If we’re going on track records alone, I’m not the kind of person who should be cheerleading THE COLLECTOR. I’m rather indifferent to the first FEAST, but don’t care for the sequels. I stopped being interested in the SAW franchise after part two, which admittedly is before Dunstan and Melton took over subsequent sequels, leaving that less to do with them and more to do with SAW, by act of inheritance, being a fluke worm that behaves the same no matter how many parts you cut up into. Yet it is still impossible to overlook the fact that Dunstan and Melton wrote parts 4 through 7, so the idea of another similarly themed Dunstan/Melton torture team up initially seems capable of being little more than an untrademarked SAW sequel.
It isn’t. THE COLLECTOR may be a lot of things and may feature a house full of traps, but a SAW franchisee it ain’t. Not by a long shot. Dunstan’s directorial debut is a response to needs I’m so accustomed to being disappointed by that I think I’d subconsciously given up hope on finding a film that packages them all together. Finally an American horror movie that is brutal without being a freak show. An American horror movie that is a legitimate throw back to an era gone by without having to yuck it up. An American horror movie that tortures people without devolving into torture porn. An American horror movie made outside of a major studio umbrella that doesn’t give a shit how small its budget may be, that doesn’t have to shortcut tough logistics with insert shots and cutaways.
Yes, THE COLLECTOR is a good horror movie no matter what country it comes from, but that it’s an American horror movie made with a budget that might barely cover craft services on Platinum Dunes production is a great thing to me.
The pitch is simple. A thief breaks into a house the same night a serial killer sets up shop inside. The execution isn’t. The killer’s MO is to layer the house with traps with the intent of ‘collecting’ whoever proves to be the most formidable opponent. It’s a very SAW-ey plot device, but there are three keystones that distinguish it from Twisted Picture’s popular phenom. First, the traps, which are not absurdly complex devices it would take the Army Core of Engineers led by Data from THE GOONIES to conceive and build. There are a few levers and winches involved, but for the most part the threats are as rudimentary as a dark room full of things that shouldn’t be touched even with a spotlight on them. Think of it as HOME ALONE with a blood lust. If a chandelier with kitchen knives attached to it is introduced in act one, it’s gonna fall on someone by the end of the show.
Second, THE COLLECTOR’s tight grab for morality. Arkin, the main character, is a criminal because he has to be to support his family. The basic conflict inherent to a reluctant thief who faces the choice of helping the very people he was trying to violate is by itself an interesting dynamic, but once the blood starts flowing and the bones start crunching, Arkin could be anyone. It no longer matters that he’s a thief, it only matters whether he decides to find a way out and save himself or help the family still trapped inside. After all the crap that gets thrown at him, you start to root for Arkin, to pull for him to just make it out alive, parents and little girl be damned. It’s a great arch for a character captured perfectly by Josh Stewart and despite other considerable strong points, it is the best thing about the film.
The third savior is Marcus Dunstan. With his debut Dunstan has proven to be a better director than a writer. He keeps his camera on a tight leash when following the action, completely abandoning every aspect of the SAW films that I hate. No spinning camera, no editing room seizures, no set direction grungier than a NYC sewer pipe. It’s a very measured take on the extreme events that ratchets tension with a build up instead of trying to snatch your attention with a sudden onslaught of gore. There is nothing in THE COLLECTOR that comes off as rushed. Arkin never panics and neither does Dunstan’s camera. He lets the great pounding of the score do the panicking, which is something I wish more horror movies remembered to do these days.
Maybe it’s because the film ended up being the opposite of what I was expecting. Maybe I liked it so much because of the things it could have been but wasn’t. I’m not sure that’s the best way to approach it, but when so often you see the same thing over and over in a horror movie it is a welcome respite to cross a title that doesn’t blend in with the sea of horror. THE COLLECTOR stands out as a film that resists compromise on the page and on the screen. My only outstanding problem with the film are a few snags in the script, most notably the ending. There’s no shock-of-all-shocks twist to it (as well there shouldn’t be) that muddys things, but it is the only element of the movie that seems incongruous with the calm insanity of what came before, as if it is playing to an audience instead of playing to the story. It’s not a bad conclusion, I’m just a greedy fan and want things to end the way I would have ended them.
Other than that selfish complaint, I’m happy to finally have a Marcus Dunstan/Patrick Melton movie I can stand behind. I’m glad the Project Greenlight fellas have found great success with SAW and FEAST, but I hope they keep striking out on their own like this. THE COLLECTOR is easily the best American horror film so far this year and, looking at what ‘09 still has left to offer us, I’ll be shocked if it doesn’t stay that way.
