Samuel Lickiss
Let's first of all say that this isn't the sort of film I'd ordinarily watch, and I started watching it by accident after searching Netflix for 'The Circle', which a friend had recommended to me, starring Emma Watson, Tom Hanks, Karen Gillan among other well-known actors. 'Circle', however, contains no one famous. It became obvious pretty quickly that I was watching the wrong film, but something about it kept me interested. For all intents and purposes, it looks like a horror, which I don't usually like, but it's not remotely scary and is better described as a psychological thriller. It's not really that either - there's no action. In fact, the entire cast spend the entire film standing in a circle (and around in a circle) until they get killed off, whereby they disappear. Their deaths come at the hands of a mysterious orb thing in the middle of said circle that zaps them and they collapse. Not gruesome or gratuitous at all.The best way I can describe is a combination of 'Waiting for Godot' meets the quiz show 'The Weakest Link'. Consequently, it defies easy categorisation, but it wastes no time in establishing the theme that lasts for the whole film: a group of fifty men and women (and children) from all different walks of life wake up to find themselves in a circle faced with a machine that will kill one of them every two minutes. The twist? They get to anonymously vote for who gets killed.
I know from having done a fair amount of amateur dramatics that one of the hardest things is being on stage without any lines. It's easy to act when you've got something to say and people to interact with, but just standing there having to react to everything while getting little to do yourself is hard. It's a credit to this cast, the majority of whom are completely unknown, that they all put in solid performances. Few characters get much more than a handful of lines each, and several get none at all, yet each of them feels like a real person with their own history and personality approaching their predicament in their own way. As the characters figure out how the weird death chamber operates, leaders, and later factions, gradually emerge and facilitate discussion among them. How should they decide who gets killed next? One character proposes that the old people should go first - they've already lived their life - while others vehemently disagree: why are their lives less valuable? Another character notices that many of the people who get killed off early are black; others accuse them of 'playing the race card'. The film, ultimately, is a discussion on how we value life. Is it possible to quantify the value of life? Is a pregnant woman really more valuable than a childless person; couples more valuable than singles; white-collar workers more valuable than blue-collar workers; children or the elderly? It's a topical film when we as a planet are facing chronic overpopulation and resource shortages. Debates around euthanasia, for example, often bring up the slippery slope: if an old person gets sick, isn't it just easier to kill them ('euthanasia') rather than invest time, effort and money into caring for them?
It thinks it's cleverer than it actually is. While some of these moral discussions are given sophisticated, intelligent treatment, others, such as a conversation around race, are clunky and feel shoehorned. Also, the fact there are only two minutes between each death means there's little depth and dialogue exchanges are vanishingly brief. Nevertheless, it's a film that I found myself thinking about: what would I do in their situation? How would I play it? I think most people watching it will find themselves siding and associating with particular characters quite quickly, whether they would admit it or not.
It's a great film for starting discussions. I watched it with a few friends and we spent quite a long time talking about this, and while the film itself may not be overly deep, you can build on that in your own time. It's not perfect: the ending leaves a lot to be desired (though could set up a sequel), some deaths feel completely random with little rhyme or reason (like the script writers couldn't think of one), and because the film attempts to cover just about every facet of society it does feel a little thin rather than focusing on one or two topical issues. The bottom line is I found myself really engaged in 'Circle'. It's a great example of what filmmakers can achieve with limited budgets. 'Circle' features one set, but it's brilliantly designed - striking and sinister. The sound design is equally ominous and adds to the chilling atmosphere. The camerawork and editing is good, and the directors have done a great job with the cast. The last film I watched on Netflix was 'Stasis', which was a painful mess from start to finish, so 'Circle' was a welcome and refreshing change.
isaacridgwell
The movie starts off with 50 random people waking up in a strange room. They all have to stand on red spots, if they move from that position they instantly die. Every 1-2 minutes one of them dies. Eventually the group find out that they can vote on who dies, and this ensues a deadly wheel of fortune. The premise of the show is very interesting and the way the story progresses is thrilling. There are many different social issues explored throughout the movie as well, some are presented much better than others. Themes such as affluence, racism and what people would do to survive are very clear throughout the film.This is not an A-Class film however. This shows. The cinematography is not that great, the technological aesthetic isn't very appealing, the dialogue can come off as very fake and the acting is mediocre to awful. Altogether this is a pretty interesting film and could be put on in the background whilst doing another activity (as it's mostly dialogue).
shannen-l-c
Circle delivers exactly what is says on the tin and launches straight into the drama from the beginning. The idea is simple and hardly original (it felt very similar to Would You Rather, released in 2012), but it did keep my attention. Despite not knowing most of the cast (except Julie Benz), the performances were strong and the interactions between the characters felt authentic. More could've been done to provide back-story and insight into the characters, but the anonymity of the characters was in a sense a main component of the story because it placed everyone on an level playing field. What movies like this are great for is posing questions about humanity. Most of us consider ourselves to be good, moral people that believe in justice and equality, but when it comes down to a life or death situation how many of us would compromise our belief system in order to stay alive? It's an intriguing thought and it's what makes this movie interesting. I saw a previous reviewer comment that some of the decisions that were made throughout the movie didn't always make sense, and part of me thought the same at certain points (it seemed people jumped on the bandwagon and decided to execute someone just for speaking out), but considering there's a 2 minute time-limit on their decisions, it's understandable. It's fast-paced and pressurised from the beginning and personally, I think the characters behave in a very realistic way. They panic, find ways to cheat the system and survive and eventually accept that whether they like it or not they have to play along, so start making hard decisions on the basis of their personal beliefs and morals. In most instances, the choices of who is killed is fitting and understandable. What lets this movie down is the ending. It's a very intense movie all the way through and the ending leaves you feeling incredibly...deflated. I would've found it more satisfying if there had been a specific reason/purpose for the circle and a much better explanation than what we got. By the time it reached the end it really felt like it had all been for nothing. In addition, I think more development on the characters could've enriched the story. Similar to Saw, how each character is chosen because they've committed an immoral act, it would've been more interesting if each character was in the circle because they'd done something terrible and therefore in a sense deserved to die. Overall, I've seen much worse movies than this. It sustained my attention and nowadays, it takes a lot for a movie to do that. However, if more originality and thought had been put into the creation and execution of the movie, it could've been a 7 or even 8 star rating.
