“Compliance”
While many people defer to higher institutional authority, it is sometimes necessary to question it and the extent to which we entrust ourselves to it. “Compliance,” written and directed by Craig Zobel, presents a case study of this societal, ethical dilemma.
At a local branch of a fast food franchise, the manager receives a phone call from a police officer, who informs her that a female employee stole money from a customer. Stating that he is investigating a possible connection between the suspect and her brother’s alleged drug dealings with assistance from the FBI, the officer asks that the suspect be detained until she can be transported to a nearby police station.
What follows are a series of disturbing orders from the officer that become increasingly bizarre. Initially confused and suspicious, the manager complies because, in her mind, the unseen voice on the phone is an officer of the law and his word is solid. Compounding this is a busy work schedule, which diverts the characters’ attention away from getting answers regarding the validity of the situation.
The film’s story raises a valid point: Many of us will, when listening to what we assume to be an authority figure, do things that we know are wrong.
Although the accused denies the allegations, she does not tell the officer that he was in no position to make these demands. Individuals should know their rights, but the film’s characters do not, making their predicament even more frightening. Only two characters, the suspect’s male co-worker and the branch’s custodian, resist, but even that does not stop the psychological manipulation.
While the premise and character actions will evoke the response of “No one is that stupid,” the actual existence of this occurrence, as well as the more than 70 similar incidents mentioned in the film’s epilogue, speaks otherwise.
“Compliance” is difficult to watch given the subject matter. While the experience is gut-wrenching, what is happening evokes fascination. You will find yourself asking the question, “What would I have done?”
“Exam”
Oftentimes, the simplest story ideas make for the best films. “Exam” — a British-produced psychological thriller written and directed by Stuart Hazeldine — centers on a blank piece of paper.
In the near future, eight job applicants enter a room to take an 80-minute exam for a position with a prestigious corporation. Monitoring them are two people: an armed security guard and a man known as the Invigilator. Three rules are established: 1) Communication with the guard or the Invigilator equals disqualification, 2) Leaving the room for any reason equals disqualification and 3) Spoiling the paper you are given equals disqualification. There is only one question to be answered, and the answer will determine the next 80 years of the applicants’ lives.
The movie is similar to two cult films from the 1990s: “Cube,” a film with the same premise, but with a gory horror approach, and “Reservoir Dogs,” Quentin Tarantino’s first film. Both feature several character archetypes in an isolated environment psychologically stressed to their breaking points. Both have mounting paranoia, conspiracy theories, and betrayal, leading to inevitable conflict.
The cast is mostly composed of unknowns, who are memorable through their physical and simple personality attributes. While cliched and at times slightly annoying, the performances work within the context of the narrative.
The story and setting are minimalist, with most of the drama derived from the clash of personalities. Underlying the main story arc is the theme of how much of ourselves we are willing to sacrifice to achieve a goal.
Because the circumstances in which the characters find themselves are overly complicated at points, the ending may seem anti-climatic. However, “Exam” is definitely worth 90 minutes of your time. It is a fine mix of psychological mind games, great wordplay and a significant amount of deceit designed to challenge what we know about human nature and ourselves.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Follow Collin Chersi on Twitter: @PepperChersi
