SHERDOG MOVIE CLUB: Week 98 Discussion - Kill List

Not as good as I remember it being. To be honest I didn't really love it this time around. Funny how you can remember movies being better than they really are.

Sorry to those who disliked it! :oops:

I can't complain. I voted for it.
 
Not as good as I remember it being. To be honest I didn't really love it this time around. Funny how you can remember movies being better than they really are.

Sorry to those who disliked it! :oops:

I actually did like it. I especially felt that the mood and tone of the film felt ominous pretty much at all times, even when nothing was happening. It had a great score and lighting to help this effect out. Its not the greatest film I've ever seen but it turned on me multiple times. It started as a film about a couple who fight really bad but also seem to have periods where they love each other. Then it turned into a hit man film where the husband is trying to save his marriage. Then it turned into an, O.M.G., WTF just happened, and where is this going?
 
I have a write up coming, but no, the wife wasn't in on it. The director was asked specifically about why she would laugh like that and he said that she was laughing at the irony of it all. When they were knife fighting she didn't know it was him and he didn't know it was her.

That seems dumb. The look on her face and the laugh seems to indicate that she was in on the whole thing. And then you cross-reference that with the fact that she had been spending so much time with the dark-haired bitch and that seems to confirm it. But then you remember that she was killing cult members with the pistol, so you're like, "But why was she killing cult members if she was in on it?"

If that was the director's intention then I think it was poorly executed. Her husband was standing across from her shirtless. She didn't recognize his pretty distinctive body and put two and two together?
 
I think we can safely assume that it was a cult of Satanists. We might even say their symbol is an A so they could be a cult of the Anti-Christ. It doesn't really matter what you call them but you have to start from that premise for anything to make sense. For example, why were the victims on the kill list saying "Thank You"? The Priest said it, the Librarian said it. In fact the Librarian took it a step further. When Gal went to check the safe and he was alone with Jay, he says to Jay, you don't even know who you are, and then laughed. The Librarian makes it a point, like the Priest, to thank Jay ahead of time for killing him.

I meant to mention all of the religious elements in my original post.

First off, just to get this out there, I don't think Gal was in on it, as you have mentioned a few times. I think he said "thanks" because his fucking guts were hanging out and he was ready to die, not because he was a cult member. If he was in on it, then why did he open fire on the cultists and kill several of them and why did they kill him?

I think that Gal might actually represent the good/positive aspect of the Gal/Jay duo. Remember that it was Gal who was iffy about killing the priest, who crossed himself in the church, who apologized to the Christians in the restaurant and who Jay referred his son to when his son started asking questions about heaven.

So Gal is good, Jay is evil. Gal is friendly toward Christianity, Jay is hostile to it.

I'm not sure why everyone else thanked him before he killed them though and it's unexplained in the film. I don't think there really is any way to know for sure what that was all about. The film just doesn't give us enough information.

There's also the scene in the kitchen--the hammer scene--where the guy is like, "He (Gal) doesn't know who you are, does he?" But again, this is never really explained so we're just left to speculate about what he may have meant by that.
 
I meant to mention all of the religious elements in my original post.

First off, just to get this out there, I don't think Gal was in on it, as you have mentioned a few times. I think he said "thanks" because his fucking guts were hanging out and he was ready to die, not because he was a cult member. If he was in on it, then why did he open fire on the cultists and kill several of them and why did they kill him?

I think that Gal might actually represent the good/positive aspect of the Gal/Jay duo. Remember that it was Gal who was iffy about killing the priest, who crossed himself in the church, who apologized to the Christians in the restaurant and who Jay referred his son to when his son started asking questions about heaven.

So Gal is good, Jay is evil. Gal is friendly toward Christianity, Jay is hostile to it.

I'm not sure why everyone else thanked him before he killed them though and it's unexplained in the film. I don't think there really is any way to know for sure what that was all about. The film just doesn't give us enough information.

There's also the scene in the kitchen--the hammer scene--where the guy is like, "He (Gal) doesn't know who you are, does he?" But again, this is never really explained so we're just left to speculate about what he may have meant by that.

