Chained (2012)

I saw this film at the Imagine film festival 2013 in Amsterdam. The plot seems mildly interesting at first, about a taxi driver (Bob) who takes women to his remote house, murders them and buries them in his cellar. The screaming and blood spraying involved in such activities, have been filmed many times before. This time, however, there is an original twist when he brings home a 9 year old boy (Tim) along with his mother, kills and buries the latter (as usual), but he keeps Tim to clean his house and prepare meals. Of course, Tim tries to escape but he fails and thus gets tied to a long chain, so that he can move through the house and perform his daily chores, among others burying women after Bob slaughters them.

This involuntarily form of cohabitation goes on for some 10 years. We see the young Tim change into an adolescent version. Bob tries to educate him by giving encyclopedia and other text books to read. Tim remains devoid of any external contacts, unable to leave the house while being retrained by his chain (hence the film title).

In the meantime, the usual process of collecting and killing women goes on. By means of flashbacks we observe that Bob has a background not only of being mistreated as a child, but was also forced to have sex with his mother. We don't get all the gory details about his past, but in several dreams we get the picture what sort of things happened in his youth, and apparently deformed his character for life.

The story becomes interesting when Bob makes serious attempts to interest Tim for the female body, and to arouse his sexual desires. Bob lets Tim choose from a photo book to find out which type he finds most attractive, then collects one looking like that example, all being a setup in the hopes that Tim and the girl have sex together. But Tim fails to settle down with her and let nature take its course. He is aware that Bob is watching every move via a camera in that room. Even worse, Bob interferes some of the time when things are not progressing fast enough. When Bob insists that he should grab the chance to explore the female body, Tim rebuts that he knows that inside and outside from books, obviously missing the point Bob wants to make. Though the girl tries to make the best of the situation and wants to help him a bit, this scene ends with blood since handling a knife is what Tim knows best.

I refrain from revealing how the story continues from this point, if only to prevent spoiling some surprising turns of events. For example, there comes a time when Tim is able to set himself free, and even meets his father who (of course) did not expect to even see him again after being lost for 10 years. Unexpectedly, this encounter does not lead to a happy family re-union, and there is a reason for that (see for yourself). As a result, Tim is thrown back on his own devices. We suspect (but that end is left open) that his only choice is to continue Bob's secret operations, and to make a fresh start with "volunteering" a new helper.

All in all, the original plot is employed very well. There were absolutely no dull moments, in spite of the constrained setting where most of the action takes place (there are very few outdoor scenes). The tension was very well spread over the running time. I consider this a formidable achievement with a cast consisting mainly of Bob and Tim, where all other roles are no more than short appearances. A few scenes were even hilarious, in spite of the dark circumstances, for instance when they play quartets with the ID ca

Fmovies: CHAINED starts off giving you the impression that this could be just another torture fest where a young boy and his mother get kidnapped by a taxi driver who is really a serial killer and taken to his home. There the boy's mother is murdered and he is made to live with the killer and do whatever he says.

After all that the plot actually becomes more intriguing with superb character development and it is very disturbing and comes up with some very unexpected moments and the final half is what raises this film above many others in the same genre.

The performances are excellent, Jennifer Lynch certainly found the ideal actor to play the serial killer in Vincent D'Onofrio and even the actors with the smallest roles manage to shine.

Overall, CHAINED is a very impressive film although not for everyone but the final half is sure to impress anyone who sees it.

The nine year-old Tim (Evan Bird) goes to the movie theater with his mother Sarah (Julia Ormond) and his father Brad Fittler (Jake Weber) tells Sarah to take a cab to go home. After the session, Sarah and Tim take the cab of Bob (Vincent D'Onofrio) that abducts and bring them to his isolated house. Bob kills Sarah and shackles and gives rules to Tim, nicknaming him "Rabbit". Along the years, the psychopath serial-killer Bob keeps killing women and Tim cleans the house and the blood, buries the women and eats Bob's leftover. When Tim (Eamon Farren) grows up, Bob decides to treat him as his son and unchains him, but Tim is reluctant to accept him. One day, Bob brings the gorgeous teenager Angie (Conor Leslie) expecting that Tim has sex with her and kills her. What will Tim do with Angie?

