MovieChat Forums > The Unseen (2005) Discussion > My review(spoilers)

My review(spoilers)

posted 17 years ago by msunshne
31 replies | jump to latest

I only heard about this movie because Gale Harold co-starred in it. That said, had I read about it in a newspaper or movie guide I would have watched it anyways. It's my kind of movie and the trailor hooked me from the first moment I saw it. Very dramatic. The issues it raises are deep and important. Never did I forget, however, this was a very indie movie without the supportive deep pockets of a studio. It felt like it was a personal film. Everybody involved did it because of the story, not the paycheck.

Having seen Steve Harris is a few different roles, I'm struck by how timid he played Roy. Fantastic job. The way he kept his shoulders and body and the way he walked. He had such a weight on him. Roy would cower around Harold and hardly look him in the eye. Great job with the characterization.

Phillip was a revelation. Sammy was so loving, so giving, so full of life. I wanted him to have a better life. A better family.

Judah was funny. I don't understand his characters' fascination with oil but whatever, LOL!! As the guy who stayed in the background and was mostly comic relief he did good. I wish 30 Rock used him more but that is neither here nor there. Hahahaha!

Michelle was all right. Her accent went in and out and seemed a little too over the top at times. Kathleen was sweet and really loved her man.

Which leads me to Harold. Gale's performance? Gale, Gale, Gale how I love thee. He did a great job with the characterization. I couldn't find any of his other roles there. Brian Kinney was nowhere, and I mean nowhere, inside that performance. Gale's performance was so good, I was able to separate him from the character---I hated Harold. He was mean and a bully. He abused his brother. What happened to him as a child does not excuse his behavior. What happened to him as a boy was a tragedy. No child should ever ever have to deal with that. His father was vile. But the way he treated Sammy? It was loathsome. I can't believe anybody would stay with him and nobody had taken Sammy away a long time before. He's a mean, miserable man. I could not imagine anything that could have made him redeemable. The acting was so great it made me forget how much I like Gale. LOL!! He embraced that character with everything he got.

S
P
O
I
L
E
R

Was the funeral at the end for Roy's father or Harold?

[–] boncoeur 17 years ago

It hadn't occurred to me that it could have been for Roy's father. I'm pretty sure the funeral was for Harold since Kathleen was there crying and Roy was sitting in the back, as I recall. He'd be upfront if it had been for his father.

I agree, msunshne, I forgot I was watching Gale -- he did a great job with that character. Thanks for the review.

[–] sjm111455 17 years ago

S P O I L E R A L E R T:

It was Harold's funeral. I found myself lost in the whole movie but the end is what really got to me. How after Roy pulled him from the house and he apologized to Sammy and gave Roy the coin that he kept all those years. OMG. the tears didn't flow but they were close.

Phillip Bloch really surprised me. From a stylist to and actor. He was great. So touching. But iI nnoticed in the credits that he was one of the costume designers and kept thinking that he must have picked out Sammy's clothes.

[–] msunshne 17 years ago

I did cry. More over Sammy yelling he had to save Harold and saying he loved his brother. After everything Harold did to him. I cried--I admit it. The coin exchange tugged the tears our as well.

[–] GoCommando 17 years ago

Enjoyed reading your review, but your comment " He's a mean, miserable man. I could not imagine anything that could have made him redeemable." brought us to loggerheads.

I liked Harold. Yeah, he was somewhat cruel to Sammy, but that was due to ignorance rather than being mean spirited. In his own way he took care of Sammy. Sure, Harold may have found it amusing when he incorrectly labeled food, but that reflected his own immaturity. The same goes with lying to Sammy and keeping him hidden all those years because Sammy embarrassed him. It was the mindset of a twelve year old. He had to take on the responsibility of raising Sammy when he was so young, still trying to process the trauma of his fathers weakness and his mothers inability to cope. Its too much to ask of a kid his age and yet he did the best he could. He loved Sammy. He also loved his girlfriend, but his love was characterized by his limitations.

I felt sorry for the guy. He'd suffered through a really screwed up situation making it a poignant time in his short childhood, burying it deep within himself, hiding it out of guilt and shame, having it eat away at him with no way of ever seeing the incodent the way we saw it - from the outside - making him self-destructive and little more than a ticking human time-bomb that had to go off sooner or later.

