The sinister potential of New Age practices gets explored yet again in Karl Mueller’s Rebirth, a psychological thriller continuing the somewhat recent trend of films about cults like Faults, The Invitation, and Martha Marcy May Marlene. This time, rather than taking inspiration from the likes of the Manson family or Jonestown, Rebirth bases its eponymous enlightenment group off of the Church of Scientology, and anyone vaguely familiar with L. Ron Hubbard’s creepy “religion” will pick up on the influence within minutes. And while Mueller provides enough intrigue to keep viewers guessing, he has a hard time coming up with a proper conclusion for his small-scale mind games.

Kyle (Fran Kranz) is a typical upper-middle-class office drone, living in a big suburban home with his wife and daughter and spending his days working at a bank in the city. An opening montage establishes the happy monotony of Kyle’s life, which soon gets interrupted when his old college friend Zack (Adam Goldberg) shows up at his work. Zack asks Kyle to cancel all his weekend plans and participate with him in something called Rebirth, which he only describes as “an experience.” Kyle bristles at the boldness of his old friend’s proposal, but he decides to go for it after succumbing to his nostalgic feelings.

Things get weird in a short amount of time, as the hotel Kyle checks himself into for the weekend getaway turns out to be a ruse. A series of clues leads him to a bus filled with dozens of other men, all of whom have to hand over their cell phones and wear blindfolds for the entire ride while they’re taken to Rebirth’s real location. Upon arriving, Kyle and the other bus passengers get taken to a room where a man (Steve Agee) explains Rebirth’s anti-establishment philosophies, making it sound like some sort of college bro’s attempt at copying Chuck Palahniuk. From there, several strange events draw Kyle away from the main group and off into a sort of hellish funhouse, exploring a derelict building where each room offers a different, stranger facet of what Rebirth has to offer.

This section of the film turns out to be its strongest, even though its structure and influences are plain as day. Kyle bounces from room to room, and every door he opens functions as an excuse for Mueller to come up with a bizarre situation to throw his protagonist into. An early highlight involves Kyle stumbling into some kind of support group whose leader (Andrew J. West) torments people both physically and psychologically. It’s a gripping sequence, but it’s a borderline remake of the classroom scenes in Whiplash. Plenty of other influences pop up throughout Rebirth, including David Fincher’s The Game and Charlie Brooker’s TV series Black Mirror, but these comparisons aren’t complimentary; it just shows that Mueller is a competent copycat.

On the other hand, Mueller’s focus is squarely on creating an entertaining game of figuring out what’s real or part of Rebirth, and Kranz and the committed ensemble (including Harry Hamlin and Pat Healy, who take full advantage of their small roles) make the film’s transparent qualities easier to forgive. It’s in the final act, when the group starts exerting its influence on Kyle’s personal life, that the screenplay starts to break down. By breaking away from Rebirth’s controlled environment and into the real world, the plausibility of the whole scenario gets extremely thin, but not as thin as whatever message Mueller tries to tack on in the closing minutes. After an abrupt ending, the film switches over to one of Rebirth’s promotional videos while the credits roll. The video, a deliberate attempt to mimic Scientology’s promos (including the infamous Tom Cruise video), makes the whole film feel like the set-up for a corny punchline. A brief section of the video, where Rebirth promotes its branded product line, suggests a bit of a sly commentary on New Age ideas getting swallowed up by capitalist interests, but it’s drowned out by the parodic, wink-nudge nature of the clip.

Teenagers can be incredibly frustrating, but maybe much of this frustration comes from knowing that we were once the same. Perhaps this is why Everlasting—a story centered around two teenagers—can be both relatable and compelling. It manages this in spite of our personal grievances and despite our insistence that we know better. There are certainly shortcomings to be found, but Everlasting is in itself a tale about remembering—and valuing—the positive over the negative, and perhaps it’s not a stretch for the film to ask the same of its critics.

