AUGUST 28, 2010
GENRE: REVENGE
SOURCE: THEATRICAL (FRIGHTFEST)
Any movie that has been on the shelf as long as The Tortured has automatically comes with low expectations. Originally filmed in 2007, the film had some minor reshoots a while back, but it doesn't seem to have helped much. I don't know what scenes are new and which were there all along, but there are tell-tale signs of tinkering throughout, as a recognizable actor is reduced to only a few seconds as a glorified extra, Erika Christensen and Jesse Metcalfe's acting is all over the place, and the film keeps changing between a dramatic thriller about parents pushed to the edge, to a traditional "torture porn".
But the real problem with the movie is it's ending, which was NOT changed from what I understand. To discuss further I will have to spoil it, so stop reading if you want to be "surprised" (read: have your intelligence, fuck, your VISION, insulted) by the ending if and when it ever actually sees a proper release.
So the movie concerns Metcalfe and Christensen planning to kidnap and torture the man that kidnapped, tortured, and killed their son. That man is played by Bill Moseley. Moseley may not be a household name, but he's certainly a recognizable face and very popular amongst the horror fans that are likely to be the primary audience for any film with FROM THE PRODUCERS OF SAW! on its poster. But apparently, the folks involved with his casting either didn't realize that, or just assumed we're all idiots, because as anyone can plainly see from the moment they tie him up in their basement, the man they have captured is not Moseley.
As we learn in a very Saw-like flashback montage at the end of the film, when they went to hijack the prison van that was carrying Moseley, they failed to see that there was another prisoner in the van with him, some schmuck who got busted for tax evasion. And yes, he does share a physical resemblance to Moseley, but not enough for any horror fan paying attention to be fooled into thinking its him. Since the van is overturned and all parties take facial injuries, I guess we're supposed to think that Metcalfe and Christensen are so worked up about the whole thing that they never really bothered to notice that the guy they took had different eyes and facial features when they picked him up after he was thrown from the van (with Moseley still safely inside). Perhaps on paper this would have worked fine, but on-screen it's just a complete failure. Even if you're not thinking "they got the wrong guy" in terms of the story, you WILL be thinking "they got the wrong actor?" anytime there's a closeup of his face. I think they actually cheat a few times and really put Moseley in there, but the damage is done right from the start, when his face is at its least injured. Some more careful editing might have helped.
But even so it's a laughable movie at times, thanks to some truly terrible dialogue from the parents. Metcalfe: "Imagine the worst pain you've ever felt in your life... this will be even worse than that!" Metcalfe isn't the worst actor in the world, but he's the least threatening guy ever - even Ashton Kutcher might have been a better choice for this role. And while the torture bits are nasty and well-done (particularly the elephant mask and "ear piercing" scenes), they never really amount to much either - they're just there to keep the movie from simply being a morality drama of two angry/upset parents debating over whether or not what they are doing is right. And thus the torture scenes don't really fit - "should we do this?" is often followed by both of them seemingly enjoying what they're doing.
The kidnapping stuff is actually quite gripping, however. The scene where the kid is taken is well-staged, and both actors are quite good at depicting the otherwise unimaginable pain of losing a child. They blame one another, have flashbacks (the flashbacks to the kid's birth, moments after they discover he is dead, is truly gut-wrenching - and I'm not even a parent!), turn to drugs, etc. And the scene where they take "Moseley" is a fairly decent suspense piece, with a terrific car crash to boot.
But I guess that's what happens when you reshoot a movie with a different crew - you get a bunch of good scenes, a bunch of bad ones, and an almost complete lack of cohesion. I mean, the whole thing comes down to them realizing that they've been torturing the wrong guy, and yet we never really see them reflect on it - they just sort of go "oh shit" and drive away from the house as the credits start to roll. Like the Saw films, once we know the twist we have about 90 seconds to go until that final cut to black, but unlike those films, there's no sequel forthcoming.
Also, and I may have asked for this before, but can we get a moratorium on using "Mockingbird" as a creepy theme song for the killer? It's NOT CREEPY. And even if it once was, it sure as hell isn't anymore, after being used so many goddamn times. I guess we can give this one some benefit of the doubt, since it was shot in the previous decade for Christ's sake, but still. Enough is enough. How about "Shoop Shoop" from Cher? That song could be kind of frightening if it was playing on a scratchy record in some killer's basement, right?
What say you?
I dying to saw movie until I can't saw this movie. The Tortured one of the my best movies which I saw in my life. Totally action, thrill and horror movie.
ReplyDeleteI totally want to see a slasher use Who Could it Be now by Men at Work whenever the killer is stalking people.
ReplyDeleteI have one question.
ReplyDeleteDid they relized who they really tortured?
I spent most of the movie wondering why the prisoner dude was wearing eyeliner... and that was the only thing I couldn't figure out. Even when he appears in full light there it is; thick black eyeliner.
ReplyDeleteNo they didnt realize who they really tortured.. If you watch and listen carefully , then youll understand that , the man they tortured really did not remember who he was or what he did, And thats why at the end when he hung himself he wrote the note apologizing for "killing" there son.
ReplyDeleteThat all makes sense, but how did he know their sons name?
DeleteHe knew their son name because he heard the father say the name when the mother was vomiting saying she couldn't do it anymore.
DeleteI took it, that the innocent Man that the parents tortured, was captured by the police while trying to escape from them. The man who hung himself was the actual Serial Killer, who had been hiding in the woods and around the farmhouse to survive and evade the police. During this, he witnessed the torture of the other prisoner, and he knew his turn was next. He decided he had enough. Hence the chilling words in the note, "I deserve what you are going to do to me, but I am tired of the torture". Did anyone else see it this way?
