MovieChat Forums > Choose (2011) Discussion > premise had potential, what was with the...

premise had potential, what was with the milgram stuff?


ok so many problems hard to know where to begin. i just had a feeling this would be poorly done but got outvoted so saw it anyway, but i feel i have to at least make that time mean something by criticising lazy film making so the next time people who are lucky enough to get a budget to make something, dont just urinate it up against the wall.

for one at the start, the guy is standing half a foot away and you have a knife, why not at least attempt to kill him even if it is a risk that you or your brother will get shot, at least try, how do you know he wont say ok kill dad, ok now pick, mom or brother, ok now pick brother or you, then kill you anyway. you kill your own father, a pretty messed up thing to do, meaning the guy is still there and you are all still in danger, rather than just attempting to stab the guy. hes almost touching her elbow, its not like she has to lunge across the room. the pianist put up more fight with zero weapons. all they had do was have the guy stand back from her and it makes sense instead of like he is milling around at a party.

what was with mr rapey the motel manager doing that where he works and then the terrible line, i like apples, how dya like them apples. did she walk around smelling of apples so she could spring that awful predictable line next time she met someone a bit gropey.

what kind of college kid has a barcode scanner in his dorm room, what kind of freaky funtime does he use it for?, and who throws out 4 people they are hanging with because someone asks to speak to them, rather than first stepping outside to find out what they are afer, she could of just been asking to borrow something and been gone in 30 seconds and he just sent everyone home, wtf. just cut in a scene of her phoning or txting him that she really needs him and have him already clearing the place when she shows up, so so simple and it makes sense, and means your extras arent sitting by a switched off computer staring at their feet not actually using it like they are just waiting to get up and walk out, rather than acting like a college kid in someones dorm room.

such terrible terrible lines, how can the reply to 'these books are from there' be, 'your talking about mr choose it, how the hell do you know that'. she didnt even mention him, she is an amateur journalist looking into something weird or she just wants to know how come someone left these random book for her which did not come from the library, she didnt mention anything about it being to do with that serial killer on the news, even if its in the news a lot, why would you assume she is involved when she has said zip about it. do most people go around asking their friends, you want directions? your going to meet that serial killer/bank robber that was recently mentioned on the news arent you? i mean if you say how the hell do you know that, youre going to be asking about something that came out of the blue and hasnt been mentioned before, so if she hasnt mentioned it before, and hasnt mentioned it now, where are you getting it from? psychic, everyone else in a movie knows what the protaganist is up to power?

she goes to see her father and manages to just walk in on an ongoing police murder investigation, not weird at all, but then she hands over the books that she says she just got given by the killer and the response is 'this is dangerous, why are you holding onto this stuff'. erm, she isnt, thats why shes brought it to you, what was she supposed to do, just leave evidence from the killer on the bus. and notice that there is zero concern that the killer is sniffing around her, he acts like he still doesnt believe her crazy stories, even though last time she showed up and described the next crime scene they would go to, he believed her because he then repeated the description to another cop and it turned out to be spot on, so by now he knows, that yes, this dangerous serial killer is leaving gifts for his daughter, and yet he doesnt blink, people dont act like this, cops definitly dont.

what was with the deranged old dr dude, oh yeh, you, get out of the car. how about shes waiting in the car because they are going to dinner after and she isnt there to see you hence she is in the car, do you often have someone come to meet you and walk past them and go talk to their kid instead. and how could he be telling them they cant stop this guy and the guy is leading them on a merry chase unless he has some idea who it might be, and why would that not think to ask? like, well it seems theres someone you met who was kinda intense, you seem to have someone in mind at least, mind telling us who that is, because, ya know, at this point, you being the crazy old dude obsessed with choices, and we have a killer obsessed with choices, maybe we like you for being an accomplice, so talk up grandpa. instead they are handed boxes of confidential doctor/patient tapes of 'therapy' sessions, with no warrant, and the guy clearly knowing who on the tapes they will notice, when they have watched through all 500 hours he just gave them, wouldnt you at least ask? and the tapes also show evidence of malpractice, showing the kids a dog and asking hypothetically would they do something after they have taken the dog away, and it isnt still in their arms is one thing for research or god knows what that was supposed to show, it was meant to be therapy but was more like experimentation on the kids like a milgram type thing. but would you tell kids locked up they could go free if they kill the dog, while the kid has his arm round the dogs neck already? you dont foresee this possibly going wrong, as you tell them they wont be in trouble, the dogs dead anyway, and they will be released. what do they think the kids are in there for in the first place? law abiding adults in the milgram experiment were prepared to shock someone to death who was begging for mercy just by being told it was ok by a supposed authority and they wont be blamed, telling a criminal kid to kill a dog and there will be no consequences, that dog wouldnt have lasted past 9 out of 10 of them, thats hardly proof the kid is warped, its more proof that thats what humans do when told there are no consequences and morality isnt part of it as the dog is dead anyway. and yeh, would the doc be so laidback about revealing his unethical psychiatric experiments on convicted minors that went wrong? i mean let them see the dog and become attached, but take it the feck away before you suggest they should kill it, if you leave it in their arms they can kill or harm it before you can say only joking. that proved nothing other than dogs necks break and that quack was dangerously irresponsible.