At the very beginning, we are told by Matt (Adam David) that his girlfriend Jessie (Valentina de Angelis) has been murdered. The plot is straightforward enough from here, with a search for answers being the main driving force for our young protagonist. As Matt begins by providing their background story, we learn that he and Jessie are troubled high school students with only one source of true happiness: their love for each other. They spend their aesthetically gothic days fantasizing about death and throwing caution to the wind, and it’s only too obvious they believe themselves invincible, as teenagers often do. Jessie in particular is shown to be overly attracted to a darker lifestyle, intensely absorbed in the escape it offers her. When she decides to follow her dreams of becoming a model, Matt has no choice but to be supportive, reluctant as he is to lose her. The two drive to opportunity-laden L.A. from their hometown of Denver, with Matt using their trip as an opportunity to create a project for his film class. But after Jessie’s death, this project takes on a drastically different shape, thus becoming the story of Matt’s journey to find her killer. Told in a non-linear cumulation of his footage from both trips as well as moments of third party voyeurism, Everlasting works towards a resolution whilst keeping a strong footing on the subject of love.

Though the story may not be groundbreaking—and is undoubtedly a commentary on how such events happen all too often in real life—Everlasting manages to carve a space for itself by taking a more human approach than most. Matt states that he does not want Jessie to become just another name in a list, and the film tries its absolute hardest to ensure this doesn’t happen. Instead, Matt (as our main storyteller) painstakingly attempts to provide a complete picture of Jessie as he knew and loved her; while this does serve to create an emotional attachment for the audience, it also inadvertently highlights a lack of substance to Jessie’s character. We are provided with fleeting reasons for her often concerning behaviour and personality, such as being raised by a single mother whose own behaviour is far from perfect, but without delving into this relationship further it is hard to ascertain exactly why Jessie is so attracted to the darkness of life. As such, her “tortured soul” identity ends up feeling somewhat superficial. Matt, on the other hand, is clearly given more thought and nuance, and becomes much more cemented in our minds as a sympathetic figure.

Interestingly, many of the less central characters grab the audience’s attention and hold elements of intrigue, and this is largely due to sincere acting by more than a few cast members. Elizabeth Röhm must be mentioned for her heartbreakingly wonderful portrayal of Jessie’s flawed mother, and Pat Healy demonstrates once again that he knows all too well how to make an audience distinctly uncomfortable. As Jessie and Matt, both de Angelis and David provide solid turns in their roles, but at times present themselves underprepared to be the objects of such focus as the film provides. Director Anthony Stabley’s conviction to keep humanity at the center of Everlasting requires the beautiful, close shots of the equally attractive actors at work, but evidently proves challenging for both. However, any moments that may seem strained can be overlooked thanks to the stunning cinematography, which works not only to be visually pleasing, but more importantly, to thoroughly deliver an environment of everything the film is selling: youth, beauty and love.

The film has done particularly well within the horror community—having even won the Jury Award at the Nevermore festival recently—but it would be disingenuous to actually call it horror. At most, it’s drama with an edge. This isn’t to detract from its quality, but more to suggest that it perhaps has a more fitting place outside of the genre it is marketed toward, particularly given the rather specific (and misleading) horror-centered focus of its trailer. And so, while Everlasting may at times be as naive as its two protagonists, it also manages to be just as intriguing.

For Henry Gamble (Cole Doman), his 17^th birthday is a big turning point. He’s first seen lying in bed the night before his birthday with best friend Gabe (Joe Keery), talking about sex before the two of them mutually masturbate over Gabe’s fantasy involving a female classmate. It’s plain to see from Henry’s behaviour that he has a crush on Gabe, but before Henry Gamble’s Birthday Party becomes a story of a secret crush, writer/director Stephen Cone shows Henry praying before he goes to sleep, establishing both the film’s prevailing theme of religion and an ambition to deal with ideas that go well beyond the intimacy of the opening scene.

Indeed, Henry isn’t the only person dealing with internal conflicts at his party, although his own situation is complicated given his father Bob (the undervalued and always reliable Pat Healy) is a pastor. As the guests arrive one by one, Cone establishes his ensemble cast while gradually revealing information about the various dramas lurking underneath the surface. Henry’s mom Kat (Elizabeth Laidlaw) can barely hide that her marriage is going through hard times; sister Autumn (Nina Ganet) is visiting from college and trying to get over a breakup; the death of a prevalent member of the congregation hangs over the proceedings; and Henry tries to avoid his gay classmate Logan (Daniel Kyri), who has a crush on Henry and doesn’t hide it around him.

