The Snare full movie review - Welcome to the Garbagerie
I make a conscious effort not to be snarky or hypercritical in my reviews. I don't think I'm going to be successful this time.
Oh. God. Was. This. Movie. Awful.
I believe C. A. Cooper, the director, was going for path-oss, drahmah, and atmossfeer but only achieved tripe, drivel and nonsense.
Consider the movie THE SHINING. On one level, it's simply a horror picture and can be enjoyed as such; viewed in this manner, it just brings Stephen King's famous novel to the screen and presents imagery designed to create the sense of growing, shuddering horror the story wants to inspire.
But there is an entirely different level of sophistication to Stanley Kubrick's version of THE SHINING. The movie is literally packed with symbolism and subtext in virtually every shot. With as much speculation and theorizing about all of the symbolism and hidden meaning that surrounds Stanley Kubrick's film, some of it is doubtless the result of hyper- interpretation; sometimes an unexpected continuity switch is just an error. Nonetheless, so much of it is so specific it has to have been deliberate. Watch the movie ROOM 237 for more insight on this point.
I bring up Stanley Kubrick's THE SHINING because I think that's what C. A. Cooper was going for, at least stylistically, in THE SNARE. Strange horrifying visions intermixed with regular scenes intending to ramp the sense of increasing, distorted horror was the intent. What we got was a horrible mishmash that looks like the unmistakable fingerprint of a director reaching well past his capabilities and resources.
All 3 main characters in the picture are especially dislikable. What does that add to the movie? Nothing.
The movie is filled of close-up head shots, especially of Alice, doing nothing but looking out of frame and being? What?? Pensive? What does that add to the movie? Nothing.
The opening credits scene has background shots of a maggoty rabbit. Why? Well, given that it's a maggoty RABBIT, and the main character's name is Alice, and that the whole movie is a representation of an unreal, distorted experience, I imagine we're supposed to draw a parallel with ALICE IN WONDERLAND. Is there some deeper meaning in this? None that I can find. Does that make some larger, major point about the story? Search me.
In one scene we watch the jerk male character, supposedly from starvation, voluntarily eat a maggoty chicken drumstick, then throw it up, then whip around and have diarrhea on it, and then get off the toilet and begin reaching into the toilet as if to? What? Re-eat it? What does this add to the picture? Nothing. It's just gross.
Again with the jerk male character, there's a scene where this character, supposedly starving and dying of thirst, suddenly and unreasonably decides to rape 1 of the 2 women. Where does this energy come from? Who knows?
Many days (perhaps weeks) into the ordeal of being trapped on the top story of the apartment building which is the setting of most of the movie, one of the women still has intact mascara and eyeshadow on. Mind you, she is supposed to be dealing with starvation and thirst at this point. But I guess you should always try to look your best.
Inexplicably, Alice's teeth are pearly white, and then suddenly go visibly grey in the scene where they're so hungry they engage in cannibalism, and then they return to white again in a subsequent scene. Huh?
The apparent health of all of the actors doesn't change for the bulk of the picture. They're engaging in cannibalism and eating spiders and all the while looking like all they need is a bath and some deodorant to be ready for a hot night on the town.
This movie is a mess. It attempts to be deep and artsy but only manages to be clumsy and ridiculous. It's actually difficult to see its fundamental flaws because one is so overwhelmed by all of its superficial flaws.
I only watched this movie to the end so I could write this review without having to admit I didn't finish it. It was a bad decision.