Ink Blotting - These Girls

Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 at 12:00 AM

These Girls

The hook to this column is that I typically read all the reviews I can find about a movie, assess what they had to say and then offer up a summation of the positive and negative qualities reviewers felt the movie possessed. Occasionally I color things a little with my own particular viewpoint - but that's pretty much going to be assumed by the reader anyway. I am, of course, looking at things through my own eyes.

But having the opportunity to go see These Girls at a press screening before it has been viewed and reviewed leaves me with little in the way of qualified reviews to scour. In fact, after an hour of exhaustive google searching I could glean only two reviews, one negative and one positive. Actually, the feelings were stronger than that - I would even say one vehement and the other effulgent.

I would like to qualify the negative reviewer's vehemence towards the movie, but the particular lens by which they viewed the movie through - the potential previous dissatisfaction with the day, their intolerance towards what they were seeing and the general ennuis this individual seems to currently suffer from in his/her current state of existence - reflects heavily upon their review to such an extent that it is less a review and a simple summation of their displeasure towards the movie and genre in general.

Here's what the negative reviewer should have said. One of the unfortunate failings of These Girls is the camera work. Angles are strangely situated, steady camera work is not particularly steady and any scene involving the characters moving along with the camera stimulate a feeling of watching an exceptionally well done home video, not a particularly well-done movie going experience. The colors were grainy and washed out lending little depth to the viewing leaving one, oftentimes feeling that this movie was less than real, different from movies nowadays that offer a more than real experience.

I am glad I was informed before the start of the movie the particular biography attached to the film. Here is a movie directed and produced by a former writer for the Calgary 'zine Ffwd. It was first drafted as a play which was performed at One Yellow Rabbit. If I had not been privy to this information I would have not understood my general unease with the first half of the movie. It is because the first half of the movie is played out as though it were a play on stage. It is not until the three girls borrow their friend's boat that the movie leaves it's humble roots in stagecraft and enters something remotely resembling a motion picture. This isn't a failing to the movie, don't get me wrong - it's just something that distracts. Perhaps it doesn't distract you the reader, but it did distract me.

The effulgent review went into great detail why the reviewer feels that the movie was not just a success, but a full-out hit. The reviewer writes that David Boreanaz surprised him with his comedic acting ability but it is my contention that one of the beautiful parts of this movie is the seamless interaction between the cast. This ensemble worked exceptionally well together to create a believable setting around which the less than believable takes place.

I should qualify that, lest people begin to suspect there are aliens, magic or supernatural powers at work within the film. No, this movie has a very believable plot with one instance of fiction that hinges on the entire work. In the case of the negative reviewer, that soul felt the moment of disbelief was not adequately explained or overstepped and therefore was unable to appreciate the context of the movie. But the general audience reaction, and my own particular opinion, is that allowing for that suspension of disbelief for that one scene dramatically allows for the rest of the movie to logically follow.

The scene supposes that the three girls would be willing to work together towards blackmailing Keith Clark (David Boreanaz) into having sex with them over the four nights during the week that his wife is out at work. They have a calendar and a plan. If one allows for their interest in sharing with each other and earnest desire for the pot growing 32 year old with a newborn then the movie follows in interesting fashion.

But whether or not you believe the premise of the movie does not have much impact on the quality of the film. With impressive acting, great editing and an incredibly well written script the plot can take second seat to the humor this dark comedy arouses. In this reviewer's opinion, however, the plot isn't a failure and was definitely something original and new.

A solid 3 stars out of 4.

Kyle Gould is a University of Calgary Graduate in English devoutly trying to make the 25,000 dollar piece of parchment not just a glorified ink blot. Currently it would serve better as a Rorschach test. Feel free to throw some ink his way at wkkgould@hotmail.com.