I should mention right at the start that I’ll be looking at the Extended Cut, which has a completely different opening and ending to the theatrical release. Since they were both the same price for rental at the time of viewing, and this year has already proven me wrong on at least one other director’s cut, I figured I might as well check out the Extended Cut. Put simply, the key difference here has to do with the characters behind the scenes for the titular Escape Rooms, namely James Frain as the puzzlemaker for the shadowy Minos corporation, and Isabelle Fuhrman of Orphan fame as his captive daughter. I’m admittedly going off of plot synopses to parse out the differences between versions, but given the information available, I honestly think the changes made were for the better. Partly because they maintain a personalised touch to all of the escape rooms shown in the main film, and partly because any excuse to have Fuhrman on-screen is worth pursuing.
Now, as much as I could extoll how compelling the story of Fuhrman’s Claire is, her connection to the escape rooms, and how she adds to the overall theme of banding together to survive (as opposed to the ‘sole survivor’ theme of the first film), that would all fly in the face of how this is still a very niche thriller for a very specific kind of audience. And those who fall outside of that definition won’t care a whiff for the extra fluff if they aren’t already on-board for the patently ludicrous puzzle design and breakneck pace, the bulk of which remains identical regardless of the version seen.
As I’ve been making a habit of saying around here, I grew up on the Saw films; I have zero issue with this kind of willingly convoluted thriller setup, and I even vibed with the first film before it fell apart around the end. Thankfully, this doesn’t have the same collapsing issue, and while the characterisation is still pretty sparse (even for the returning characters in Taylor Russell’s Zoey and Logan Miller’s Ben), that same breathless pace that doesn’t allow any room for development also doesn’t leave enough room for the audience to even notice in the moment. The puzzles are properly thought-out, if incredibly reliant on lightning-fast thought processes to get through, and there’s enough variety to keep things interesting.
However, while I’m able to meet this film’s engagement on its own terms, I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t starting to see some massive problems begin to develop. Going beyond the Cabin In The Woods-ass motivation for why these escape rooms exist in the first place, the larger ideas I’m getting from the writing thus far is built on some pretty dicey understanding of what trauma does to people. With the original, we had characters who had gone through traumatic experiences, managed to move past them and grow stronger, and then were brought together to test that strength. Whereas here, that notion has become warped into the idea that trauma = strength, QED. This reads like someone sat through Shyamalan’s Split and ran with the worst possible implication of that film’s take on mental health.
As a result, the whole idea of this happening to please a better-off audience takes on an uncomfortable meta context, like the only reason someone would watch this is to see already-traumatised characters get pushed even further down that path until they break. It’s something that was also prevalent in Cabin, except where that film flat-out acknowledged how cold that approach ultimately is, this film seems to want to excuse it just to perpetuate its own existence as a franchise. I’m not saying I don’t get similar arguments towards films like Saw or Hostel, or any of the other “torture porn” horror flicks that Cabin was directly responding to; I’m just saying that those films weren’t as on-the-nose about their own voyeuristic appeal as this series is becoming.
What irony that a film about intricate puzzles would start to fall apart once you try and figure it all out. While it’s not plagued with the same immediate problems as the first film, and I’d even argue that this is markedly better overall, its franchise aspirations are starting to unearth some unsavoury notions about its own audience that are making it difficult to recommend. I still think it works well enough for the popcorn thriller it is, and the note the Extended Cut ends on, not gonna lie, has definitely piqued my interest for what may be coming next, but this lands right in the middle of guilty pleasure territory despite the legitimate film craft on display. It’s the kind of film where you might enjoy it while you’re watching it, but if you think about it for even a moment during that time or at any point afterwards, don’t be surprised if you find it immediately losing appeal points in recollection.
No comments:
Post a Comment