ReplyDeleteThis is the correct interpretation
Deleteinteresting interpretation.. but wrong..
DeleteBasically... with a little bit of pulling the film backwards and forwards and analysing certain facial features etc. The guy that Jessie Metcalfe spoke to through the cage in the van was Kozlowski - but obviously, as he didn't know the other guy was in there, they thought the person they picked up was the right one, but Galligan would have been further back in the van, hence throwing him out, and leaving Kozlowski to escape! Then.. the police picked up Kozlowski and Galligan hung himself.. they wouldn't have known this, as 1) The bloodied up face due to the van crash would have made him lookm different and 2) The note would have made them think it was the right guy.
ReplyDeleteI would honestly assume that the letter was left as he would have seriously thought it was him, as he said he couldn't remember - and they probably had him thinking that he'd done it.
How did the guy being tortured know there sons name was Benjamin if it wasn't Kozlowski?
ReplyDeleteSame question from me? The only explanation I can think of is that the actual child killer managed to swap places with the tax evader on the torture table at some point, and put himself up for torture to punish himself - hence knowing the son's name. Or it's a huge plot hole...
ReplyDeletePeople on other forums are saying that he knew the name as he would have overheard the parents talking. But that doesn't really explain why he would hold out from saying it until he'd been tortured a lot.
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing somewhere in Metcalfe's rantings he did mention the name of the kid...maybe. The tortured guy had to say the name to save what was left of his feet...ugh!
ReplyDeleteThey tortured the wrong guy (tax evader). The only reason the tax evader killed himself is because he couldnt remember (he said he only remembered the crash). Thats why he left the suicide note. Parents were so mad and believed he (tax evader) was the killer that he began to feel like he was and wanted to end it but apologize first. Parents were obviously sure he was the killer but if he had amnesia, he wouldnt know one way or the other. The only reason he called out Benjamin's name was because he wanted to save his foot, like another person said. he just wanted the pain to stop so he said the boys name.
ReplyDeleteHow did he know the boys name.......he could have heard the father say his sons name or he may have heard on the news in prison or from the real killer bragging about the boy he killed. They could and should have cleared this up in the movie but this is my take. That's why the big build up of music at the end with the real killer emerging from the van. If it was the tax evaded innocent man, who cares. They just didn't elaborate well enough.
How he could have known the boy's name from the news or from the real killer if he didn't remember anything before the crash?
DeleteGUESS!!! What is the most popular boy name in the US??? At that point you can assume that he guesses it right!
Deleteit's up to you to think of it who is the real killer because it is the director's purpose to leave an open ending.
Case 1: if he is the wrong one... ouch .. too bad for him, he gets tortured for doing nothing... think about it, is it fair?
Case 2: if he is the real killer... finally, he commits suicide and apologizes. However, if it is the case, do you think it is a fair price that he has to pay? torturing and torturing and forcing someone to death to pay for someone else's death?
thats a good point!!
ReplyDeleteBASICALLY, the dad is grieving for the son and so is the mum so whilst torturing the wrong dude they were talking about their son and why they are surely committing this crime of torture. It makes sense if you think about it however the film should have made this more clear or perhaps they just wanted the viewer to do some thinking to make the film more "interesting" maybe??
ReplyDeleteThe note was left by the killer when the car alarm went off. When the tax evader was about to walk out the door, he read the note and tried to return to the bedroom, where he got knocked back out. The police caught the serial killer and the tax evader hung himself because he knew they would continue torturing him to death. The movie should have ended with a phone call to the parents stating that the killer had been captured, because at the end, you still cannot assume that they know they tortured the wrong person.
ReplyDeleteIt was definitely the tax evader that left the note because it ended 'I just couldn't take any more of the torture' and the killer was never tortured.
DeleteI reckon the tax evader was convinced he had done such a despicable act that he couldn't remember, otherwise he would have cried 'I was just a tax evader!! I never killed or tortured anyone!!'
The remorse shown in the note sounds right coming from the tax evader who could never contemplate such a monstrous act on a child. How did he know the child's name, well sharing the back of the prison van with the real offender may be something, (although it is possible to kidnap a random child without knowing their name also).
it should have been clearer by the director.. being in court, they saw the kidnapper clearly. How could his face be so busted that they didnt know?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fearstrikes.com/
It seems that the director, after the film being on the shelf for so long,simply got tired of dealing with everything and just let it go without clearing up a few loose threads.
ReplyDeleteFrom reading other comments,I think I've filled in some of the blanks abt that terrible ending. It apperas the tax convict really didn't rememeber who he was so that's why he apologized and killed himself believing he'd done those horrible things. How he knew the boys name? Unless he was in solitary confinement anyone in the prison knew what the other guy was in for. What also doesn't make sense is him not even trying 2 profess his innocence&tell them his real name even if they don't believe him. It would've planted doubt in their minds. The ending is SO ridiculous bc what happens later when the couple hears on the news that the real killer has been recaptured? It would've made more sense 2 play out them finding out what they've done &turning themselves in or committing suicide together bc they can't live with having tortured an innocent man.THAT WOULD'VE MADE SENSE out of this hot mess of a movie!
ReplyDeleteThey tortured the wrong guy. When the police are chasing the convict at the end of the film he has a limp, which you would expect to be from the foot crushing vice. But it clearly shows that the killer injured his leg during the crash, thus causing the limp.
ReplyDeleteThe note was written by the tax evader because he thought that he was the killer, so he committed suicide both because he thought he deserved it, and to escape further torture.