Bro, it only makes sense if you understand what the cult was all about. They were a cult of death so Gal shooting them is not really a problem, they kill their own on the regular. I'm not going to argue the Gal angle in this post though. I want to stick to the "Thank You" part. All the members of the cult said thank you because it was a privilege to be killed by their chosen one, Jay. Its very similar in idea to the nanny in Omen jumping off the roof for Damian. They will sacrifice themselves for the anti-Christ. Its always about blood sacrifice with Christianity and Satanism.



We've seen it over and over in movies. There is no other way that the film makes sense. Jay was that special selected one, for whatever reason, that they would kill and even die for. The Librarian practically reveals it because the Librarian all but tells him he is the anti-Christ.
 
Bro, it only makes sense if you understand what the cult was all about. They were a cult of death so Gal shooting them is not really a problem, they kill their own on the regular. I'm not going to argue the Gal angle in this post though. I want to stick to the "Thank You" part. All the members of the cult said thank you because it was a privilege to be killed by their chosen one, Jay. Its very similar in idea to the nanny in Omen jumping off the roof for Damian. They will sacrifice themselves for the anti-Christ. Its always about blood sacrifice with Christianity and Satanism.



We've seen it over and over in movies. There is no other way that the film makes sense. Jay was that special selected one, for whatever reason, that they would kill and even die for. The Librarian practically reveals it because the Librarian all but tells him he is the anti-Christ.


Do you feel that Wheatley is trying to make any kind of statement about Christianity in this film?
 
Do you feel that Wheatley is trying to make any kind of statement about Christianity in this film?

Obviously he is. He put a table of Christians in the film and Jay said he not only was going to murder them all, but that he was going to do it slow. Jay didn't just want to kill them, he wanted to kill them in a torturous way. He also gave us the Priest, the first victim on the Kill List, who was obviously a member of the death cult and not really a Christian at all, or he was a bad Christian, however you want to view it. I don't think he set out to make a film that disparages Christians, it was more a matter of that's just how it fit in.

The entire thing is difficult to dissect which is why I said in the beginning of this thread that the film needs more than 1 watch to really form an opinion on these things. Was Jay the anti-Christ? I can't say, but the evidence is....

1. That he was someone special. The old man that hired them, simply known as "The Client", cut Jay's hand to introduce blood into the equation.
2. All Jay's victim's said "Thank You" to Jay as he was killing them, including Gal.
3. They willingly sacrificed themselves to him. (Same as Damian's nanny in the Omen)
4. The Librarian almost comes right out and says that Jay is some sort of special person, remarking that Gal doesn't even know.
5. Fiona specifically marked Jay's home with the sign of the cult. They weren't looking for Gal, it was Jay they were focused on.

So what can I draw from this? I don't know. They were into blood sacrifice and Jay was the focus on their machinations only they didn't want Jay dead, they loved Jay and would die for Jay. I have to assume he was the anti-Christ or some sort of figure that is similar.
 
Obviously he is. He put a table of Christians in the film and Jay said he not only was going to murder them all, but that he was going to do it slow. Jay didn't just want to kill them, he wanted to kill them in a torturous way. He also gave us the Priest, the first victim on the Kill List, who was obviously a member of the death cult and not really a Christian at all, or he was a bad Christian, however you want to view it. I don't think he set out to make a film that disparages Christians, it was more a matter of that's just how it fit in.

The entire thing is difficult to dissect which is why I said in the beginning of this thread that the film needs more than 1 watch to really form an opinion on these things. Was Jay the anti-Christ? I can't say, but the evidence is....

1. That he was someone special. The old man that hired them, simply known as "The Client", cut Jay's hand to introduce blood into the equation.
2. All Jay's victim's said "Thank You" to Jay as he was killing them, including Gal.
3. They willingly sacrificed themselves to him. (Same as Damian's nanny in the Omen)
4. The Librarian almost comes right out and says that Jay is some sort of special person, remarking that Gal doesn't even know.
5. Fiona specifically marked Jay's home with the sign of the cult. They weren't looking for Gal, it was Jay they were focused on.

So what can I draw from this? I don't know. They were into blood sacrifice and Jay was the focus on their machinations only they didn't want Jay dead, they loved Jay and would die for Jay. I have to assume he was the anti-Christ or some sort of figure that is similar.

