Red Knot (2014) Reviews

• Great Acting and Cinematography, Poor Script

  hilaryjrp2017-12-11

  "Red Knot" is a good film with a very ominous title. Vincent Kartheiser and Olivia Thirlby excel in their roles as Peter and Chloe, newly-marrieds who impulsively honeymoon aboard a freighter bound for Antarctica. And how could cinematography in the golden age of video be not excellent? In general, this film's reach does not exceed its grasp. If the documentary "March of the Penguins" could be combined with the Benedict Cumberbatch/Sam O'Neill mini-series, "To the Ends of the Earth," you'd have "Red Knot." Independent movies in 2017 in general rely far too much on 1) non-verbal narrative--characters' lingering, meaningful looks--and 2) infatuation with digital photography. "Red Knot's" *story* is excellent, so why muddy an excellent story with excellent lead actors and excellent cinematography with a confused and confusing script? The story is basically Chloe's, not Peter's. Starry-eyed about marriage, she learns how fast a claustrophobic sea voyage will make you develop your inner self. Strangely, the addition of the kinds of scenes that could have made this movie great would have cost no money--for example, the prescient scene where Chloe decides to skip out on the first mate's (?) pre-voyage lecture about safety in case of troubles on the high seas. More script would have made "Red Knot" a hit. In Chloe's case, inner self means not only skipping safety instructions for sex in a bunk bed but expedited understanding of a husband's potentially murderous or suicidal character. Peter's quick disdain for her in favor of the company of highly trained researchers superficially explains his unusual choice of their honeymoon trip. But this is *his* honeymoon, not Chloe's. Billy Campbell as the Captain is very good and slightly mysterious--but is he or anyone at all real or imagined, flesh-and-blood or a dream? Because of many never-explained jumps to pastoral green settings, it's unclear whether "Red Knot" is not in fact entirely surreal, a prolonged nightmare like the one Chloe has in the middle of the film. When Chloe's claustrophobia gets too much, the Captain is always there to rescue her. Almost always. A better-developed script wouldn't necessarily have ruined "Red Knot's" impressionism. More dialogue or even more development of Chloe's growing loneliness and feelings of abandonment (at the antipodes of the planet) wouldn't have undercut the artiness the film clearly craved. And Peter's ultimate reveal, his vulnerability, would have been more believable if the audience actually had narrative to support it. There are no minor characters. There are talking heads but not characters; and this isn't a bad thing, because even the title, "Red Knot," makes it clear this movie is about the breathtaking isolation of marriage without communication or love. The final sequence is absolutely unsatisfying. That the film's first scene opens with what will also be its last scene is additionally weird--or else a statement that *all* of "Red Knot" is symbolic. Antarctica's terrifying barrenness is not the type of terrain where inexperienced travelers would be allowed to roam at will. In motorboats. Motorboats they pilot alone. So maybe even Antarctica is a cold desolate world Chloe has dreamt, as well as a real ice-world. So is "Red Knot's" conclusion as dire as all the cliffs and snow and vanishing foot-tracks suggest? I don't know. Is the film to be taken at all literally? I don't know. Is Vincent Kartheiser's trademark (apparently) cruel aloof lover sincerely capable of lying to his bride in order to keep her? Don't know that, either. The odd scenes of penguins on paradisaical green grass may be the best clue that "Red Knot" is just as impossible and not to be taken literally. That doesn't detract from the story of Chloe's premature, fast-tracked journey to the heart of marital darkness.

• Amazing film. Spot on performances.

  rogermanning9952015-09-25

  This is really well done. It's subtleties make this movie particularly good. Performances are very well balanced - not overdone, a lot of really good non-verbal delivery. Olivia is brilliant and Vincent nails it too. Great editing/pacing. Great cinematography. Perfect shots of incredible vistas, wildlife, weather, the sea. On location to Antarctica - can't imagine pulling that off. All locations actual - including the tight confines of the ship (required shooting through mirrors). Very effective music score. Main potential criticism is lack of story, but I don't think that's the case. There's a magnitude of story and many layers between the lines - though appreciation is likely reliant on the viewer's degree of personal life experience.

• Selfies

  westsideschl2015-08-03

  Positive: To whomever invented FF. Negatives: 1. Glacial - as one person described it. Well, if watching ice melt is your thing then have at it. 2. If sharing "selfies" with the world and former friends (used to be friends until you inundated them with "selfless") then the preponderance of head/facial closeups, mostly of our couple, will have you screaming for an escape. 3. If simulated sex on a bunk bed excites, there is some of that too, but it was pretty boring. 4. Not very believable expedition behavior on the part of everyone from scientists to ship captain. Acting was too scripted, and rote reading robotic. 5. Even the more documentary aspects were brief and cheap e.g. whale in ocean, penguin on land, ice wherever it happens to pop up. 6. Even the background music throughout the film didn't fit with the environment. Sounded monotonic like a cello out of tune. I suppose it was to represent isolation/vast desolation. I would just as soon go into a closet and shut the door.

• Can't hear a doggone thing

  davethemathtutor2016-07-06

  This looked like it might have been a good movie. The music and the cinematography appeared to have been well done. But the sound level was very low, and the dang DVD didn't have any subtitles or captioning, so the dialogue was a mystery to me. I'm sure the characters were saying important things to each other, but they might as well have stayed silent. I'm not planning on giving this movie any particular number of stars (unless the website forces me to, in which case I'll give it 5 stars since it's a toss-up), because how can I rate a movie I never really experienced? This is very frustrating. Note to filmmakers, DVD makers, or whoever it is that's responsible for what goes on the DVD: INCLUDE A CAPTIONING OPTION!

• Nice unassumingly film

  cheer882018-06-11

  I guess this one was never released to the major or minor medias. I found it on Hulu and was temped enough to watch it. Cinematography is stunningly good. The storyline is straight forward no complicated schemes involved. Maybe that is the problem. There was in need for some melodramatic scenes to make points. It's too clean and fluid. Some details of main characters' past should have been prevailed into the current. It's not bad or anything but it's not impressed enough to become memorable. I supposed the director tried to use Antarctica as a backdrop to display human conditions. But I felt the whole story had little to do with the location. They were a young and married couple. Disagreements and arguments happened just like others at that age. They were not exceptional in any ways with or without being in Antarctica. They could be arguing on the busy street in New York City as well. Circumstances would not matter. That was also the reason why elaborating plot was needed to avoid the commonalities. The visual is good. It has the quality of documentary films. It just needed some booze.