Review: The Collector
Director: Marcus Dunston
Year: 2009
Country: USA
Picture the Saw films. Now strip away any semblance of plot until all that remains are the vestiges of a story supported by approximately one hour of excessive gore and torture. Now include a wildly divergent soundtrack, the overuse of filters, and the funniest use of the phrase “You faggot bitch” in cinematic history and you have a good idea of what to expect in Marcus Dunston’s directorial debut, The Collector.
This subversive home invasion flick focuses on a burglar named Arkin who attempts to rob the home of a wealthy diamond broker in order to pay off the loan sharks after his wife. Upon arriving at the house, however, he finds that someone beat him to it: The Collector, a masked man with a pedilection for booby-traps and sparking one victim, which he collects. Arkin must now save the very family he was intending to rob, all while trying to avoid becoming a victim in one of The Collector’s traps.
The Collector is a paradox. From the outside its sole redeeming quality is that what makes other films of its kind so deplorable: all gore, no plot. Once situated and introduced to the characters, however, its decline into convention is inhibited by the performance of Josh Stewart, who plays burglar-turned-hero Arkin. Managing to inject a modicum of emotion into a film that should be completely devoid of all feeling, his perfomance was actually one of the more enjoyable aspects of the film, hindered only by one or two moments of questionable acting. The rest of the cast was interchangeable and served as nothing more than a means to propel the lack of a plot.
Dunston’s direction deserves kudos, employing a number of unique shots designed to elevate tension, though these are often ruined through the use of filters in what I presume was an attempt to be edgy. The film was dark and gritty, however, owing to that as part of its appeal. It didn’t try to be anything more than eighty-five minutes of violence, gore, and tension, the latter of which only managed to be served up in sporadic doses. In that Dunston succeeded.
The Collector is nothing special, but then, it’s not trying to be. It’s level of violence surpasses anything found in Saw not in terms of gruesomeness or creativity, but in terms of distance. Without a plot or characters to genuinely care about, all we’re given is pure, unadulterated violence, and we know everyone is going to get the axe by the end of the film. And that’s enough for me. The film wasn’t perfect, and I wouldn’t go as far as to say I liked it, but I certainly didn’t hate it, and at this point that’s good enough for me.
RSS Feed
I disagree, man. I’m not saying THE COLLECTOR has the best plot ever, but to put it down while standing up for the loosely strung together blood letting of the SAW franchise is more of paradox to me than anything in Dunstan’s flick. Sure, more stuff happens in the SAW franchise but none of it is coherent or logical.
I also don’t think THE COLLECTOR is all gore. There’s only one drop of blood in the first third of the movie (from the mom’s botox needle) and while what remains in the latter half of the film is certainly gory, the only part that stands out as being typically torturous is sewing the mom’s mouth shut.
I’m with you on the crappy lighting, but all of that is confined to the basement, which is a place Dunstan only goes three or four times. Everything that takes place elsewhere in the house has a great, calm color scheme to it.
The only thing I think Dunstan completely blew was the ending, which is needlessly bleak in order to establish a franchise.
While it may seem like I was supporting the Saw films (I assume you’re referring to the first paragraph), that certainly wasn’t my intention. But even without a plot, I still enjoyed The Collector far more than any of the Saw films (except maybe Saw III, which I really liked for some reason, and the basic plot of the first), though I would have loved a liiiiiiitttttle more plot and back story of The Collector himself. I am glad they dispensed of any sort of twist, though, and kept it straightforward.
I do suppose I may have been a little..liberal with my wording. But you make a good point. I suppose “violence” would have been a better word than just torture and gore. But the father in the chair and the mom almost getting her tongue cut out was pretty torturous.
I’ll disagree on the ending, though. I would have been really pissed if they all walked away into the night. While I agree that they could have done it better (the whole ramming the car thing was kinda stupid), it was better than a happy ending. It made sure The Collector actually collected someone. I also don’t think it necessarily meant a franchise was inevitable. He could have easily ended it there with no intention to drag it out like they’re doing with Saw. I mean, he probably won’t, but still.
I blame me being tired when I wrote it and the fact that three days had passed. So yeah. Good points, though, and thanks for the comment.
The granddaddy of the modern horror film, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, had a downer ending. The guy in the box tells us, “He only takes one.” Why are we surprised when he takes one in the end? I agree that there isn’t alot of plot. But is there much plot in TAKEN? It’s all set-up. The girl gets taken and he goes from scene to scene kicking ass. That movie is filled with all sorts of coincidences and there’s a little bit of some clue searching. But no one really complained about the miniscule story there. I think THE COLLECTOR takes it on the chin because it’s the bad guy who’s dishing out the pain and that’s “mindless” to us. But when good guy Liam Neeson dishes out the pain (with all the wrath of PG-13), we accept that.
THE COLLECTOR is a scary and very tense movie. Sure it’s flawed but it accomplishes what it sets out to do and in that regard, it’s a success.
my mom has a coffe franchise near seattle and she earns a lot from it~`*