Harold was not a 'bad guy'. He was a victim. He was vulnerable, which was proven by his defensive actions. His story was a classic tragedy. I never really thought he needed redeeming, though his giving the coin to Roy at the end could have been seen as redeeming himself to himself. Give the guy a break.

[–] msunshne 17 years ago

Disagreements are what make the world go 'round. I'm allowed to view the movie as I see it, so are you.

His childhood, though tragic, is no excuse for how he treated Sammy, his friends, and his girlfriend.

[–] Soul-Mate 17 years ago

I have heard a really good quote yesterday. Sylvia, the wife of the swedish king Gustav, said it at the "Bambi-Gala" over here in Germany.
I don´t know what writer actually said it, but she quoted this writer. I believe it was a swedish writer...of course.

"Children who are not loved in their childhood will grow up being adults who don´t love."

That is so true. They have to be healed to be able to love again and I had to think of Harold immediately. Who did help him to get healed? Who did love him when he was a little boy and in desperate need of love. Why did no one listen to him?

Silence kills...that is true,too.

I felt sorry for Harold, too and I wholeheartly agree with your comment.

[–] msunshne 17 years ago

Don't you think his death was the only way for Harold to escape? One comment from Roy was that all they talked about as kids was escaping to the big city. Once the situation happened with his dad and his mom--he was trapped.

It sort of looked like he let the cig. burn deliberately.

[–] GoCommando 17 years ago

No offence meant msunshne. Of course we all have opinions. And yeah, Harold was commiting suicide, and he wanted to take the house with him. He had trapped himself in his own pain by continuing to live there, but then he never had anyone around that could tell him what he was doing to himself. Roy was the only one who could have understood and helped, but he couldn't even look Harold in the face anymore and of course, left to live in the city. The people Harold surrounded himself with were people he felt he could control, and I guess that made him feel safe because they were never a threat to him. They could never see the festering guilt and shame that was torturing him. It had basically been rotting him from the inside out.

In the first scene of the film when Roy (as a boy) follows Harold and his father to their house and walks in on them, I remember thinking "Ohno ohno ohno! Noooo, his father can't be doing what I think he's doing," and of course later we see it in more detail and he was doing just that, well I had my hand clapped over my mouth and tears spilling from eyes. (I hate when that happens because I can't see the screen properly!) It was just so gut wrenching and unfair and horrific and human and true. The film makers did an amazing job of getting that across.

Harold was a wonderful character, and I empathised with him, as well as had a lot of sympathy for him (which he would doubtless have hated). I probably would have liked to cuff some sense into him too, but only because I cared about him enough. I'm not sure I would have loved the film so much if I hadn't of liked Harold from the beginning.

[–] boncoeur 17 years ago

I agree that it's important to feel some sympathy for Harold, or the movie just wouldn't have worked for me. On the surface, Harold is despicable and controlling, but I still had the feeling that you could reach him; he hadn't gone over to the dark side completely. I could see one of the women giving him a piece of her mind, and him getting all contrite. He really could have been saved; that's why it was so tragic that he committed suicide.

What did others think about Sammy, and Phillip's portrayal of him? I can't quite put my finger on what is wrong here. I found his acting very believable. I liked the character; loved the funny clothes; felt sympathetic for his plight. But something wasn't right. I just didn't feel that strong of a connection to Sammy, and I'm not sure why. Am I missing something here?

[–] msunshne 17 years ago

I didn't see the clothes as funny. They were his mother's if I'm not mistaken.

[–] GoCommando 17 years ago

I think I can understand why you may not have felt a strong connection to him because he viewed the world from such a different perspective than we (as people who can see) do. Its possibly an important part of his character that you can't connect with him fully. I don't think he's ever been allowed to really grow up either, being stunted by having contact with mostly only Harold, who is still a child himself in many ways, and Kathleen and Earl (is that his name? I've only seen the film once so am not sure).