I do agree it's obvious that the cult thinks Jay is special in some way, but I don't think he's supposed to be THE anti-Christ.

After all, the anti-Christ is supposed to be a charismatic world leader or high-profile individual who sways nations toward his thinking. It seems hard for me to believe that this cult thought Jay would somehow rise to such heights.
 
I do agree it's obvious that the cult thinks Jay is special in some way, but I don't think he's supposed to be THE anti-Christ.

After all, the anti-Christ is supposed to be a charismatic world leader or high-profile individual who sways nations toward his thinking. It seems hard for me to believe that this cult thought Jay would somehow rise to such heights.

He's playing an archetype of evil. The anti-Christ is just one such example. Wherever you settle on it, there is definitely something to Jay more than meets the eye. All the hints are there but the director, for whatever reason, decided not to tell us precisely what he means. Plus mistakes were made. If Gal is not in on it why was there so much evidence to the contrary? Its kinda like what we saw in the movie Prisoners. There were mistakes made either on the part of the writer or the director or both.
 
He's playing an archetype of evil. The anti-Christ is just one such example. Wherever you settle on it, there is definitely something to Jay more than meets the eye. All the hints are there but the director, for whatever reason, decided not to tell us precisely what he means. Plus mistakes were made. If Gal is not in on it why was there so much evidence to the contrary? Its kinda like what we saw in the movie Prisoners. There were mistakes made either on the part of the writer or the director or both.

As far as I can tell your strongest evidence that Gal was in on it consists of him saying "thanks" and him not having his hand cut during the meeting with the cult leader guy.

I don't see either of those as particularly strong forms of evidence honestly.
 
As far as I can tell your strongest evidence that Gal was in on it consists of him saying "thanks" and him not having his hand cut during the meeting with the cult leader guy.

I don't see either of those as particularly strong forms of evidence honestly.

1. Gal is the one that took Jay to the man hiring them with the kill list who is a cult member or leader.
2. Gal did not take a cut to the hand. It seems like if he wasn't in on it he would have been required to.
3. Gal's dinner date was Fiona, who we know was a cult member and who marked the back of the bathroom mirror.
4. Gal said thanks as Jay killed him, same as the others on the kill list.

The fact that Gal was dating a cult member and introduced Jay to "The Client" is not a good look. It really makes him look involved.
 
Good movie.

I liked the movie for it's plebian script and dialogue, the naturalistic acting, the smatterings of really visceral violence here and there, and the thin veener of a ghostly mood that hung over much of the picture.

That said, I also felt that the main mystery never really felt that tantalizing to uncover. The satanic shenanigans didn't have much pondus to them. The film was better when it focused on Jay alongside his friends and family, with the supernatural hovering in the background. When the Zerg Rush happened it took me out of the story a little.


On the filmmaking side, notice how many smash cuts the film employs. They cut right from when Jay is fighting or arguing with either Shel or Gal, to them making up afterwards. It's a speedy trick of juxtaposition. Hell they probably cut right before Jay displays his wicked 10th-Planet guard! Another example being when they decide to go after the Librarian and cut right to them socking him in the face. I think this was a well-picked editing style since it bridges scenes were quickly, keeps to story flowing, and as mentioned juxtaposes the modes so to give an impression.



* Shel's phone-call was entirely improvised by MyAnna Buring. The filmmakers had no idea what she said until much later.

She was talking to her mom about Jay. She said that she doesn't know what to do anymore and that talking to him is like talking to a wall.


was a hybrid of the styles and themes of Get Carter and H. P. Lovecraft

I get the Get Carter vibe, in how the characters act and their plebian, unpleasant mannerism. But I don't get the Lovecraft vibe at all. It's more marrowed in the old satanic/pagan-cult stories than it is to anything I would vagely describe as Cosmic Horror.

the language barrier I had trouble knowing what was happening
The very first thing I want to say is thank God for subtitles. Because without them I wouldn't have been able to understand about a third of what was said in this film, the limey fucks.


Gtmid+winter+gthigh+school+girls+wearing+shortsdresses+_b198a4010128e5159eaf8e64a7ee7235.jpg


Really? I watch almost all my films with Swedish subtitles. This was one of those rare instances where I didn't and I understood virtually everything fairly simple, expect when they were speaking in hushed voices.