Tags: Marcus Dunstan, Patrick Melton, THE COLLECTOR
I think I realize now why the film didn’t impress me as much as I thought it would. It’s that the film has 2 premises, one of which I haven’t seen done and the other I have seen in different variances, and I think there’s an overexposure of the premise I HAD seen done; to some degree.
The Collector character, though not exactly identical to any other horror villain, is an amalgamation of various villains with his unique identifying feature being that he collects people, so to speak. I don’t think you can dismiss that his execution resembles Jigsaw’s, just not with any kind of moral or life reaffirming motive, and the serial killer depicted in UNBREAKABLE.
However, a thief unknowingly walking in to a house where a serial killer is doing his dirty work, and trying to go unnoticed as he finds his way out; while struggling also with his conscience to save the family he’s robbing I find extremely intriguing and something I hadn’t seen before. But, I think despite that being very prominent in the film it’s not as prominent as I would have wanted. I think they had a desire to flesh out The Collector villain even though he’s the aspect of the film that’s not the most original. Though, I recognize it’s the piece that’s most marketable.
I wouldn’t have minded if I barely saw the villain at all. I’d like to have seen everything from Arkin’s perspective instead of cutting back between what he’s doing, and what the killer is doing; even at the risk of maybe not being able to show cool death scenes.
It’s personal preference, but I think that’s why I didn’t respond as positively to it as you did, despite genuinely having a good time with it overall.
Is this a remake of the 1965 based on the John Fowles book? If so that might make it worth a look. The book was disturbing and noteable in that it is was writing in first person from the Collectors point of view, who starts off as sympathetic character and grows steady more evil as the book goes on.
No, Mr. Movie, I don’t think it’s based on anything, though I’m going to look into that book now.
Thank you Mr Movie…I knew this looked familiar. Great book…good reading if you get the time Peter. I”m curious to see the movie know.This would not be the first time an “original” hollywood script would be very similar to a John Fowles novel…If you get the chance read The Magus and then watch The Game(97).
Having gone over a recap of John Fowles’ THE COLLECTOR, it’s safe to say the two are very, very, very different. Fowles’ certainly seems to have a better, more thoughtful story.
Oh good, I’ve been looking forward to a film version of John Fowles’ book for a long time.
You’ve convinced me to give my 10$.
Saw this at Comicon and I can assure you it’s worth it. These writers know a lot about a good horror film and finally get to shine outside of the SAW construction. Check it out for sure.
[...] and has a never ending spirit of adventure to all its dark misery. I know I recently called THE COLLECTOR the best American horror movie so far this year and I still stand by that because, well, its [...]
[...] to you by the directors of Feast, The Collector is being championed as a great new horror film. Unfortunately, it’s being dumped in a limited release tomorrow in [...]
Did we see the same film ?
The Collector is nothing but torture horror…it has nothing new or interesting to offer.
Its poorly lit and shot with many sequences being almost impossible to follow. Should I even get into Dunstan’s use of cheesy yellow and green gels ? he should hook up with Charlie Band.
As for the plot. Its swiss cheese. Just a couple of the bigger problems include…Hannah manages to keep her cool and hide for most of the movie then just as Arkin gets out she shows up banging on a window..how convenient. Lets mention how it would take a crew of a dozen people a full day to outfit that house with the amazing number of traps the ‘Collector’ did…guillitines on the windows ???
Explain again to me why he set up these traps when he already has everyone captured and tortured ?
I could go on and on and on but Id rather just forget this piece of crap film.
If you like mindless gorefests this is the film for you…otherwise stay away.
I didn’t like it very much, but not because of the buggy logic or continuity mistakes. My complaints mostly have to do with the missed opportunities to actually make it suspenseful.
Looking back over the comments, Mr. Charles hit the nail on the head here: “I wouldn’t have minded if I barely saw the villain at all. I’d like to have seen everything from Arkin’s perspective instead of cutting back between what he’s doing, and what the killer is doing; even at the risk of maybe not being able to show cool death scenes.”
It wasn’t scary for me because I was constantly informed of where the killer was and what he was doing. It is next to impossible to be suspenseful if you are giving the audience such a complete picture of everything going on.