also the doc knew who theyd be looking for and seems to have known he was on the hitlist as he talked about there being no way to stop the guy, so what, instead of leaving town or asking the police for help, he chooses to wait for the guy to show up, 'ive been expecting you' style to be melted in acid, over what? the guilt of letting a dog die 20 years ago?

oh and the ending, the killers dad was letting him 'work' in the motel, or he just knew what his son was doing, as he knew who the girl was etc, but the son never worked out who his dad was? you would think the kid who killed his mom would be just as angry at the father who also never came to get him out of those hell holes he grew up in, never showed him any love etc, surely hed have given him the same fate, so why did he just ignore him and let him live or maybe even be working with him. dumb for the story just to throw in a 'twist' ending.

why is it everytime my girlfriends friends all want to watch the same movie, its something so good awful, there are so many great movies but they always assume they will be to hard to follow if they are actually good. i wasnt allowed to bitch at the time so thank god i can come here and get my fix.

reply

I've just seen this film on TV. I agree with all the issues you raised. I find all thrillers/horrors have plot and character holes. I often say 'I would do that' or 'not do that'. Or ask myself why they haven't figured it out already!

But I still enjoyed the film in a silly sort of way. I've seen worse thrillers/horrors. I was in the mood for a creepy and dark film! It wasn't up there with Silence of the Lambs or Seven, but as I say, seen worse! And it wasn't too long - I like my films no longer than 90 minutes!

reply

hey different strokes for different folks, nothing wrong with that, i just hate the silly little things that could be improved with a single line of dialogue or one more take, and hey i was upfront that this is not what i picked to watch but the premise was good and could have pleasently surprised me with just a rewrite in a few places. when you think how hard it is to get a movie made, the fact there are great film makers with amazing ideas who take years to break into the business, i just think if you are lucky enough to get the budget, studio support, all those people on the crew, all working to make your movie, you have a responsibility to not make silly mistakes that have a dire effect. so easy to fix most of the things on my list of gripes, anyone whod directed an episode of a mildy good tv show should have been able just make a couple adjustments and raise this film considerably, they were good elements if only they utilised them better.

reply

Psychic, everyone else in a movie knows what the protagonist is up to power. That is purest win! LOL
I think the real problem with this film it the writing. It send like they found a writer with a really great idea for a movie, and then let him/her run amok on the grounds that it was her/his idea.
The character development was painfully weak, even where the writer made an effort, (Fiona & her dad).Take for instance Dr.What's-his-name talking about this killer. He's all "You'll never catch him, he'll get you long before..." "He's chosen you." This is total left-field information. We have been shown nothing whatsoever that hints at exceptional intelligence on this guy's part, yet now he's Wile E. Coyote - Supergenius.
Another example is they obviously meant to convey that her father took her completely seriously but didn't want her to know it, they just failed to give it credence by not writing enough proper development.
And why wouldn't she have told her father about the chat? Or that the pop-up she DID tell him about said click here to choose? And the entirely unnecessary and contrived twist? Just why?
I sound like I didn't like this movie but i did, but I am all the more frustrated with it for the poor writing. I know this was a film with a pretty low budget, but it really could have been excellent if someone had simply had the courage to challenge the writer at some point in the film's production.

reply

Doesn't the director have the final say/edit, though? As the OP writes, many of the movie's problems could have been corrected with minor changes in dialogue and/or direction - a worried look, the dad saying to another cop "I want surveillance on her," etc.

reply

Well, re the guy with the scanner, I'd say just look at her, then at the other four; easy choice, if you'll pardon the obvious pun? And the books are all about choice psychology, so his guessing she was onto/after the "choose killer" didn't seem to me too far-fetched a guess on his part.

The girl at the beginning couldn't have maybe played for time by stabbing her dad in the shoulder or something, maybe get the guy away from her brother so she could at least try to get the gun away/stab *him*? OK; she's young and terrified. But, in that incident, it's the innocent daughter he most traumatizes, not his actual target, the father, who should have been the one forced to make a choice. And he sees the guy as a real d**k to the point of wanting him dead, yet is confident he'll be noble and self-sacrificing in that situation?

This is the least of the movie's issues, but no way she could rinse her hair in a shower with such low water pressure.

However! I agree with you re everything else. Her cop dad learns she's being sent gruesome photos, and no reaction? Then that they are of a just-discovered murder victim, and *still* no reaction?! (Though she never mentioned that the woman was young; oops.) I expected him to order 24/7 surveillance on her as soon as she left!

The shrink (Oh, Mr. Dern,) who *has* to know the history of his patients, is shocked! shocked, I say! when a very disturbed kid makes a pretty damned predictable choice, given his backstory?? And Right - how the hell does he know Fiona is at all involved, let alone "chosen," or that Dad is a detective? (Did they call first?)

MY PRIMARY GRIPE: The first incident sets up a very good - i.e., horrible - premise. But neither of the two subsequent victims is allowed to choose, let alone forced to do so!! And why not force a choice on both Pendleton - didn't we learn from Breaking Bad that acid eats through porcelain? - and the Dad, instead of simply killing them? (The movie was running too long? As you point out, the insertion of some dialogue could "cover" this.)

After what she's just been through, Fiona just climbs into a truck without so much as a glance at its driver - just No. Not to mention that she's apparently wandered off leaving her father's body with that of his killer. And what, did Nathan suddenly lose the ability to move his arms or something, or decide to commit suicide-by-half-sister?

Yup, some tweaking here and there could have done much to improve this movie.

reply