That’s only a small chunk of the many subplots swirling around Henry’s home, and as the day goes on many of the various crises going on between friends and family come to a head. Taking place over one day at the house, Cone’s skillful balancing of the large cast and multiple narrative strands is so impressive it’s easy to forget that it’s all an elaborate juggling act. Part of that has to do with the ensemble, a combination of amateurs and professionals that work together naturally (it’s worth singling out Healy and Laidlaw as Henry’s parents, who are so good it feels like there could be a film just about them), but it’s largely due to the thematic tissue connecting everyone’s stories. Almost everyone faces a similar dilemma involving their faith, finding themselves face to face with a desire that goes against what they’ve been taught. And as much as their community promotes a friendliness and openness with each other, the fact that their feelings and/or actions would be categorized as sinful means their issues stay buried.

Cone’s ability to extend his story beyond Henry’s own struggle with his queer identity is what helps give Henry Gamble’s Birthday Party an empathetic quality that’s rarely seen in US indies. Whether it’s Kat trying to fight against her feelings of leaving her marriage or someone wanting to break away from their overbearing mother, Cone approaches each character in a way that distinguishes them and respects their own inner conflicts. Granted, this isn’t the case for every character, and when Cone’s characterizations turn broad—like one woman who spends her time at the party ranting about pornography, or a minor character whose story takes a grisly turn at the climax—there’s a brief clash with the naturalistic mood. But the fact that there are no heroes or villains in a film dealing with homosexuality and Christianity is a rare and welcome sight, one that highlights the complexity of everyone’s situations without casting judgment on whatever they believe in public or private. It’s a film that’s not without its issues, but it displays a sensitivity that more films (indie and otherwise) should try to emulate.

There are some people out there who are willing to do just about anything for stardom: move to Hollywood, work dead-end jobs, endure endless auditions, and even sleep with those in power. Sounds familiar doesn’t it? That’s because it’s the foundation of many stories about chasing the American dream in cinema. And that’s precisely what filmmakers Kevin Kolsch and Dennis Widmyer attempt to examine with their latest film Starry Eyes. Or at least that’s where they start. Constant gear shifting makes the pacing feel uneven and the underlying message disjointed despite the intriguing premise.

Sarah (Alexandra Essoe) is an aspiring young actress who is trying to make it big in Hollywood. When she isn’t waiting tables at Big Taters (take a guess at which skimpy wing chain it’s imitating), Sarah auditions for any kind of role she can find. After many failed attempts at landing a gig she finally receives a call-back. Although the lead role in a horror film called The Silent Scream from a declining production company may not be the most glamorous role, she figures beggars can’t be choosers.

The story starts out as a psychological thriller when Sarah’s mental state is in question after multiple breakdowns, but it quickly transitions into psychological terror. During her second audition for the lead part the director demands Sarah to disrobe, something that the original role description never mentioned. Leery at first, Sarah eventually complies in hopes that it proves her dedication to the role. However, this only affords her another round of auditions and this time the stakes grow even higher. Sarah is offered the part as long as she performs a sexual favor for the sleazy producer, forcing her to consider how much she really wants this role. The film would have been better off keeping the focus on this difficult moral dilemma and show the repercussions of selling out. Instead the film spirals off into various directions using the “kitchen sink approach” that generates little impact.

Using a foggy and dreary Los Angeles backdrop, Starry Eyes paints a grim picture of Hollywood and the people who live there. Sarah surrounds herself with the sort of pretentious industry people you always hear about, the kind only concerned about how others can help their careers. Every authoritative figure she crosses is masochistic towards women and takes advantage of her willingness to do whatever it takes to make it in the business. Although this is an exaggerated portrait of the Hollywood system, one can’t help but wonder if there’s at least some truth to it.

It wouldn’t be surprising if horror fans get a little restless halfway through Starry Eyes as a lot of time is dedicated to character development and exposition — perhaps too much time, something not found very often in horror films. But the film more than makes up for it in its final bloody act when shit hits the fan. There’s a sense of overcompensation clearly aimed to please fans of the genre with a sudden abundance of throats slits, nudity, and blood splatter.

