The Dirties (2013)

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

If I had a word for The Dirties, that word would be fresh. Even with some questionable choices in regard to filming, The Dirties comes into it's own with character. This is a movie that strives on realism. Most films can contain great dialogue, but then only to distract from it's own realism; I really felt like all characters were holding real genuine conversations. The believability of the two main characters, Matt and Owen, is undeniable, and in addition to that found in their friendship, the lead and execution of the premise remains strong throughout. Without going into mental health clichés, both characters seem to have genuine reasoning and path to their decision making, with Matt Johnsons character seeming to have a real inability to cope with confrontation. Even then, elements in the movie aren't made to lead or force them to their decisions, but rather to support them. Often in anti-bullying movies all is lost by the campaign of the movie itself, but The Dirties contains a strong energy and drive throughout. The best thing that I can say about it really, is that it's not bad, it's really not bad. In everything that it does well, it does impressively well. The faceless filmer leaves a menacing undertone, with all acknowledgment of his character being brief and interesting. Lastly, it's final leaves the viewer in awe, ending at the most perfect moment of it's screen time. A very underrated classic 9/10

This is not your typical Saturday-night movie. In fact, after just finishing watching The Dirties about fifteen minutes ago, I'm still feeling quite detached and empty. That's how this film made me feel.But that's a good thing.It means that this movie is incredibly well written and directed. To leave a viewer feeling as I do now - perturbed - is something to marvel at. This is a powerful film which shines a harsh, unforgiving light upon bullying. It reveals all: the act itself, the victims, and the consequences.The two movie-makers and best of friends, Owen and Matt, go from laughing and joking together to being diametrically opposed in their attitudes and social statuses. This is, of course, with the aid of bullying as an accelerant: because that is exactly what bullying is. This is seen in the film, as well as in schools worldwide. Situations which could otherwise be avoided or lessened in severity are made irrevocably worse as a result of bullying; this is one of the film's key themes. It is made clear from the outset that both characters have been bullied all-throughout their lives. However, things soon change. For Owen, things improve: he becomes more confident, the girl he has had a crush on for years has finally begun reciprocating, and his life in general seems to take a turn for the better - high school gets a little less scary for Owen. On the other hand, Matt ends up at the other end of the spectrum. In his efforts to aid his friend to get the girl he'd swooned over for so long, his own social status does not improve. If anything, Matt becomes even more isolated and frustrated than ever before, which leads to the definitive moment in the film - the psychopath scene.In this scene, Matt is finally able to do what Owen has been pleading for him to do: he separates his film from his life as he genuinely struggles to comprehend what is going on in his mind. He makes a cry for help: "Owen, I think I may be a psychopath" (*paraphrased*), yet his cries are misheard by Owen who has moved beyond the realm of being able to help his once-best-friend, and is now the quintessential society member whom of which this film specifically criticises. Owen becomes just another figure in the daunting hallways of their high school: eyes glued to his phone, his mind elsewhere, popularity and bettering himself being all that he can prioritise. He loses sight of Matt and is unable to see him as a friend in distress. This is what is so tragic about the film. It ends up being Owen, Matt's best friend, who drives Matt to doing the things he does because at the one point which truly mattered, when Matt needed Owen more than ever before, Owen wasn't there for him. And when Matt explodes in fury at his friend not recognising his desperate need for help, it only pushes Owen away even further and makes the viewers feel even more helpless.The final line is utter perfection: "Owen? What are you doing?! It's me!"As Owen stands in horror in the corner, fearing for his own life at the sight of what his friend has become, Matt doesn't understand what changed and why Owen can't see him for what he is. This is where the movie got me. This is where it screamed its loudest. For, as the viewers, we are able to see that the true victim here is Matt. And that is a very morally-challenging concept to wrap your head around. The victim, at least in the movie, is the one holding the gun and not the one lying on the floor. You are left feeling aghast at the thought that the person who committed the massacre was in fact the one in need of the most help. This film leaves you with a burning question to ask yourself: are school-shootings portrayed by the media (or by society in general) in the entirely opposite way that they should be? All in all, this is a very powerful and tragic film which successfully tells a compelling story whilst also spreading a message fundamental to the development of society. It forces you to ask questions which make you uncomfortable when you explore the answers, and emphasises the importance of reaching out and helping those who are at their most vulnerable. Films like this one are some of the best you can watch; they don't come along very often, but when they do you ought not to miss them.

"piece of crap" is a compliment for this endeavor. Documentary style film making seems to be in vogue and this might have worked if the director or producer had actually employed kids who were 17 or 18, not 25 and 26. Their mannerisms reflect their age and that completely takes the film far from watchable. 2 out of 10 only that I was able to view as long as possible. Do not waste your time on this trash. It is awful. poorly directed, poorly photographed, acting? no Oscars here. I would've preferred watching a Justin Bieber video...over this. Time wasted when life is so short should be a criminal offense. Have I posted the expected 10 lines yet? Let's see....