Also, I wish Arkin would have utilized his unique skill set a bit more. Why set him up as a master safe-cracker among these complex mechanical traps and not have him utilize his abilities in some way? If I remember correctly, all he did was pick the lock on a set of handcuffs.
Finally, please, no more people hanging on hooks. It hasn’t been shocking since HOUSE OF 1000 CORPSES.
LittleWilly,
It has torture in it, but I wouldn’t call it torture horror/porn, I’d call it a home invasion flick. An extreme one at that. Sure, it’s not plausible that he’d set up all these traps, but making it a home invasion movie (twice over, actually, when you consider Arkin’s intentions) makes it far more interesting to me than any other horror films that use torture as their weapon.
I’d agree with you on the shitty gels for the little portion of the film that takes place with the mom/dad in the basement, but everything upstairs is great to look at it. Very lucid camera movements and a moon-lit lighting scheme that worked really well with the digital aesthetic of the film. But you’re totally right about the stuff in the basement.
As for the plot holes, yep, they’re there, but I think most of them are explained away by the presence of Arkin. Presumably the Collector would have released them at some point to try and make it out. But even if he wasn’t going to, I wouldn’t necessarily consider a gap in logic within the mind of a psychotic serial killer a plot hole. That’s like critiquing the grammar of someone who writes on the walls in an insane asylum.
Brian,
Dunno, man, I thought it was suspenseful. I thought the movie didn’t really have any guarantee of safety or pre-destination. Arkin and the little girl could have lived or died and I wouldn’t have been surprised.
And that’s actually my problem with the movie, so Spoiler Alert! for anyone who hasn’t read it:
That ending is pointless. I felt like everything leading up to it fit the story and that it would have been a perfectly satisfying ending to have Arkin and the girl make it out okay. Just make it so the Collector gets away and Arkin’s paranoid, seeing that leather mask everywhere. That’s fine. Ramming the ambulance? Going to such a huge extreme to involve far more people than what was in the house? It was uncharacteristic of the rest of the movie, where it felt like Arkin and co. actually had a fighting chance to get out. It didn’t feel like the ending of The Collector it felt like the beginning of The Collector 2: Re-collecting Blues.
As for his skill set, I think that paid off in his ability to both go undetected while detecting the traps. What else could he have done? It would have been silly if he was Catherine Zeta Jones’ing through the traps.
I gather that the collector setting up traps is something he’d probably do even if he wasn’t planning to “use” them at all. I think it’s just his physical expression of love of spiders. He sets up his web, and if he catches something then great, if not then no biggy.
I also don’t think it implausible to think one man could set all of the traps up, especially if that one man enjoys doing it and has done it countless times before. Years ago people thought it impossible for humans to have done crop circles overnight, when it turned out to be 2 guys with a piece of wood and a rope mowing down crops in less than 4 hours.
None of the traps were incredibly complex. Some were just pullies and bear traps.
[...] doesn’t have to shortcut tough logistics with insert shots and cutaways,” Peter Hall from HorrorsNotDead gave it a B+. Several shots, particularly in the opening sequence, took my breath away and as the [...]
Absolutley the stupidest movie Ive ever seen. WOW what a FAILURE!!!
I am not a fan of the SAW films, I am the only member of my circle of freinds that does not go ape shit every time ones hits theaters. So I went into this flick preparing for the worst…and I walked out feeling..eh…it was ok. Is it the next great American Horror Classic…not in my book…but it was good. I agree with most of what was said above, the camera work and lighting was superb..the acting was ok. I did’nt get setting up all the traps either…I did’nt think it needed any of that.
If u dont like horror dont watch this movie… i know everyone who said this movie was bad is not a fan of the genre. its a breath of fresh air for horror torchure films. 4 outta 5 stars
The only people who will enjoy this movie are those who think “torture” is spelled “torchure” (bonus: the latter does have a meaning in French. Incidentally quite an accurate description of the movie’s quality).
I know how to spell torture and I enjoyed THE COLLECTOR, then again I also know how to spell “pretentious”, which your comment is.
The Collector… a violating “could have been” suspenseful thriller, that givesway to being an overdone “Gorefest”. Even a slasher movie has some evidence of a plot that lures you in.But this movie is o constant graphic demonstration of torture that gets disturbingly old very quickly. Enough already. What’s the point of all this crap? Is it to entertain,or to suggest techniques to those who may want to torture their prey in real life. Also the very image of what was done to a cat in this movie infuriates me!
