Hall of Mirrors (2001) User Reviews

Fans of the "surprise" movie, this one's for you!

[cinefreak8378803 · 8/10 · 18 March 2001]

This movie rocks! Low-budget, unconventional, gritty.and totally satisfying! In the realm of independent suspense thrillers, `Hall of Mirrors' is a welcome addition with its clever writing and edge-of-your-seat pacing.

You can't help but be swept up in the plight of Dylan Hewitt, a compulsive gambler who can't seem to get a break. The quintessential anti-hero, Hewitt's misjudgment gets him involved with a gang of `counterfeiters' and a devious femme fatale who seize upon his predicament and manipulate him into doing their bidding. Then, in the pit of desperation, Hewitt discovers a secret that unravels a complex con game and brings the film to its gripping climax.

Fans of the `surprise' movie, this one's for you. Nothing more can be said without spoiling the plot, but `Hall of Mirrors' will definitely take you for a ride. Hats off to the filmmakers for making an ultra low-budget thriller that really delivers, right down to the very last shot!

good first film...great premise

[Virago6 · 7/10 · 11 December 2005]

Great story line. crude body special effects, but understandable on a No budget film. I love how the film maker, Marc Pilvinsky, plays the "repent" homeless man. His sign, "The End Is Near" may just be telling us literally that the film will end soon, or figuratively, that for the main character, his demise is preeminent.

As a part of his emergence as a young gun film maker, Marc Pilvinsky and crew are beginning to explore much of human behavior. With enough time and money, conflict can be see as more than Man versus another Man, and Man versus Himself.

This is a good movie to whet one's appetite for Piulvinsky films.

He'll be a big time director in no time...

A sign of things to come? Let's hope so!

[sdavis75093 · 8/10 · 5 August 2005]

Sizing up a micro-budget feature film is a tricky thing, especially when the movie in question is a directorial debut. Such is the case with "Hall of Mirrors", director Brad Osborne's first film. Obviously you ask "Is the movie worth a damn/good?" The answer: YES.

Honestly, I find most micro-budget films painful to sit through. I'm not trying to paint myself as a "snob", because the truth is whether it cost $100 or $1,000,000 to make, it still cost me $8.50. In regards to micro-budget films, I find it hard to sacrifice two hours of my time to a movie where the cast and crew has already thrown in the towel. Either they're "Zapruder film" looking pieces of trash (complete with date and time in the lower right hand corner), they're public access/community college looking turds, or they spent all of their time/focus worrying about the wrong components of the film. Most extremely low budget films seem to shoot themselves in the foot before they even get out of the gate. It's as if the writers/directors of these pictures realize that they are handcuffed financially (although creatively is more like it), embrace the concept of "underachievement", and spend way too much time figuring out how to make "really cool gore".

What I found refreshing with "Hall of Mirrors" is that Mr. Osborne (PAY ATTENTION KIDDIES!) CONCENTRATED ON MAKING A COMPELLING STORY! That's EXACTLY what us aspiring filmmakers should be doing! THE STORY IS THE FREE PART!! The writing is rock solid! I was just as hooked reading the script as I was watching the movie. Brad understands that story, lighting, and acting are the most important elements, and it shows because those are the things that stick out most in this film.

The lighting/look of the film: Interesting. Filmed with a $900 consumer grade digital, the film has a "not quite video/not quite digital" look to it. There were times that I loved the soft, almost fuzzy look of it, and there were times that it looked a bit too grainy. While I wish that it was a bit more consistent, it looks "interesting" to say the least. Some nice uses of shadow, lighting, and of the color blue in this film.

Music: The opening score reminds me of James Newton Howard's work in M. Night Shyamalan's films. Also, I wonder if Brad is a fan of radio theater...There are some musical cues that are VERY reminiscent to radio soap operas.

Acting: At it's finest - REALLY GOOD! At it's worst - SERVICEABLE. I don't mean that as a back-handed compliment, either.

