DARK GLASSES

 

Back on May 6^th of this year, I was lucky enough to be able to attend, what we were told at the time, the only big screen presentation of Dario Argento's latest film, “Dark Glasses” in Australia. Twenty four hours prior, I had no knowledge of this screening's existence, and I am actually going to begin this review with a small personal anecdote. Late the night before, whilst absentmindedly browsing the internet to alleviate my boredom, I miraculously came upon the information that a screening of “Dark Glasses” was to take place in Melbourne in the near future. However, my elation quickly turned to deflation when I realised that it would be screening the very next day, which also happened to be my wedding anniversary. I quickly came around to the idea that I would not be able to attend, and that was okay, but later the next day whilst having lunch with my wife, I mentioned to her that the new Dario Argento film was on that night. My wife, having been together with me for now 22 years, knew of my immense love of Argento and immediately said that there was no way I was missing that screening, anniversary or not, and despite my (very honest) protests, she convinced me to go when she said that if I did not go to see it, she would come with me to make sure that I would not miss it(and my wife HATES horror films!!). Obviously I made it to the screening, and I had initially planned to write a review for it back then (however life got in the way). Recently I received the new Italian blu ray of “Dark Glasses” (which thankfully comes with unadvertised English subtitles) and have since re-watched the film on the small screen and decided to now write that review I had planned to do, months ago.

Before we get down to the nuts and bolts of this review, let's give a quick recap of the plot of “Dark Glasses”. There is a killer running around Rome, who has been regularly knocking off prostitutes, using a piano wire as his choice of weapon. He has four victims to his name thus far, and is planning on making Diana his fifth, but during the attack Diana fights back and flees for her life in her car. The killer follows in his van, causing Diana to be involved in a horrific two vehicle accident, that sees a young Chinese boy orphaned when his parents are killed in the crash, and Diana left permanently blind. After recovering from her minor injuries, Diana begins to live life again, now without the assistance of her sight. She attempts to make contact with Chin, the young boy who survived the crash, and after some initial resistance from the boy, the two of them start to look out for one another. Diana also makes a friend in Rita, the woman assigned to help her get used living with her blindness. Whilst the transition isn't exactly smooth, Diana is doing better than expected, but it isn't long before the killer comes back to finish off what he started.

I was so bitterly disappointed in Argento's previous film, “Dracula 3D”, that I actually said that I hoped that it would be his last film as it was painful seeing how far one of my heroes had fallen, and I meant it. I ranked the film as the worst film of that year, and scored it “zero” stars. To my eyes, it was a film with no merit, no redeeming factors at all, and I hated every second of it. I was finally ready to admit that this once brilliant horror director had finally lost it, and whilst I would still see anything he would make in the future, I would no longer anticipate them. However ten years later, when Argento finally did announce his new film, “Dark Glasses”, I found myself looking forward to it again, like all of his films previous, and it even made my most anticipated list of 2022. So did the film deliver, or was it another stinking pile of crap like “Dracula 3D”? The simple answer is “Dark Glasses” is an extremely entertaining thriller, proving that Argento still has the chops to put together a professionally made genre effort, but it is far away from the classics of his glory days. Let's look a little deeper at it now though, shall we?

One aspect of “Dark Glasses” that I loved and thought that made it a successful thriller was the fact that it was quite small in scope. It was less grandiose and as such Argento could focus on the characters, and putting together a succinct and suspenseful story. There are not a lot of characters in the film, and the story takes place over a short period of time, with the entire second half of the movie, representing a couple of hours of “real” time. With the budgets that Argento is working with late in his career being much smaller than what he had to play with in his glory days, I think it makes sense to make the films a little smaller too, because trying to emulate the operatic nature of those early films on a much smaller budget, only makes it more obvious to the audience how much cheaper they are now. However, and this may sound like I am contradicting myself a little, at times it did feel like “Dark Glasses” took place in a vacuum, as outside of the action on screen, we never get a sense or feeling of Rome or the outside world surrounding the story. I understand that “Dark Glasses” was shot during the global pandemic, but I think you can feel this, especially early on during the scene of the eclipse which sees the onlookers positioned in a way that screams social distancing.

