Tilt

Moviecut—Tilt

source: Tilt

I watched this movie without reading any reviews beforehand, and I'm glad I did, because I might not have otherwise watched it based on the low IMDB score. I was quite surprised to see it rated so low. It's not a spectacular film, but it's better than a 5 for sure, and I would say a worthwhile watch particularly if you're a fan of the genre. Although there are some political parts where the main character expresses his distaste for Trump, I don't feel the movie is trying to make a political statement at all like some other reviews are stating. I think it's just establishing the main character's obsession and frustration with things in his life that are out of his control. Tilt is essentially what the summary describes: a man with worsening mental health roaming the streets at night falling deeper into his own psychosis. I wish there would have been a bit more meaning behind his madness, which is the weakest point in the film for sure. The audience is never really shown any solid reason why the main character acts the way he does; he just comes across as a cold, selfish, unemployed jerk for no reason. That said, he somehow has a smart and doting girlfriend who he treats like crap despite her being forced to work long hours as a nurse while studying for med school and being pregnant at the same time. Aside from that, it was a film that kept me interested. It's atmospheric and moody with some good cinematography. The ending was fairly meh, but then again I didn't get the sense that it was the type of film that was going to have a shocking or twist finale anyway. I felt compelled to write a review because I believe it objectively deserves a better score. At least a 6 for this one.

I saw one critic reference Taxi Driver in his review of Tilt, and while I see some slight resemblance there, there were more moments in this film that reminded me of Falling Down, a '90s movie in which a man, played by Michael Douglas, has lost his job as an engineer and is on a downward spiral toward irrational violence and self-destruction. In this movie, the protagonist, Joseph Burns, a thirty-something indie documentary-maker who experienced marginal success with his previous film, is currently jobless to make time to work on his next film, which seems to be on the same path of mediocrity as the first. The only problem is his wife, Joanne, who is in medical school and working/studying almost constantly, is pregnant. Joseph is provided an opportunity to work full-time as an assistant editor, and at first he rejects the opportunity. But when Joanne angrily pleads with him to stick to the agreement they had, that he would work once she was in medical school, he agrees to interview for the job. In the meantime, Joseph apparently has been on a secret road to insanity since (at least) the couple's vacation in Hawaii. Obsessed with economic stratification (the topic of his documentary-in-progress), he becomes increasingly interested in the idea of lording power over those perceived as weak (a homeless man, a stray dog). It's ironic and interesting, as it was in Falling Down, or even in the satirical movie, American Psycho. What's missing in this movie is ... well, anything resembling a reason for us to sympathize with Joseph. In Falling Down, we sympathize with the protagonist because those of us who have experienced the terror of having no income, no financial security, understand how it can fray the ends of sanity in the worst moments. Even in American Psycho, though we don't exactly sympathize with the protagonist, we laugh at him--we're meant to laugh at him because he's ridiculous and absurd. In Tilt, Joseph and Joanne, a couple of Millennials, live in a lovely little house with a backyard and a separate workspace next door where Joseph can play with his little movie-making gadgets. They eat health-food, which they don't appear to struggle paying for. At the start of the movie, they are just returning from a vacation in Hawaii. Joseph has the ability to get a good job with benefits, but he thinks having a job merely to pay the rent is degrading to him as an artist. He despises those more financially privileged than he is. In fact, in one scene in roughly the middle of the movie, he subtly threatens a rich, older tourist, who drives an expensive convertible, at a scenic overlook.. He hates the rich and wants to eat the poor. What in the world is it that Joseph stands for, anyway? Perhaps the problem is that Joseph is not merely an individual character but a representation of a cultural phenomenon--a generation of people, now coming into middle-age, who were raised to believe that in adulthood they would be independently wealthy, perpetually vacationing in Bora Bora. Joanne's friend Kendra calls him out: "Welcome to adulthood," she says. Indeed, Kendra, indeed. Ultimately, Tilt is lost somewhere between what I believe the writers meant to achieve and the sheer, self-pitying emptiness of their protagonist's psychological struggles. My psychological struggles watching this movie were in believing Joseph, the ineffectual but socially well-adjusted geek, as a foreboding predator capable of horrific acts. Travis Bickle (Taxi Driver) goes violently insane because he's socially awkward and anachronistic in a time of cultural revolution. Joseph Burns goes violently insane because he doesn't want to work to pay the bills, because having a comfortable home, a good job, and a loving family is below him, apparently.