Despite a breakout performance from Alexandra Essoe and an excellent pulsating soundtrack, Starry Eyes is mostly a disappointment. What begins as a focused study of how some sell their soul to make it in Hollywood, eventually becomes a broad examination of Los Angeles stereotypes. Neither are particularly original topics, but a narrow scope could have prevented the film from feeling so scattered. Starry Eyes starts off as though it may have something to say about the dark side of fame, but by venturing off into the revenge-slasher arena it proves it has less to say on the subject than originally thought.

Like an alternative, bite-size version of Breaking Bad, first-time director E.L. Katz’s gruesome comedy Cheap Thrills takes an unassuming suburban family man named Craig (Pat Healy) and exposes a repressed, dark side of his psyche via the sinful temptation of money. What begins as an quick drink between old friends at a bar evolves into a horrific freak show of debauchery, mutilation, and mind-blowing excess driven by the promise of big money.

Most of us would go pretty far–perhaps much farther than we think ourselves capable–to get our hands on that kind of dough. Katz and writers David Chirchirillo and Trent Haaga stretch the bounds of morality with the characters of Craig and his scruffy, sketchy old high school buddy Vince (Ethan Embry).

Though the exact nature of their previous friendship is never clearly explained (good choice by the writers), Craig, a conservative, self-conscious fellow, and Vince, a rougher, more reckless spirit, seem relatively content to randomly bump into each other at a local bar after years without contact. They’re both strapped for cash, with Craig struggling to provide for his wife and baby, and Vince paying his way as a shady debt collector.

Before Craig can call it a night and go home to his family (like a respectable father), he and Vince run into hootin’ n’ hollerin’ party dude Colin (David Koechner) and his quiet, hot wife Violet (Sara Paxton), who happens to be celebrating her birthday. The loaded (on booze, coke, and most importantly, money) Colin begins daring Craig and Vince to do simple dares like taking shots of tequila and getting girls to slap them, with big bucks as incentive.

The foursome eventually drift over to Colin and Violet’s home–an eccentric hippy cave filled with weird art and tchotchkes–where the dares become exponentially more objectionable and vile. (It’d be a shame to spoil just how extreme these little freak shows become, but what I will say is that I have a reasonably strong stomach when it comes to gross-out horror flicks, and some of the latter dares border on unwatchable.)

“I need that money for my family,” Craig mutters with a bloody, broken nose, dished out by his “buddy” Vince. Does he really need the money that bad? As he sacrifices more and more of his morality and decency, one begins to wonder whether he’s doing these terrible things for his family, or because he’s been waiting his entire life for something or someone to unlock his wild side. This sophisticated idea makes Cheap Thrills stand out amongst its genre movie contemporaries. There’s food for thought buried deep beneath the filth.

Healy (always good) and Embry (pulling off tough-guy machismo despite being known for his earlier work as a cute, clean-cut teen) communicate the devolution of their characters’ friendship with refined nuance, which can be hard to pull off amid such a chaotic scenario.  Through quick, spiteful glances and subtle, is-he-kidding-or-isn’t-he personal jabs, we watch as they gnash at each other’s throats, all in the name of the $250,000 that Colin has thrown up in the air for them to fight over. Koechner, mostly known for his comedic roles in The Office and the Anchorman movies, is familiarly funny and zany here, but is given the opportunity to wander into dark territory as Colin and Violet become more menacing ringmasters as the film wears on.

One of the characters arrives at a revelation in the film’s climactic scene that doesn’t feel sufficiently earned. It doesn’t come completely out of left field, and it makes sense from certain angles, but the turn feels forced and more in support of another character’s arc. Aside from this instance, the film is harmonious.

Katz constantly finds interesting ways to shoot Colin and Violet’s kooky abode, where most of the film plays out. It at first doesn’t seem so creepy, but as the night’s events grow crazier and more frightening, so does the house. Deep shadows and moody lighting create an ominous atmosphere that lends itself to the devilish material.

There’s a punk rock vibe to Cheap Thrills that comes through most towards the end of the film, when things get really outrageous and brutal. The interplay between the four main characters is balanced perfectly, with Koechner and Paxton setting the rhythm and groove and Healy and Embry playing dueling frontmen without stepping on each other’s toes. It’s a compact, twisted, delightful (if you’re into this sort of thing) nugget of exploitation that thrives on committed performances and sound craftsmanship.

