The story of Ozler possesses all the elements to craft a compelling crime thriller. It diverges sufficiently from the typical serial killer narrative, warranting its place in the genre.
However, Ozler falters in two crucial aspects - the script and direction. The script comes across as overly dramatic, resembling a first draft and extending far beyond necessity. Some scenes suffer from excessive character explanations, contributing to a sense of verbosity. Combined with the afformentioned confusing direction makes the movie feel long and tiring. The only saving grace is the presence of a star-powered antihero, preventing a more substantial decline in the movie's appeal.
Personally, I believe there is more potential for exploration in the portrayal of the antihero. Despite attempting to portray the antagonist's actions as a form of revenge, the movie falls short in exploring the moral dilemma presented. The antagonist's actions, while seemingly heroic, involve the loss of multiple innocent lives. Addressing this moral complexity could have added a layer of depth to the narrative.
Some other observations include: The extras are seen ready to react well before the actual situation unfolds. This premature readiness and the group reaction detracted from the natural flow of the scene. For instance, when one victim faints in the middle of the restaurant, the entire restaurant rushes towards the person without any hesitation. While this would be ideal, in such a public situation, it overlooks the bystander effect that would most likely come into play here. The same thing was noticed in the hospital as well.
Overall, I exited the movie with the feeling that it was worth watching, but simultaneously, I couldn't shake the sense that it could have been significantly better.
However, Ozler falters in two crucial aspects - the script and direction. The script comes across as overly dramatic, resembling a first draft and extending far beyond necessity. Some scenes suffer from excessive character explanations, contributing to a sense of verbosity. Combined with the afformentioned confusing direction makes the movie feel long and tiring. The only saving grace is the presence of a star-powered antihero, preventing a more substantial decline in the movie's appeal.
Personally, I believe there is more potential for exploration in the portrayal of the antihero. Despite attempting to portray the antagonist's actions as a form of revenge, the movie falls short in exploring the moral dilemma presented. The antagonist's actions, while seemingly heroic, involve the loss of multiple innocent lives. Addressing this moral complexity could have added a layer of depth to the narrative.
Some other observations include: The extras are seen ready to react well before the actual situation unfolds. This premature readiness and the group reaction detracted from the natural flow of the scene. For instance, when one victim faints in the middle of the restaurant, the entire restaurant rushes towards the person without any hesitation. While this would be ideal, in such a public situation, it overlooks the bystander effect that would most likely come into play here. The same thing was noticed in the hospital as well.
Overall, I exited the movie with the feeling that it was worth watching, but simultaneously, I couldn't shake the sense that it could have been significantly better.