All too believable study of a husband's gradual descent into psychosis. It works best as a case study, and not as a source of traditional scares or excitement. It creates an atmosphere of dread near the start and continues to hold us, chiefly due to the inspired performance of the actor playing the disturbed husband. The screenplay is a masterpiece of clarity as it depicts his pathetic attempts to create a documentary film while dealing with the pressure of impending fatherhood. Some viewers might be reminded of Polanski's "The Tenant," which deals with a similar situation. "Tilt," like that one, will never be popular, despite the talent and obvious skills that went into its production.

It would probably be a 5 or 6, if it wasn't so pretentious. Tilt looks like it was made so that Joseph Cross could wander the city at night in a black hoodie, smoking a cigarette and trying to be emo. Some shots are dark and confusing, others hold onto meaningless objects for no real reason. But one thing you can tell right away - nothing much is going to happen in this movie, and you can relax and turn your brain off. It would actually be painful if you paid attention to the bland dialogue, Joe's forced enthusiasm about his documentary, and the complete and utter pointlessness of everything that happens in this movie. Joe, who must be the loneliest firm-maker ever, has a boring wife, rude house guests, and nobody to call a friend so he goes around the city staring at people, scaring them by looking like he's about to kill them, and losing his temper after two bad line-readings because he's so on edge about his passion project which besides a few lines of dialogue, there is no evidence of it ever being his 'passion'. His true passion seems to be to smoke, stay up late at night, dress like a rebellious teen and hate his wife-mom. It has some sort of political agenda probably. I don't know why else there's so much of that stuff in here. But other than that, its not really offensive or frustrating. It's a calm, do-other-things-while-this-is-on kinda movie.

I'm baffled by the low rating and so many negative reviews for this movie. One person even said that the main actor "had no charisma", which really cracked me up. This is a really dark character in a really dark, really odd movie, not Ryan Reynolds in Deadpool. We're not meant to like this guy or find him charming, we're meant to be intrigued by his darkness and want to see where it'll take him. I really loved all of the implied things that happened, even moreso than the things we could actually see. Except for that one scene which literally had me coughing for a full minute, I almost threw up. It's been about 2 hours and my throat still hurts. (And I do not have a week stomach for blood, violence, etc. This was something different.) The movie started off really strong, but the second half didn't quite measure up to the expectations the first half set up, hence 7.5/10. I really liked it and could have easily watched another hour of what he's going to do next. Although this movie does mention politics and has some anti-Trump references, it's not a political movie and you shouldn't let that deter you from seeing it.

Typical low budget thriller where something erratic is going on but it doesn't explain why and ends on an ambiguous note. It was entertaining for a couple hours but frustrating at the same time.

There was really no suspense, no shock factor. The ending that was supposed to be the highlight, I said to myself "I guess that's that". Pretty boring as well. The main guy had no charisma, this is more likely because his character was poorly written or thought out. Because his acting is ok. Not bad. but ok. I don't even care about his views as he rambles on about his "philosophy" I dont even know what to call it. But this is no reason for the story to suck. The only reason why I gave this 3 points is because of the execution. The movie doesn't look bad. Some of the scenes that were shot, what was actually good considering that this is not a big budget film.

Why do movie producers make such nonsense, a movie is meant to have a story line with a beginning and ending, well this one has no ending, no conclusion. No point in watching this, don't waste your TIME!!!!!!