I’m beginning to think this article’s high placement on Google is more of a detriment than benefit.
Stumbled upon Peter’s review and went to see the film. Not the kind of movie I’d pay money for under normal circumstances. But it rocked. What a thrill ride of scares and gore. It’s mostly mindless fun (like everything at the box-office) but there’s plenty of irony in it. Felt like one of those gritty horror movies from the early 70s. I might have liked this more than Peter.
Before I went to see this movie, I was hearing about a ton of reviews of it becoming a horror icon much like Michael, Jason and Saw which are all very good, well thought up movies in my opinion.
Now i’m not trying to bash the movie or anything, people who like these kinda movies totally have the right to give an opinion and be respected for it. I just was personally a little bit dissapointed in the story plot and how gory it ended up being. Now I absolutly love horror flick’s and murder stories as much as the next person but maybe for the obvious second one, they could cut down on the graphics and gore just a little bit, that might cause less contreversy between opinions and reviews.
This movie was horrible. First off any horror movie that relies upon only gore to try to make itself scary is a waste of time and effort. There was nothing redeeming about this movie the premise is stupid a collector that wastes time and sets up huge traps inside a house of his victims. What a load of bullshit, there is nothing in this movie that scared me I felt like I was watching a gastric bypass video on the discovery channel. If all you know how to do to make people squirm in their seats is play techno music and rely on way too much fake blood you shouldn’t be making movies. I want the 40 minutes of my life that I wasted on this movie back.
So did you only watch the last half of the movie, Karl? There’s no gore in the first half whatsoever, but it’s definitely just as intense as the second half…
Go see it. It’s worth it.
I thought this movie was pretty good. I like movies where the presumed bad guy is forced to become the hero. If you think this movie has too much gore, you probably don’t watch many horror movies that don’t star Vincent Price. Romero is considered a god of the horror genre and “Day of the Day” depicts people being eviscerated before your eyes, their faces peeled off. The Collector used a lot more suggestion: screams and whatnot. You really only see the after affects of the torture.
I meant ‘effects,’ for the douche bags out there.
Simple, if you are a horror fan, watch it.
Excellent thrill ride….good sense of tension and suspense, IMO.
You people actually think this is really gory? Jeez, I mean it was pretty gory, but movies like Inside (2007) are truly gory.
I do think the end was a tad extreme though. I would have liked Arkin to escape, but whatever.
Recommended to the horror fans out there and people who are down for a thrill.
Ok, a few points concerning the comments above about the Collector.
1.) I find it completely plausible that the collector had time to set up all of those traps. By the look of the setting, when Arkin and the other workers leave the house it seemed to be about 4 or 5 pm. Since he didn’t get to the house until about 11:00 or so, that leaves at least 6 hours for the collector to tie up the family, set up the traps, and even kick back his feet a little.
2.) I had the feeling that Hannah was hiding in the house but watching Arkin at the same time. She noticed him fleeing and, out of desperation, banged on the window.
3.) I thought the gore was actually limited considering the high level of mental psychosis that the collector possessed. In fact, the murders conducted by people the likes of John Wayne Gacy were far more grotesque than what was displayed in this film.
I agree with some posters above. This movie is a refreshing sip of water from the other mundane, “oh no I’m running through the woods and the wolfman/vampire/michael meyers/jason vorhees is coming after me!”. 5 stars.
After reading all the reviews, I must see this movie. As a hardened horror fan, I love all horror flicks, some just more than others. Thanks for all the input!
I just watched this movie last night, and I gota say this is by far the best horror movie since american pyscho. And thats my favirote movie. Iam really leaning toward the collector to even be better than that. I could not belive how great this movie was. It does kind of have a saw feel, due to the traps and ect. But this movie The Collector is way more powerfull. The killings are incerdible. And the traps are great. You get emotionally involved in the lead character (thief) and really pulling for him to save this family. Theres just so much more to say about this movie. It is a one of a kind and a movie that I will never forget. And I personally think this movie will have a long shelf life and become the next friday the 13th or Nightmare on elm street. The villian is way more scarier than both freddy and jason. You can read all my reviews and also buy new movies from me at twitter.com/steevyweevyshow
Pretty boring and plot holes galore. LittleWilly nailed it with his comment. If you’re willing to radically suspend your disbelief and don’t find the whole torture thing tedious and overdone then you might enjoy it. But as a critic said, this is like it was cooked up by a 14 year old devotee of Bloody Disgusting.