Cheap Thrills trailer

In first-time director E.L. Katz’s gruesome Cheap Thrills, two former high school friends (Ethan Embry and Pat Healy) run into each other at a bar. A rich married couple (David Koechner and Sara Paxton) entice the drunken buddies (both in financial straits) into coming to their place, where they strike up a series of dares-for-money that escalates to horrific, revolting levels of madness. The film explores the tug of war between greed and morality as the two friends begin to lose themselves in the sadistic couple’s wicked game.

We spoke to Katz about the challenges of filming predominantly in a living room, why the film has a punk rock feel to it, casting the famously comic Koechner in a darker role, brain-dead genre films, and more. Following our phone conversation with Katz, we spoke to Embry about disliking Pat Healy, being familiar with dark head spaces, why he doesn’t play nice-guys anymore, and more.

Cheap Thrills opens this Friday, March 28th at the Roxie in San Francisco, and is available on VOD and Movies On Demand now. For more, visit cheapthrillsmovie.com

This is a relatively contained story, taking place mostly in one location with four characters. Was operating mostly in one place freeing in that you could focus more on being creative as opposed to the logistics that come with bigger productions?

Katz: It’s kind of a double-edged sword. Yes, we don’t have a lot of company moves. But if you have the money for the company moves, that stuff isn’t hard. It’s actually easier, because you’re shooting in new places. When you’re shooting the action in one living room, essentially, and you’ve got four people talking for most of the movie, it’s kind of a tough to make it cinematic. That was a challenge. Being a first time director, maybe I initially thought, “Oh, if it’s just people in a house, it’s not a big deal,” but you’ve got to find ways to film the actors that are interesting.

The house that you shot in has an interesting, alternative look to it. Did it already look like that, or did you design it?

Katz: There’s some design involved. In the original screenplay, the house was more American Psycho, super-modernist, like an old De Palma movie. But…we didn’t have the money for that shit! We could have done a really crummy version of that, but instead I thought, “What’s another world we can play in?” Right outside my door in Silver Lake and Los Feliz, there are people who live up in the hills there, and their houses are a little artier, a little warmer, a little more inviting. I met these guys who used to be in rock bands. I think one played in Guns n’ roses at one point and another was an architect. They were really colorful, interesting people. They had all this art there from an artist who had died, so they owned the rights to it.

Their place just seemed like it would throw the audience off the trail a little bit. You look at it, and there really isn’t a thematic shorthand that it speaks to. As soon as you see modernist furniture and white walls, you think, “Alright, they’re going to fucking spray those walls with blood.” With this…you don’t really know what to think about the house. It kinda seems nice, but you look at it a little longer and you’re like, “Is it crazy? I don’t know.” It’s not trying to be anything.

There’s a very punk rock feel to the film that I can’t put my finger on. Maybe it’s the bloody nose on the poster, or the fact that the four main characters are so different, yet complement and play off of each other like a band.

Katz: Pat Healy’s character has a Black Flag tattoo if you look closely. Ethan and Pat both used to be punks. Sara’s always playing music in the script. In a weird way, I wanted this character, who barely anything, to be sort of like this Greek chorus and make the movie feel like it’s carrying you into this musical place. What we did with the score was, we started it off playing this douche-y dance music that you’d imagine would be playing at a coke-head party. It feels ridiculous, but it also makes you feel kinda safe because of how ridiculous it is. Then you can slowly take the music away and have Sara play her own strange music, or the ambient score which sounds kinda creepy.

The film explores how money can reveal the ugliest side of us as human beings. Do you think genre films are best when they have sophisticated ideas running underneath all the blood and guts?

Katz: I’m a big horror fan, so I would say that I also enjoy them when they’re brain-dead, mean things. I’m fine with that. It’s kind of what I was raised on. I think that genre movies can be tools to be sneaky and subversive, but I kind of like them when they’re straight-up a dude in a rubber costume ripping people’s heads off. They’re both fun to me.

Your cast is very balanced. They all bring something different to the table and read each other well.