To all those criticizing this film,like 'xBlack from Saskatoon (i guess more compelling program close to home like Corner Gas is more your thing), you ALL completely are missing and trolling this blatantly fine film. *note: Users and IMDb should look at users profile and history that gave this film a 1 or 3 as revealed trolls and/or people without film knowledge. 'xBlack' admits to not even finishing watching it yet gives a 3. 'sdiegotow' only gives 1 for things they dislike and a 10 for what they like, so its all a game and no in between nuances. Viktor Vedmak does the exact same thing, only 1 or 10, and is even more discredited by giving Burt Wonderstone a 10(!?). Charliehound, who does same thing too yet acts in review like they know what they're talking about and gives ratings as though they are fair (gives Gravity a 1, which is film I thought was overrated and Bullock bad acting, but a 1 with that direction and compared to ALL other films ever made, and its a 1!? Also only gives Chronicle a 1. Like this person is insincere and a troll, or just completely devoid of intelligence or scale of good and bad.) Most of these people only like what they like as 10 to raise their things but then gives 1 to lower other things. At least hey gave Breaking Bad a 10 lol! Their contributions should be either banned or weighted as meaningless compared to real reviewers. The audacity is that they are confused why people are liking it and can only conclude therefore it must be fake or everyone are morons, so they are just frustrated they are in minority opinion. They are almost like the bullies AND losers they say they found boring in this film. Can IMDb please use some oversight in who gets to speak for film and who rates film. As far as Canadian filmmaking goes it is superior to most. The work of Matt Johnson as lead actor, director, editor, and everything else, should be commended. If anyone has seen Gus van Sant's 'Elephant' or Harmony Kormine's 'Bully' or Micheal Henke's 'Funny Games' or more recently Josh Trank's 'Chronicle', you would be right to draw comparisons but also realize this film earns the right to placed in the same regard and esteem. The film has a lot more ideas going on than simply the premise of losers and bullies, as the lead character drifts more into a fantasy fueled by a thin line of film fiction and daily surreal alienated life and bullying within and without. It is transparent and self aware of its construction and inner workings of film gimmick. The film doesn't indulge in constructing overwhelming terrible world they live in, so other than the odd physical bullying by stock type characters, there is an authenticity to the school, home, and outside world they live in, as well as the films they draw from and inspired by.Also, there are people I knew and know that talk and act that way, albeit annoying to many, so the rendering and dialogue of these characters isn't too far off the mark, especially in terms of film nerds and today's eccentric outcasts and 'beautiful losers'. You aren't suppose to "like" these characters, but film nerds and those bullied may root them on. Regardless, the task isn't to make them heroes or victims,but rather a fly on the wall as part of their fantasy and reality at odds. One thing that the film misses that is a detriment, is the fact that there are actually many intersections and exceptions of what constitutes 'nerds' and 'bullies' (i.e. many film or artsy or eccentric people are popular, and jocks aren't like the big bully nor are they perceived as popular by all people, but the film is playing on stereotype as well yet playful enough in doing so).To those commenting on the mystery and intent of having a 'camera-man' and their identity and role: its a device, don't get too worried about it...it's part surreal and part as though there is someone "in on it" like some collective shadow. The shadow and world of this 'filmed bubble' with camera and mics is what they share and experience as friends, like an 'in joke' only they get. Voyeuristic metaphor and random viewer interpretation of that mystery is the intention I think.The abrupt insane ending, is something to be admired too, which i wont spoil. Running throughout the film is a nice balance and building of wit, humor, hypocrisy, exaggeration, and frustration. Nothing is overly indicted as "the sole reason" for bullying and school shootings. Nor, is the film exploitative, in violence or in antagonisms that are clear right and wrong or hero/victim thingy. There is a careful way of allowing viewers to take different things from the film, and to perceive the leads as either victims, heroes, or losers. That in and of itself shows that the film did its job.The audience is one big high-school with varying camps who would like or dislike and gang up. Trolls ruining this film's rating intentionally with a 1 rating, almost ironically embodies them as "the Dirties'. The judgement for sake of judgement without understanding and not paying attention is partly why such 'losers' and 'bullies' exists in tension. And, I was popular but I also am nerdy and have some nerdy friends so i'm not biased, and lets face it, nerd is now the norm, and in fact bullying has become trolling, so i guess there's a frustration and tension still brooding but in different ways. Grow up.In short, leave the 'real' reviews and films to film fans and people who know what they're talking about. We aren't all Roger Eberts, and things are all subjective, but there is a difference and those trolling or those ignorant know exactly what i'm talking about.