The strongest element of “Dark Glasses” though is, unsurprisingly, the visual side of the film. Argento has always had very strong visuals in his films, to the point that he is often accused of being all flash and no substance. Here he is working with a new director of photography, Matteo Cocco, and the two work wonderfully together. This is a very slick and classy looking film, and with it taking place almost entirely at night, Cocco has done a fabulous job of making sure the visuals are sharp, rather than smeary and bland that can often happen when shooting digitally in the dark. We can always see what is happening onscreen, which may sound like a stupid thing to point out in a review, but it is ridiculous how many low budget films struggle with this during night time shooting. I also loved Argento's use of the colour red, and how he added highlights of the colour in almost every shot. It is really well done, obviously deliberate, and yet never draws too much attention to itself. Speaking of the colour red, being an Argento film I am sure you are all interested in just how bloody “Dark Glasses” is, and I must say that outside of the film's very violent and graphic opening murder, the film is relatively bloodless. That is not to say, there are no more killings in the film, in fact there are quite a few, but none are as ruthless and explicit as that first one. Argento is more focused on the suspense in “Dark Glasses” rather than the murders themselves, and personally I think he made the right choice; it just feels right for “this” film.

For those of you who are fans of Argento, you probably already know that “Dark Glasses” was originally meant to be the next film he made after “Sleepless”, however that was put to a screeching halt when the production company who bought Argento and Franco Ferrini's script, ultimately went bankrupt. It took twenty years before the script finally fell back into Argento's hands, and I must say that for a script that is over two decades old, it is surprisingly underdone. It almost feels like a rough draft, or early script where Argento and Ferrini were trying to nail down the plot before working on the dialogue, which in the finished product is incredibly pedestrian. I also have to mention just how bland the killer's motive is for trying to kill Diana; it is laughable in its simplicity. It is also strange that a big deal is made out of the fact that a serial killer is killing prostitutes with a piano wire early on, but this weapon is then discarded in regards to Diana and the following victims. His motive also seems to indicate that he is only after Diana, rather than him being a serial killer going after prostitutes. It is almost like Argento and Ferrini changed directions in regards to the killer but couldn't be bothered about altering either the start or finish, so the reveal makes more sense. I should mention that the film is not a whodunit as we learn the identity of the killer rather early, and it this reason that I keep referring to “Dark Glasses” as a thriller and not a giallo. Your opinion may differ from mine, but for me, this film doesn't have enough of the elements of a gialli to call it such (although Argento himself refers to “Dark Glasses” as a giallo, so who am I to say differently).

I thought that Argento did a great job casting his latest film, with Ilenia Pastorelli giving a strong lead performance as Diana, and who was very believable as being blind too. Pastorelli also has very good chemistry with the young Chinese boy, Andrea Zhang, which makes the buddy pairing of Diana and Chin work in the film, something I had very strong doubts about before I had seen it. The person though who gives the best performance in “Dark Glasses” though is Asia Argento, who makes her sixth appearance in one of her father's films. It is without a doubt her most low key role in those films, but she is so so good in her limited screen time, feeling incredibly real in all of her scenes. There is actual genuine emotion created and felt between these three main characters, particularly when one of them perishes to the killer's murderous tendencies. I must say though, Asia is sounding more and more like her mother, the older she is getting.

Another element of Argento's films that he is always known for is his use of pulse pounding music, and he does so once again here with Arnaud Rebotini's score being a definite highlight of “Dark Glasses”. To be honest, it was the score where my opinion changed the most between my two screenings of the film. During my cinema screening, whilst I thought the music was effective in parts, it started to grate on me a bit by being too repetitive, however I never felt this at all in my second viewing at home. Instead the score kept my adrenaline pumping particularly during the suspense of the second half.

Something that I have hated in these later day Argento films, is his use of very poorly rendered CGI. It always comes across as very cheap looking and only signifies just how much better similar scenes were handled in the past when done practically. Well I am happy to report that “Dark Glasses” is almost CGI-free and it is so much the better for it. Almost everything is handled in camera, especially the kills thankfully, although there is an unintentionally hilarious scene involving sea snakes that probably should've seen the cutting room floor. It is not “praying mantis” level bad, but it is definitely the praying mantis scene of “Dark Glasses”. But hey, this is an Argento film, and they all have some sort of bizarre “WTF” moments in them; that's why we love him so much! (although what was with that strange line of dialogue to end the film on??).

Overall, “Dark Glasses” is a return to form for Dario Argento, but it still doesn't come close to him replicating the success of his early films. It is a slight story, but has been directed with style and flair, and its filled to the brim with suspense, to make the most of it all. Whilst Argento has created a very stylish looking film, do not go in expecting any visual fireworks or grandiose camera moves or you will be sorely disappointed. His inclusion of the colour red is very nicely handled, and despite a vicious murder early on, “Dark Glasses” isn't the total bloodbath you may expect. Whilst this review might not show it, I had such a good time with “Dark Glasses” and think the finished product is very entertaining. If nothing else, if this does end up being Dario Argento's final film (he is in his eighties now!), at least it is a much better effort to go out on than the deplorable “Dracula 3D”. It will never be considered a classic but “Dark Glasses” is so much fun, and its re-watch value is very high.

3 Stars.