Nor'easter (Adv 15)

Let me again, for the slow of wit or short of memory, remind you of a life lesson - if you sit in a cinema, and a sparsely populated one at that, and start eating popcorn loudly while rustling the bag as if you've lost your last tuppence, expect a reaction. Don't be surprised by the multitude of dirty looks and the shooshing. Trust me, you got off lightly.

On the off-chance that either of the popcorn sisters is reading this, I was the one who shooshed you first. I would have been the second, but someone beat me to it.

On the upside, I'll put money on Nor'easter confusing the hell out of the pair of them.

Shown as part of The Uncharted States Of America section at the Bradford International Film Festival, Nor'easter marks the debut of writer/director Andrew Brotzman, and tells the tale of a wet-behind-the-ears priest given his first posting in a remote north-eastern corner of America.

David Call plays Erik, the priest thrown in at the deep end after his predecessor upset everyone by sleeping with the cop's wife. His church has a flock of three - two stalwarts and Ellen Green (played by the superb Haviland Morris). Ellen has issues. She barely talks to her husband, her daughter seems to be the neighbouring town's bike, and her son hasn't been seen since he was kidnapped some years before.

So, no pressure on the new guy then.

Ellen's husband Richard (Richard Bekins) is still clinging on to the hope son Josh is alive, clinging so hard in fact he's strangling his family. He's lost faith in God, but has faith in his lost son's existence. Well, until Erik proffers closure and redemption by holding a funeral for Josh. This works. Then Josh comes back.

Then things get... well... let's go with interesting.

You see, this film doesn't really know what it's trying to be. It's about faith, but not in any great depth. It's about a man of God's doubts, but not in any great depth. It's supposed to be a thriller (according to a quote from the Portland Herald), but - again - depth is an issue.

And the lack of depth really is a big issue. The film runs for a mere 85 minutes, and in that time we see Ellen try it on with Erik, Erik working with a young ice hockey team, Josh return, where Josh has been, more stuff that I can't go into because it'll ruin the film... but none of it happens to any great satisfaction. Everything is on the surface, which is a hard sell when so much of what should be driving the characters is lurking in far deeper waters.

There are some positives here, though. For a start it looks great (but then so does the Mona Lisa, just don't ask her to tell you a story), and there is a cold detachment that runs through the film that perfectly mirrors the harsh Maine landscapes. And the idea is a good one, no doubt about it.

It just has a lot of problems, and not just with the plot. For a start, the characters are two-dimensional. OK, this might be forgivable with the peripheral players, but apart from some cursory background for Erik, you don't feel you know any of the main players any more by the end than you did at the start.

And that includes Josh.

Now, I know Josh has returned with a secret. He's been somewhere with someone and he won't spill the beans. Not a problem. But it feels like Brotzman didn't know how much or little to reveal, or how he wanted Liam Aiken to portray the myriad of conflicted emotions Josh is going through. Instead of a tortured soul, torn between his two worlds, he just goes for a grumpy teenager.

And then there are the little things. How does Erik get to the right pizza place? Oh, look, she must be the doctor because she's carrying her stethoscope on the outside of her massive medical bag. If the daughter is being 'easy', why is she with the same boy the whole way through? How does a new priest in town get to work with a hockey team so quickly? Why does no-one lock their doors?

I have other issues as well, but am wary of saying too much in case I spoil anything. Let's say this. Where Josh has been is complicated. It raises questions. A lot of questions. None are dealt with. There is redemption, of a sort, but even that is far from satisfactory. And the ending can be read two ways, neither of which will fill you with joy. It left my screening in stunned silence.

But despite all this, I didn't hate it. Far from it. It's certainly thought-provoking, and while Nor'easter is trying to deal with issues and subjects too vast to be fully grasped, it's having a go - and that's to be applauded. For a debut film, it doesn't lack ambition.

Nor'easter trailer

There is almost certainly more - and better - to come from Andrew Brotzman, but from little acorns etc... Hitchcock's debut didn't sweep the world off its feet either.

Nor'easter is a flawed piece of work, but it's still a work worth seeing. In a world where Die Hard and G.I. Joe movies are churned out at the drop of a hand grenade, and where the Scary Movie franchise is on its fifth incarnation, films like Nor'easter that are actually trying to do something original and say something are to be applauded.

Just finish your popcorn before you go in to see it.

(There are probably things I want to add to this, but Steve Earle's new album has just finished, my wine glass is empty, and Richard Parker has finally stopped climbing the door and gone to bed. So I'm gonna follow suit...)

(...Good morning folks)

I was right. The one thing that is clear throughout the film is how ill-equipped Erik is to deal with what he is facing. In fact, he is demonstrably constrained by the rules within which he has to work, leading to the events of the final 20 minutes of Nor'easter.

There are parallels to be drawn as well between Erik's inability to deal with what he discovers and the Catholic church's own in-house issues. That bit will make more sense when you see the film.