Katz: I try to imagine the movie with different actors, and I can’t do it. It’s such a random process, and it’s so hard to get actors to do movies like this, where there isn’t a lot of money and the circumstances aren’t ideal. David hasn’t had a chance to play something this dark. I’ve seen Ethan play edgier parts, but I don’t think many people are as familiar with that side of him. I was a big fan of Pat and all of his moments where he’d steal the show in Magnolia, Ghost World, and Great World of Sound. I knew I wanted to reach out to him, and he responded immediately.

Ethan cruised in on his motorcycle to have a conversation about the film, and he just looked like a badass. We talked at length about edgier movies. He and Pat are an interesting combination. I’ve always been a fan of David’s work. I wasn’t being sneaky with his casting. I knew he was capable of [this role]. Even though he’s known for comedy, it’s still all character creation. It’s just as hard doing comedy as it is doing drama. I wasn’t thinking of casting Sara as sort of an Innkeepers reunion, but I did have Ti West and Pat help me get her interested. At first, she was like, “Violet doesn’t talk or do so much.” But as we talked about it more and Pat told her that, really, she was kind of controlling everything, she got excited.

For a while, it does seem like her character isn’t paying fucking attention and she’s just another person in the room. But after a while, it’s almost as if she gets a little more bold in her spine. She’s getting closer to them, becoming more animated, and you begin to see how interested she is in watching them do these things. By the end, her face is twisted into this evil grin.

Following our call with E.L., we called back Ethan Embry, who had been trying to get on the line for the past five minutes.

Hey Ethan! Apologies for not picking up your call. I was on the line with E.L. Katz.

Ethan: That asshole?! Anything he says is a fucking lie! I’m sure you saw that piece of shit he calls a movie.

I did see that piece of shit he calls a movie! But seriously, I enjoyed the film, so congrats my friend.

Ethan: (laughs) E.L. had no part in making it good!

That’s a question I asked him. “Why did you contribute nothing of value whatsoever to the project?”

Ethan: Yeah! “Why didn’t Ethan Embry get directing credit?!”

Seriously now, I want to ask you a question I asked him. The film is quite a compact story. Did its small size attract you to it?

Ethan: The undertone of the story deals with the economic situation that 99% of Americans find themselves in. It’s a moral question, underlined with all the comedic material we have. It takes a lot of material and condenses it down to 88 minutes. That’s what drew me to it in the beginning. It starts off and you’re watching a dramatic father’s struggle, turns into a comedy, and then starts ripping your gut out.

I asked E.L. this as well: Do you think genre films are better when they have sophisticated ideas at their core?

Ethan: Yeah. I think any art form, period, is going to lend itself a hand when it has a foundation of something that we can all identify with on a deeper level. Unless you’re doing something that’s really just for the ride of it, like Cabin in the Woods or Drag Me To Hell. I think why Cheap Thrills works is that you can be so ridiculous and cross so many boundaries because it has this realistic foundation. I think that’s what makes it as gut-wrenching as it is.

You and Pat have a great dynamic in the film. It’s very subtle. You start out as friends it seems, but that slowly melts away as the film wears on. You convey this through short glances you exchange or little jabs that become more and more offensive and brutal.

Ethan: First of all, I have a lot of respect for Pat. I think he’s a really smart man, and he’s very talented. When we started shooting, I made a conscious decision to look at the things I don’t like about Pat, personally. There had to be a reason why, in the film, we didn’t speak for five years. That being said, it couldn’t be so much that we wouldn’t have that drink in the bar together. I just started looking for the things in Pat that I don’t like. I never talked to him about it–I just did it. There was real tension there when we were shooting, but it was a calculated decision on my part. We had two weeks to shoot the movie–what’s the worst that could happen? I’ll bully him around for two weeks, and then it’ll be over. (laughs) I’ve talked to him since then, and now I treat him like I treat everybody else. You look for the good things in people. I’ve gone back to treating him like an actual person. (laughs)

Like you said, the film really guts you as it goes on. Did you have to go to a dark head space, and is that difficult for you as an actor, or is that just the gig?

Ethan: It’s a familiar place for me. I’m not a stranger to dark head spaces. That being said, I’m a happy person. But I’ve been to dark places before. I really like doing it for work. Most of the time, I’m allowed to go to a darker place than I allow myself to go in real life, so it’s a great outlet. If I can do that at work and convince myself that I’ve gone dark enough, I actually have a happier life after the job.