Another measure of a low-budget debut is "Do I want to see another film directed by this person?" In this case, yes I do. Since HOM, Osborne has gone on to do two short films. While I haven't seen them yet, I have a feeling that his work gets better with each effort. (Another sign of a good director) As far as debuts go, Brad should be very proud of his achievements. While the film isn't flawless, it serves as a fine template of "how to approach a no-budget film". In fact, I would put this movie above "El Mariachi" in that department. It's a shame that this movie isn't available at most video stores. It's also a shame that Brad only had about five grand to spend on this picture, because I would have liked to have seen what he could have done with a bit more money. But the real shame would be if Mr. Osborne doesn't make at least 10 more films before it's all said and done. Keep your eye on this guy! He's going places! Score: 8/10

"Mirror" Doesn't Crack

[jha929 · 7/10 · 22 March 2001]

Good suspense films can often be like compliments. They're not that frequent, but you really savor them when they surface. That said, the only thing harder to make than a good suspense movie may be a good low-budget, independent suspense movie. Somehow, against the odds, Brad Osborne has managed to pull it off with his debut picture, `Hall of Mirrors."

My preface for the rest of this article is this: I will probably often refer to this as a `film' even though it's not shot on film. In today's world of digital `filmmaking' this hardly bares worth mentioning. Then why do I mention it? Because Osborne and his crew have managed to shoot this project with a `film look' that lets you forget you're watching something that originated on videotape. In fact, the quality of the whole production is such that you're able to concentrate on the content of the story instead of the production value. If you've seen many low budget or independent films, you can appreciate how this enhances your chances of enjoying the movie.

There are many homages to the more popular filmmakers of the suspense genre in the film. Polanski, Mamet, even a Hitchcock cameo by the director. It follows the usual formula of the multiple-plot-twists-and-games-of-viewer-deception to the tee. What makes the movie good, though, is that the pacing, while brisk, is just herky-jerky and non-conventional enough to keep you guessing a little. Even if you figure out who you can trust, and who's conning who, you're never quite sure exactly when or in what scene it will become apparent to the characters. This and some clever dialogue in some scenes is what will hold you when you watch this picture.

The main character of the movie, `Dillon," is a life long loser with a serious gambling problem. In his attempts to wipe out his debt, he manages to dig a deeper and more dangerous hole for himself to climb out of. He's very much an anti-hero. While you don't necessarily empathize with his problems, you can certainly grasp the scope of them. Watching his spiral into a state of desperate measures, the audience will find itself wrapped up in his struggle to get control of his situation, and his life. It's hard to say too much about the story without giving away any of the more crucial plot points, but the ending of the film is where it makes its stake for being a very `non-formula' script.

A peppy script and tight editing are what ultimately sell this movie to the audience as something far more enjoyable than the average independent spare.

The production, while good, obviously took a back seat to the characters and plot development of this picture. A lesson that Hollywood could do itself a big favor to learn.

The "Signs" version of the man-gets-mad-and-even scenario.

[Smartt · 15 April 2003]

You know that kind of film. We all do. It´s the kind of film where, in the trailer, the Voice of Boom spells the predictable: "They burned his wife! They raped his house! But this time, they pushed him too far. And now... THEY-ARE-GOING-TO-PAY!!!!". Cue to big explosions and the hero mowing entire armies of tommy gun-wielding ninja mobsters with his bare hands.

Hall of Mirrors is that kind of film. Only that it isn´t. It´s the Signs version of the man-gets-mad-and-even scenario. And just as M. Night Shyamalan brought new twists to the horror, superhero and alien invasion genres, helmer Brad Osborne puts his own spin to the `underdog revenge' plot.

Imagine yourself as a gambling addict neck-deep in debts. $90,000 neck-deep, to be precise. Ouch. Not the kind of money your best friend or bitchy ex-wife have around to loan you. To make things worse, your bookie has a henchman who just watched a Chinatown rerun and got some new ideas on how to bull debtors.

Well, that´s the hell Dylan Hewitt (Eric Johnson) is going thru (the opening sequence is not just a nod to the bone-tossing scene from 2001; it´s a cool storytelling device to show how our anti-hero became a compulsive gambler since his childhood). Of course, when you´re in the bottom of the pit, the only way to go is up.