I really liked Sammy. He has such an innocence about him. Phillip did a spectacular job of portraying that. His choice of clothes, and his rebellion against wearing what Roy thought he *should* wear was insight into how willing he was to accept people for who they are. He was born blind, and wasn't poisoned with the everyday image problems most of us judge in others and struggle with ourselves. If anything is clue as to what sort of person Harold really was, it was Sammy's love for him.

[–] boncoeur 17 years ago

By funny, I meant odd -- as in odd clothes for a grown man to wear. I understand the reasons he wore them; it just added to his overall quirkiness. Which I found endearing, by the way.

GoCommando--I like reading your insights into the characters -- we agree on many, many points. My lack of connection isn't about the character per se, it's about the portrayal of Sammy in this movie. While I found Phillip convincing as Sammy, I was convinced only up to a point. My head understood and accepted it, but my heart was strangely unmoved. I don't get it, because Sammy is exactly the type of character that I adore (the innocent outcast who helps define our own humanity, a la Forrest Gump), but I just didn't feel the connection I would have expected. If others felt it, then I am even more perplexed. Oh well, you don't get answers to every mystery in life.

[–] GoCommando 17 years ago

"Oh well, you don't get answers to every mystery in life." How very true.

The character that I felt most in tune with - the one that really pulled me into the story, the one that made me want to follow it through - was Harold. He was the most influential on me. He's the one who is at the center emotionally for me. Though its possible that Sammy was supposed to be the heart of the film, so that's possibly why you're trying to figure out what it was about him that didn't quite meet your expectations? I could be way off though...

Sammy was undoubtedly important in the fact that he brought out the best and the worst of the other main characters at play, but the one I found the most compelling in the film was Harold.

[–] Soul-Mate 17 years ago

You have put into words what I´m thinking, GoCommando. I like reading your thoughts and your ability to look inside of Harold´s character.

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

I think the experience of most people in watching the film is that they do not identify that much with Sammy (most of us aren't that much like Sammy, or ever will be) but we identify plenty with the people Sammy comes into contact with, and with their reactions to Sammy. We can all identify with the people who meet a handicapped person, or have responsibility for him, and who have to determine how kind they'll be, how patient, how tough; with how much time they'll give him and how much time and space they'll reserve for themselves; with how many decisions to make for him and how much autonomy to give him. And Harold is responsible for Sammy all the time. It's hard enough on Roy just to give him a day's outing. Harold isn't perfect, but he's doing the best he knows how.

--------------
***You didn't suffer as much as black people so stop acting special.***

[–] Lichtgestalt_des_Erdenru 17 years ago

But why does Harold lock up Sammy? He never lets him out even for the barbeque.

I didn't understand that at all and Harold doesn't answer that, when Kathleens asks him, why he is that way to Sammy.

But the scene with Roy on that window the first time was so funny, when Roy gets scared by Sammy's appearance. And Sammy asks, how Roy came up here and if he has a ladder. When Roy looks to the ground and replies "No." It was sooo funny. I wanted to cuddle Roy and Sammy.

[–] Soul-Mate 17 years ago

I think it was not just a dark movie.

There were a few scenes with quiet, subtle humor....especially when it came to Sammy. The scene when he tries to escape out of the window...thinking he will fall hard on the floor...that scene was priceless.

I didn´t really understand why Harold locked up Sammy,too.

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

No, you're right. I was expecting a much darker movie. Actually, the part I liked least was the ending. It just seemed unnecessary and kind of tacked on.

--------------
***You didn't suffer as much as black people so stop acting special.***

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

I think he's worried that people will make fun of Sammy and mistreat him, and that he himself won't be able to keep Sammy from doing something embarrassing or accidentally self-destructive outside of a controlled environment and his own complete control. His imprisonment of Sammy is the only way he knows to take responsibility for him. He doesn't want anybody looking askance at his brother. Harold doesn't have a huge frame of reference. He only knows Harelson and roundabouts. He hasn't investigated programs for the blind (and he doesn't have a lot of money anyway). He's just doing what a lot of country people would probably do -- though to a greater degree, because he's a single man and his mother isn't there to provide a female influence.

