Rating: 2/5
Synopsis:
Director Steven Soderbergh returns with another experimental film. Here, he tackles a complex drama combined with a supernatural thriller. A family moves into a nice suburban home, quickly realizing that a presence also inhabits the residence. As we see the dynamic of their family unfold, the presence’s interactions become more frequent. Can the family unravel the mystery that looms within their home?
Positives:
I always appreciate a creative effort that attempts something new. Steven Soderbergh is always up for a challenge. Even this late into his career he is still trying new camera angles, story formats, and thematic exploration. “Presence” is a film that doesn’t follow the pattern of any other plot, challenging what audiences come to expect from a ghost story. Soderbergh has some unique editing to the way he presents POV. The story is told entirely from the presence’s perspective. This gives the viewer an insight of how a spirit may perceive the people it haunts. There is an unsettling factor that the audience experiences from this angle since we know they’re being watched (even though they don’t). The performances flow pretty well, providing insight into each character’s struggle within their relationships. Although the story didn’t come together I still commend the unique experience.
Negatives:
“Presence” had so much potential to be a memorable experience. Unfortunately, the direction the story takes creates a number of problems for the viewing experience. The film’s editing choices make for an extremely choppy experience. We see conversations with the characters that are ended with a quick, random blank screen that feels jolting each time it happens. This becomes a gimmick throughout the film that becomes more unpleasant the more it happens. The story is completely devoid of scares and tension too. This is a huge bummer because it was marketed as a nightmarish experience in the trailers. They used every sequence that the entity revealed itself in the previews, leading audiences to believe that they were in for something else. What we get is a family drama that is being observed by an entity that may have ties to the daughter. I don’t feel bad sharing this detail because the film tries tricking the audience into buying a ticket for something completely different.
The problems presented within the family are largely unresolved too. It ends on a sour note that puts the family in a worse spot than they were in before. Audiences should know that this is not a horror film whatsoever. The camera angles Soderbergh uses don’t pay off either. There is a strange roundness to the screen, where the edges feel like the outside of a circle and the center of the camera zooms too close. Again, while it’s a unique approach…it makes for an unpleasant format. The film reminds me of last year’s “In a Violent Nature”, where a presentation from the killer’s perspective gives audiences something new. Much like that film, it’s a big swing and a miss.
Conclusion:
Steven Soderbergh never stops with his experimental filmmaking. His efforts don’t go unnoticed but they don’t pay off in this situation. While some may appreciate the unique perspective based presentation, most audiences will find this to be a chore to get through. At eighty five minutes, the film feels too long…and that’s saying something. Some neat creative decisions can’t offset the dull nature of the film. Audiences coming for good scares or lingering tension will also be disappointed. The film is completely mismarketed and audiences should know that before going in. I don’t see most viewers appreciating the film’s creative swings so I’ll advise those thinking about seeing it to stay away.