(Yeah, right).

Things start to change when Dylan meets Mara Payton (the stunningly gorgeous Julie Arebalo). They bump uglies and that´s just a figure of speech, cause there´s nothing on Julie that´s even remotely ugly. Later that night, Dylan gets a weird phone call. `What about some free money? Come meet me at Santa Claus´ home and we´ll solve all your problems, no strings attached!'. Well, actually the dialogue is more noir-ish than that, but that´s the gist.

Dylan does what any normal person would on a situation like that: he dismisses the whole thing as bullshit and hangs up. The end.

Nah, that´s not the end. The story must go on, so Dylan decides to meet the caller, a mysterious man called Haze (Halim Jabbour), and it´s weaved inside a weird tapestry involving conterfeit super-dollars, broadway strippers, dead people coming back to life and the surprise appearance of Dylan´s evil twin, Darrin.

Okay, I made up the evil twin bit, but that´s basically what Hall of Mirrors is: a surprisingly well-crafted con/revenge story that may not be original, but is gripping enough to keep you guessing til the very last minute. And the best thing is that the movie gets BETTER on a second viewing, when we can see how we were so cleverly deceived by Brad Osborne´s scrip. Sure, it´s a script that cheats a lot to achieve the desired effects, but so what? It´s not as if walking zombies or starships making noise in space count as realistic moviemaking.

And do you wanna know something more surprising? Hall of Mirrors was made for scant $ 4.000 and doesn´t show it at all. It´s not schmancy fancy (it was shot on digital video and processed to look like film, hence the soft image) and some sets look cramped, but it doesn´t look cheap - a lesson those multi-digit-hungry vultures from Tinseltown REALLY need to learn.

No-budget or not, this flick was made very professionally, with smooth editing, excellent photography, cool minimalist music (also written by the director) and attention to that little thing 99% of indie producers never fail to neglect: sound. Using only sound effects, they managed to turn Dallas during winter on sunny Louisiana. It´s a very subtle detail that will probably go unnoticed (and I only know that ´cuz they say it on the commentary track, so don´t think I´m a genius), but it sells the illusion on a subconscious level. Or quite: during a night scene, Julie appears with a tight sweater with no bra that´s a tell-tale sign of how cold it was that day, if you know what I mean.

Save for some small exceptions, the acting is consistently good and convincing. You know you´re going to see a nice acting job when a small bit player, the guy who plays the blackjack dealer as the casino (Chip Joslin), delivers a single line with rare naturality. Seeing how the movie is character-driven, the cast did a wonderful job in bringing Brad´s story to life.

Hall of Mirrors is available on DVD thru the official homepage and it´s a pretty decent disc. Video compression leaves something to be desired, with at least two brief scenes suffering from heavy pixelation, but don´t let that stop you. The extras include a fun commentary track with writer/director/composer Brad Osborne, producer Marc Pilvinsky, director of photography Bobb Truax, actors Eric Johnson and the woman I want to call my wife, Julie Arebalo. There´s also an interesting documentary/making of, and a series of bloopers and outtakes. FUNNY bloopers and outtakes, for a change. There´s only two things missing: the trailer, and a photo gallery consisting solely of Julie pics.

In the last decade, Quentin Tarantino and Kevin Williamson rose to fame paying self-referential homages to drive-in classics of yore. That´s cool, but what about bringing new ideas to tired genres? Hollywood´s not doing that anymore. This task is now at the hands of guys like Alvin Ecarma (Lethal Force), Brian O´Hara (Rock´n´Roll Frankenstein), Dante Tomaselli (Desecration) and, now, Brad Osborne. More power to them! And I only hope they don´t screw things up once they dip their feet on those murky Hollywood waters!

"Cuban actress, Rebecca Sanabria, rocks"

[brandye james · 25 June 2001]

The best thing about this film is Rebecca Sanabria. Her performance is captivating and real. She mesmorizes and brings the film above low budget. The perfect casting choice. I'd see her in anything. I'm absolutely sure she will be the next big thing on the independent scene. Look out for this one.