Last weaks films -- Trollhunter -- was pretty ghastly for me since half the cast I could understand almost perfectly fine while the other half sounded like they spoke the dark tounge of Mordor.

I think there was an interesting idea here, and some of the execution is very impressive (especially for a relatively inexperienced director working with only an $800,000 budget)

I wonder if the nudists worked for free.

How the hell do you coerce a pack of people to get naked, grab their torches and hold a satanic, wicker-man ritual in the middle of the night on an $800,000 budget? My fridays could get a lot more interesting if I somehow figuered out what trick he used to achieve that...

I have always wondered about endings. It seems endings are one of if not the most important part of a film to a lot people.

Well that is where the catharsis is usually to be given.

But I think it depends a lot on the films structure. Some movies are build-ups towards an climactic apex. Other are more like episodes of cool stuff happening.

The director was asked specifically about why she would laugh like that and he said that she was laughing at the irony of it all.

I agree with shadow, that was poorly executed and didn't convey a sense of irony at all. Especially since the wife never seemed like the sardonic sort, so her laughing at some sort of Greek Tradgedy-esque fate befalling her seems rather out-of-character.

Maybe they didn't have enough cash to reshoot it and needed that footage in there.


Some people believe the entire film is a dream

Honestly seems like a rather pointless dream if that was the case. It's not like what's happening could be understood as projections of his dormant consciousness or mental-demons coming out to haunt him.

I think we can safely assume that it was a cult of Satanists

Their get-up was pretty pagan though. With the wicker-man and all (but it's not like real-life satanist tend to distinguish between pagan and luciferian regalia anyways). But I don't really think the director was after a specifically satanic vibe, just something abstractly, iconically evil -- to vauge to properly identify but clear enough for the viewer to assossiate them with the forces of Darkness.

There was also some foreshadowing in there you can't catch the first time around.

lol, that's a good one.

1. Gal is the one that took Jay to the man hiring them with the kill list who is a cult member or leader.

Well... that is his job. He's done it for what have to be at least a dozen times before.

Not as good as I remember it being. To be honest I didn't really love it this time around. Funny how you can remember movies being better than they really are.

Well... how did you remember it then and how did it disappoint you this time?

It started as a film about a couple who fight really bad but also seem to have periods where they love each other.

Well a lot of bellicose relationship seems to tend to be pretty bipolar. Love each other one second and fisty-cuffs the next one and then back to evertrue love again. The smash-cutting presented that aspect really well, I thought.

3. Gal's dinner date was Fiona, who we know was a cult member and who marked the back of the bathroom mirror.

Nothing that indicates Gal knew of this, however.

Also, if Gal is supposed to be an undercover cultist, then the cult is really pulling a long-con. Gal and Jay have know each other since at least their military days, meaning they had to have been friends for well-over-a-decade by now. Also, if Gal is a cultist, then why does he act so normal when Jay ain't around?
 
Last edited:
I liked the movie for it's plebian script and dialogue, the naturalistic acting, the smatterings of really visceral violence here and there, and the thin veener of a ghostly mood that hung over much of the picture.

That said, I also felt that the main mystery never really felt that tantalizing to uncover. The satanic shenanigans didn't have much pondus to them. The film was better when it focused on Jay alongside his friends and family, with the supernatural hovering in the background. When the Zerg Rush happened it took me out of the story a little.


On the filmmaking side, notice how many smash cuts the film employs. They cut right from when Jay is fighting or arguing with either Shel or Gal, to them making up afterwards. It's a speedy trick of juxtaposition. Hell they probably cut right before Jay displays his wicked 10th-Planet guard! Another example being when they decide to go after the Librarian and cut right to them socking him in the face. I think this was a well-picked editing style since it bridges scenes were quickly, keeps to story flowing, and as mentioned juxtaposes the modes so to give an impression.


I agree with shadow, that was poorly executed and didn't convey a sense of irony at all. Especially since the wife never seemed like the sardonic sort, so her laughing at some sort of Greek Tradgedy-esque fate befalling her seems rather out-of-character.

Maybe they didn't have enough cash to reshoot it and needed that footage in there.