It’s cathartic for you.

Ethan: Exactly.

When I was younger, all of my girl friends had crushes on you.

Ethan: (laughs)

You were this cute kid in all these movies, and now you’re doing edgier roles. Do you relish those days of doing nice-guy roles, or do you prefer the tough-guy stuff? You’re great at both.

Ethan: First of all, I appreciate that you think I can pull off both. Yeah…I appreciate that. I was completely oblivious to any popularity when I was a kid. I never went to school, so I was never around my peers until my late twenties. I never had a peer group that was my age. All the films that I did back then took a long time to get popular. They had these slow burns to them. I like what I’m doing now because it feels truer to who I am right now. I was a crazy kid. The guy in That Thing You Do wasn’t so far off from what I was when I was sixteen, seventeen, you know?

I think putting on that goofy, over-the-top energy “thing” was me figuring out a way to not deal with the darker side of me. Now I’ve decided that it’s okay to be darker, bitter and pissed off all the time. (laughs) I’m a man now, you know? I’m a late bloomer. I don’t think I could pull of those nice-guy characters anymore, physically. I’d look like someone with a disability. “Why is that guy with Aspergers so ripped?” (laughs)

Based off true life events is Craig Zobel’s Compliance, a controversial yet captivating look at how people fail to know their own basic rights and how gullible people are while in the presence of authority. Partly shot in docudrama style, the film ultimately shows the cruel manner of our own human nature. Reactions to Compliance have been fairly mixed after premiering earlier this year at Sundance Film Festival. It continued to divide audiences when it played at SXSW a few months later and it is easy to see why.

The film opens with a major crisis at a local fast food restaurant when one employee failed to close a freezer door overnight resulting in $1,400 in damaged inventory. Because of that they will be short on pickles and bacon for a Friday shift. And what is a fast food restaurant without pickles and bacon? The manager Sandra (Ann Dowd) deals with the situation by instructing employees to use just two strips of bacon per sandwich due to the shortage.

Right off the bat you get a sense of one-upmanship competition between Sandra and a particular employee named Becky (Dreama Walker), a cute blonde girl who just decided she found the perfect pink case for her cell phone. Becky is having a conversation with another employee about a new guy she is sort of seeing which impresses the other employee when Sandra walks by. Sandra interjects that she just knows her man is going to ask her to marry him. They both respond with congratulations. Becky mentions that this guy has been sending her pictures of his abs but Sandra states that she “sexts” with her guy often. A fairly awkward conversation between a middle-aged manager and a younger employee.

But still there is something genuine that Sandra projects. She seems down-to-earth and has a great work ethic. It is seen when her husband calls her to ask if it is alright if he stops by a friends place to have a few beers while he waits for her to get off (he hardly seems like someone who would sext). Even though she is slammed with work she kindly responds that he can do so without her permission but that she just does not want him getting too drunk is all.

The story really begins when Sandra receives a phone call from a police officer informing her that a customer had money stolen from them at the restaurant. The officer tells Sandra that they have someone who can testify that Becky was the one responsible for this. Sandra can hardly believe it but follows the orders to detain her for further questioning.

The officer on the phone has Sandra check the pockets of Becky and even take her cell phone and purse away from her. Becky denies stealing anything from a customer and although Sandra seems to believe Becky, she follows the orders the officer is giving her. It all seems fairly convincing until the officer asks Sandra to strip search Becky while they wait for the officers to arrive at the store.

Another flag rises when Sandra steps out of the room and the officer on the phone tells Becky to pretend that this whole thing does not bother her because of the stress it puts on Sandra. Just like Sandra did, Becky compiles with the officer even though she knows she is innocent and that it goes against her common logic. As crazy as it may seem to viewers, most people in their position would probably do the same thing.

Studies have shown that better judgment gets thrown out when authorities are persuading you do something. Even if the requests cause harm to the other person the majority of people will do it if they are told to. The famous Milgram social psychology experiment proved this when participants were told to give an electric shock to the other participants. The results of the experiment were that 65% followed orders and administered the final shock to the other person.