"Chained" is a disturbing, twisted and depressing loss of innocence of a boy kidnapped by a sadistic and deranged serial-killer and with a surprising plot point in the end. Vincent D'Onofrio is a scary psychopath with a twisted mind. The fate of Angie is omitted in the movie and this is the weakest part of the cruel plot that makes an ambiguous conclusion. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Acorrentados" ("Chained")

Chained fmovies. I rented this movie from Redbox and watched it last night with my husband. Loved it! It is one of those movies that marks you and leaves you with questions. The movie is about a boy who was with his mother when a taxicab driver abducted and murdered her. The same taxicab driver takes the boy in, renames him Rabbit. Rabbit learns that trying to outsmart the one who holds him captive does not work and he goes into survival mode, simply working to make it through day to day. The acting of both men was stellar. Even the extras in this movie were amazing actors. But this is a movie that is strong ONLY because of the acting. There aren't any million dollar special effects, amazing backdrops, no fancy CGI, and sorry guys no naked cheerleaders with breasts bared. The story line is not as straight forward as it sounds, as Rabbit and Bob become a twisted sort of family. I think that we all want to believe that such things cannot happen, but the reality is that all too often they do happen. People can be monsters. Some are born and others are made, and this movie makes you question both. Was the man who became a monster made a monster by his past? Was the man who walked away unscathed, maybe even more of a monster than the monster? This movie is still simmering in my mind, and likely will for days to come. Highly recommend this movie, and even an action junkie like me was able to sit through it, and I continued to sit after the movie ended, listening.

The movie is a really difficult watch. It's not easy seeing what is happening on screen and is meant to be that way. Vincent D'Onofrio is mesmerizing (in a bad or a good way, depending on how you look at it). His character is more than despicable, but the acting is amazing. So if you know that, you know why the voting is split down the middle. The ending is not helping either with most people.

The director talked about the ending and there is a different version of it, if I got it right (extended), which I'm looking forward to see on an upcoming release. Though I do feel the ending I saw was very good too. It might take you back a little, but if you think about it, it does make a lot of sense.

Bob (Vincent D'Onofrio), a cab-driving serial killer who stalks his prey on the city streets alongside his reluctant protégé Tim, who must make a life or death choice between following in Bob's footsteps or breaking free from his captor.

In the short time that Jennifer Lynch has been making her mark on cinema, I have grown to enjoy her style of film. At least, based on this one and her last effort, "Surveillance". I confess I am not familiar with "Boxing Helena". Her latest films are odd, but not absurd -- just odd enough to be unique and really draw people in by their novelty (a great quality to have). Here we have the serial killer story, but told in a very different way: through the eyes of a captive held for nine years. (Critics have said this idea was already presented in "Bereavement", but I would argue this is the better film.)

D'Onofrio gives a solid performance, one that may be among the best of his recent career. Trying to gauge his character is tough -- smart, stupid, slow? He is clearly clever enough to do what he does and get away with it, but his way of speaking clearly implies some sort of mental issues beyond the murderous intentions.

One could psychologically analyze Rabbit all day. He is the poster child for "learned helplessness", accepting defeat after years of beatings. Yet, he does not fit with the classic idea of Stockholm Syndrome -- he accepts Bob as his master, but only grudgingly so. And there could also be talk of nature versus nurture. Certainly, Bob is "nurturing" Rabbit to become a killer -- but will he accept it?

My friend and horror adviser, Aaron Christensen, had what he calls a violent, visceral reaction to this film and even had the urge to punch director Lynch in the face (particularly after she explained that the film was intended as a message against child abuse). For him, there is too much of a need for suspension of disbelief and this story could only exist in a "fairy tale" world. We are in disagreement. I have no opinion on the child abuse claim (though it seems rather strange), but I approach all horror films from the point of view of a fairy tale, more or less. Sure, this film was presented as more real than, say, "Nightmare on Elm Street", but I saw little need to pick out the plot holes -- some being so obvious that pointing them out is hardly a mental challenge (such as why Rabbit never escapes).

You may agree or disagree on the greatness of this film, or even have no strong reaction at all. I would be curious to hear more thoughts from people... I did not realize this film would be a conversation piece, but apparently it is.