--------------
***You didn't suffer as much as black people so stop acting special.***

[–] Lichtgestalt_des_Erdenru 17 years ago

Well, that could be his reason. But look at these people of Haralson! When Sammy enters Mama Jack's, Mama Jack is very confused, but only because she hasn't seen Sammy for years. And so is Miss Lucille, she is surprised, but glad to see Sammy and gives him a haircut (which is not too different from his style before *gg*).

No one of the other guests at Mama Jack's is bothered who Sammy is and how he behaves. They are nice.

And they seem to like Harold as everybody is really nice (scene in the shop with Veronica).

What I think, why Harold can't afford this school for Sammy, is because he is paying for his mother's sanatorium.

I am still puzzled how they brew beer. Very weird method. 0-0

[–] Soul-Mate 17 years ago

I also think...(after I did that a lot...thinking, I mean)...it has to do with fear of losing control.

Harold is responsible for Sammy. He can´t afford special treatment of Sammy. I did not even think about the opportunity that Harold could be paying for his mother´s sanatorium...that could be,too.

But Harold lost control once...and it turned out bad. All the things that followed were not that good. So...maybe he wanted to forestall any trouble, any chance of losing this control again. What he forgot was that he was not able to keep that control when he was younger. He was a kid and so he was dependent on his parents. Do I make sense, at all?

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

Yes you do. I think you make a great deal of sense.

--------------
***You didn't suffer as much as black people so stop acting special.***

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

The fact that nothing bad happens to Sammy doesn't mean that Harold doesn't fear that something will. Harold can be wrong. And remember what bad things happened to Harold as a child. Childhood is supposed to be a happy time, and our parents are supposed to protect us. Harold is a very pessimistic man, and who can blame him.

--------------
***You didn't suffer as much as black people so stop acting special.***

[–] Soul-Mate 17 years ago

Exactly, duc.

[–] ladycat713 16 years ago

If the first you know of the world is evil than that will influence you all your life. Especially if the evil is in the form of a person who is supposed to love and protect you. You can see how the world perceives them and how far from the truth that is.

Therefore , even people that appear to be kind are seen as a potential threat and if there is someone that you love and that is weaker in some way (from physical or mental defect or age , young or old) then you might end up going too far in order to protect them.

[–] ljfrance 17 years ago

Hi -

This is Lisa France. I don't usually use this sign in, someone I work with does to input things for us...In any event, I just wanted to say how exciting it is to chime in on all of your comments. Even the people who don't like the film -- it's all fine with me...Naturally I'm pleased to see the lively chat that leans positively.

Thank you all very much.

I just wanted to let you know that it looks very likely that Starz will be premiering our film in November and December. A very exciting bit of news for us. We're not exactly sure of the date yet, but when I know, I'll let you know.

Lastly, I wish I could read German! Wild to see all that chat in German!

Thank you again,
Lisa

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

Thanks, Lisa. I love the film (except for the ending, sorry), and I am delighted that it's going to be on Starz, instead of just popping up unheralded on VOD. That's a bit of a coup for you, m'dear. Yeah, isn't the German reaction amazing? It amuses me that they're all comparing the heavily accented southerers to Bavarians. I had no idea you would ever read any of this, so I definitely wasn't blowing smoke when I said I was reminded a little by the setting and the mood of "Floating Weeds." I doubt that a filmmaker minds being compared to Ozu, even if you were going for something else.

--------------
***You must be old and wrinkled to have that type of reaction. - Liana***

[–] sjm111455 17 years ago

GoCommando, are you reading my thoughts? i feel exactly the same way.

[–] ljfrance 17 years ago

http://66.63.163.187

It's official. The Unseen will be playing on Starz on November 1st.

No, the filmmaker does not mind being compared to Ozu. She thanks you!

[–] ducdebrabant 17 years ago

Congratulations! Now the bad news. For every other premium network I get, I get an On Demand channel, so if it airs anytime at all I can go to the OD channel and watch it whenever I please. Starz is the only exception, unfortunately. That sucks. I hope it at least shows up in Movies On Demand, where you have to pay for it. I actually own a DVD of it, but I'd like it to be seen by as many people as possible. The good news is that "Wake" did show up on MOD a few years back, so maybe "The Unseen" will show up there or on "Indies on Demand."

--------------
***You must be old and wrinkled to have that type of reaction. - Liana***

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]