One of the best parts about Compliance was the acting. I have only seen some of the cast in smaller roles before but nothing as substantial as here. Each played their convincing role as humble people that are forced to do things that make them feel uncomfortable in a bizarre set of circumstances. The two leads, Dowd and Walker are especially good.

Compliance plays out pretty much how you would expect it to but yet it still remained a powerful watch. What makes the premise so compelling and at the same time haunting is how it accurately shows weakness in human nature. If there is one thing you will get from the film, it is a reaction. Do not be surprised to find yourself debating your side when the credits roll.

Compliance received mixed reactions and has sparked some heated debates when it premiered at Sundance Film Festival earlier this year. The trailer for this controversial film, which some believe contains political allegories, has arrived online today. While we will have to wait to before we can chime on the heated discussions of the film, take a look at the trailer.

Based on true events, Compliance is about a teenage counter girl named Becky (Dreama Walker) and her middle-aged fast food restaurant manager Sandra (Ann Dowd). One day a police offer calls the restaurant accusing Becky of stealing money from a customer which Sandra complies with the orders to detain her. What follows is an interrogation that leaves no-one unharmed.

Compliance is in theaters on August 17th, 2012.

Watch the official trailer for Compliance:

Ti West’s The Innkeepers is one hell of a slow burner. The film moves at a snail’s pace but is none-the-less fascinating at how it achieves a grand atmosphere. All the credit goes to West, a young director who is on a hot streak with this film and the one prior, The House of the Devil.

West (who is only 31 years old) knows horror inside out and more importantly, he loves the genre. For only having a few films under his belt, West shows a lot of talent. He knows how to manipulate the audience. I think manipulation can be bad in a lot of cases when it involves controlling the audience, but in the horror genre I think it’s absolutely fine.

Save for one scene I believe, the entirety of The Innkeepers takes place at the Yankee Pedlar Inn during its final days of being open. The boss is away on vacation and our two heroes are left to run the show. They are played by Sara Paxton and Pat Healy. For me Paxton is a dead ringer for actress Alexis Bleidel at times the resemblance is uncanny.

Paxton plays Claire and Healy plays Luke. Luke has been obsessed with old haunted hotels/inns, he even frequents a website about them. The two dedicate their final days at the hotel to finding any kind of evidence that ghosts populate their hotel. Luke’s obsession becomes Claire’s obsession. There seems to be an unfortunate irony about this when it’s all said and done.

The hotel has a few guests in its waning hours. A mother and her young son staying a few days after she got into a huge fight with her husband are two of them. Another guest is a former actress who is in town for a conference. She’s played by 80’s star Kelly McGillis. You remember her, she was in Witness with Harrison Ford and Top Gun with Tom Cruise. There is a bit more to her character that what is first let on. Finally an old man shows up. He demands a certain room. Even after Luke and Claire explain to him that the third floor is being worked on, he insists. They eventually oblige him and give his room.

I’m done describing the plot and its characters because there isn’t really much else to say. It’s a horror movie in an old hotel involving characters looking for ghosts. You can pretty much imagine what eventually ends up happening.

What I’d like to focus on is West’s control over this film. No one in American horror has the focus and restraint that West has. Instead of throwing scares at us left and right, West lets scenes build on one another. Power resonates more in later scenes because he allows his earlier scenes to just flow and grow organically.

Sure West will throw in a cheap scare here and there. But remember what I said about him manipulating the audience? By giving you a cheap scare, you’ll be expecting some here and there. You may or may not get one. West has you strung from strings like a marionette as he sits above you pulling on them.

West’s work behind the camera is so good you’d think he’d have been doing this for 20 years. His camera movements and angles are impeccable. There are a few moments in the film where he just lets the camera linger. Whether it is a long corridor or piano keys or a computer screen, the camera studies them quietly, suggesting certain monstrosities are sure to arrive. This all creates a sense of atmospheric dread.

The Innkeepers is that rare horror film (much like The House of the Devil was when it came out) that takes its time with its plot. It doesn’t rush anything. The story builds with meticulous power at a miraculously slow pace that builds to a melancholy ending.

If you find yourself looking for a movie to watch one night with some friends, seek The Innkeepers out. Close the curtains throw down the lights and turn up the volume. Just be sure to remind yourself that it’s only a movie.