Honestly seems like a rather pointless dream if that was the case. It's not like what's happening could be understood as projections of his dormant consciousness or mental-demons coming out to haunt him.



Their get-up was pretty pagan though. With the wicker-man and all (but it's not like real-life satanist tend to distinguish between pagan and luciferian regalia anyways). But I don't really think the director was after a specifically satanic vibe, just something abstractly, iconically evil -- to vauge to properly identify but clear enough for the viewer to assossiate them with the forces of Darkness.



lol, that's a good one.



Well... that is his job. He's done it for what have to be at least a dozen times before.



Well... how did you remember it then and how did it disappoint you this time?



Well a lot of bellicose relationship seems to tend to be pretty bipolar. Love each other one second and fisty-cuffs the next one and then back to evertrue love again. The smash-cutting presented that aspect really well, I thought.



Nothing that indicates Gal knew of this, however.

Also, if Gal is supposed to be an undercover cultist, then the cult is really pulling a long-con. Gal and Jay have know each other since at least their military days, meaning they had to have been friends for well-over-a-decade by now. Also, if Gal is a cultist, then why does he act so normal when Jay ain't around?

As I said in my original post, the film had a very oppressive feel to me from the very beginning so I agree with you that the film had a sort of ghostly mood. Now, at first, when I saw you used the word bellicose, I was like...

giphy.gif


But then you had to go and drop, pondus.

<{cruzshake}>

WTF is a pondus?

Alright, moving on. I'm not saying Gal was in on it but the evidence makes it look like he is. Its another situation where I think the writing or directing was bad. Gal hooks up with Fiona, she's a cult member, Gal takes Jay to meet The Client who is like Satan himself, Gal tells Jay thanks when he kills him like the other cult members did. I'm like really Wheatley? You thought this was a good idea? It just doesn't look good but I can accept that Gal just got played by the cult like Jay did.

You say you don't think Wheatley was after a Satanic vibe but he made damn sure that one of the victims on the kill list was a cult member known as The Priest, and he made a specific scene where Jay wants to slowly murder Christians, and included a lot of blood sacrifice. The vagueness of the cult bothers me because its integral to the plot. We could call them The Cult of Death because they do blood sacrifice and even kill their own, but then we have the problem of who they are actually doing all this sacrifice in the name of?

What is the viewer to think? They are doing sacrifice in the name of Cthulu? And what is the significance of Jay? These people are grateful to be killed by Jay and in a violent manner. I think we have to draw some conclusions otherwise the film falls apart.
 
But then you had to go and drop, pondus.

<{cruzshake}>

WTF is a pondus?

lul you don't know what pondus means?

Let me look it up for you...

...

...

Fuck it's a Swedish word.:oops:

It gets hard keeping all these languages apart in my mind, okay!?<45>

Google translates it as "force," or "authority."

As I said in my original post, the film had a very oppressive feel to me from the very beginning so I agree with you that the film had a sort of ghostly mood. Now, at first, when I saw you used the word bellicose, I was like...

giphy.gif

Man bellicose is a legit, real English word. Why would you even need to consider that?:p
 
lul you don't know what pondus means?

Let me look it up for you...

...

...

Fuck it's a Swedish word.:oops:

It gets hard keeping all these languages apart in my mind, okay!?<45>

Google translates it as "force," or "authority."



Man bellicose is a legit, real English word. Why would you even need to consider that?:p

I'll accept bellicose but if you were my friend and you said man that bitch is bellicose, I would need to slap you or something and tell you not to speak like that in public.
 
I'll accept bellicose but if you were my friend and you said man that bitch is bellicose, I would need to slap you or something and tell you not to speak like that in public.

Man your english language is fucking weird. Is it because bellicose sounds vaugely french-y? If I ever meet you in real life I think I'm going to stick to Swedish just to be on the safe side. Walking the streets saying stuff like pondus and shit. Man that bitch is pondus!
 
Man your english language is fucking weird. Is it because bellicose sounds vaugely french-y? If I ever meet you in real life I think I'm going to stick to Swedish just to be on the safe side. Walking the streets saying stuff like pondus and shit. Man that bitch is pondus!

These guys don't use bellicose.
th


These guys might.
giphy.gif
 
Back
Top