly from forming a more cohesive identity. Where “Searching” occasionally strived for real-world gravitas, “Missing” drops all pretenses of realism in favor of a narrative bursting with outlandish twists and turns.
Screenwriters Will Merrick and Nicholas Johnson cleverly create the big-screen equivalent of a page-turning novel – an engrossing series of “what just happened” moments that constantly keeps viewers second-guessing their expectations. I appreciate the endless imagination and fearless risk-taking featured throughout Merrick and Johnson’s rousing whodunit. Even if the story lacks meaningful textures, connecting all the pieces of this carefully composed puzzle becomes an intoxicating experience.
Merrick and Johnson also enhance the film’s stylistic vision. “Searching” equipped the Screenlife pastiche as an earnest medium for concocting big-screen thrills on a small budget, but the financial restrictions were apparent throughout the final product. Chase scenes occurring strictly through google maps and other technology-based shortcuts burdened the intended suspense of significant plot beats rather than genuinely enhancing these frames.
With “Missing,” the Screenlife techniques are imbued with much more dynamism. The inclusion of swooping aerial shots and resourceful inclusions of smart technology cameras infuse lively energy throughout the production. Both directors execute a finite balancing act of maintaining the original’s intimate visual style while also imprinting a palpable verve to drive the mystery forward.
“Missing” is ridiculous and inconsequential at points, yet the talents of its well-rounded ensemble consistently elevate the material. Emerging actress Storm Reid delivers a transfixing performance as our protagonist June. As the character undergoes a roller coaster ride of emotions, Reid expressively captures June as a precocious teenager with remarkable personability and intelligence. In addition, Nia Long and her radiant affection help make Grace a compelling presence despite her limited screen time. She and Reid form a lived-in pair as a mother and daughter disconnected from one another. Supporting players Ken Leung and Joaquim de Almeida also leave a strong impact as enigmatic figures in June’s search for answers.
I had a blast throughout “Missing” – it’s a spry and self-aware thrill ride that begs to be experienced with a reactionary audience. I will be curious to see how a potential third entry in the franchise can continue to improve upon the Screenlife concept.