Ink (2009)

I've never felt luckier to live in Denver. Ink, filmed in Denver, had one of its first screenings tonight and despite going in with no particular expectations, I was completely floored. Nothing about the film indicates that it is a lower-budget, independent film, except perhaps its freedom to pursue such a surprising and ambitious concept.

Though it was in production at the same time as these films, it strikes me as mixing the best parts of Pan's Labyrinth and Nightwatch. However, these two excellent films in their own right simply do not match up in my mind. Ink is visually and aurally stunning. The blurring the lines of reality present an allegorical tale that is emotionally gripping and philosophically challenging.

I'm not easily taken to high praise, but I really think this may be THE movie to see in 2009. I just hope people get the chance to see it.

Fmovies: let me start with what i don't like; the blind guy and how his eyes cross taped. the idea is interesting but the tape was so shiny new, it wasn't fitting with the enigmatic/dreamy atmosphere. i mean, it was like, they just bought a black electronics tape from the next hardware store and applied on actor's face just in two seconds and patted him from his back and sent to set or something... i don't know. and ink's nose, i keep watching the movie my eyes on it... when it is going to fall? anyway, i loved this movie so much, i'm going to ignore these "little things", yes. besides, incubus folk and their headset was freaking superb. fighting scenes and the music was so in rhyme, it doesn't felt any violent, it felt like art, like, forces of universe in action, the evil and the good, yin and yang. and as an indie film, this make a good blend of happy children's fantasy and dark science fiction. some butterfly effect, some the crow, some pan's labyrinth and even some x-men... if you are not a freaking perfectionist, you will love this movie, it's full of little beautiful fresh ideas.

Ink is a nicely done low-budget indie film with an interesting visual style. It's not a masterpiece, but it's really quite well done, despite some fairly weak acting (in some places it's downright cringe-worthy.) The dialog ranges from clever to humdrum, but I've heard worse in blockbusters from big studios, who don't have the excuse of a low budget and limited resources. The story is simple, but told in a non-linear fashion that I found interesting but never baffling. Nothing in the movie seemed arbitrary or random. It was obviously a labor of love, and I for one am willing to overlook the flaws and appreciate this film as a sincere and energetic effort by a director with potential.

Ink fmovies. This is billed as a sci-fi flick about the struggle of good and evil. Don't believe it. It is not, it so much more. Who are you? who were you? Where did the two diverge? Can the thread ever be rejoined? This is a psychological, existential, social commentary, that is a cinematographic masterpiece.

Internal struggles, external struggles, is there redemption to be had, how much does one pay for a mistake, how do you come to terms with actions that cause guilt and shame.... Is that chain of events we call life reversible, or inertial and determined until the end? How so?

The political slam on capitalism and the analogy of drug addiction to that of power and greed are clearly contrast to true values of family and self worth. They are viewed through an old but effectively employed psychoanalytic lens. But hey are shown not told and you are the witness. This movie could serve as a model for treatment well beyond Freud's limited treatment modalities.

Existential issues of life, purpose, death and a hereafter, the quicksand of limbo land, they are all intricately woven in a drama of distorted time imagery, fresh vibrant music, and photography that is gripping, innovative, and alive while allegorical and metaphoric. The acting is superb, the cinematography is as good as anything West of Thomas Imbach and the music is so fresh and coherent that it is often the thread that holds seemingly disparate pieces uncomfortably in place until they are resolved. This is a brilliant film in all regards. See it. It is billed as sci-fi but is as human and humanistic as anything you will see.

This is a far from perfect movie. The acting was shaky at times, and the cinematography sometimes was overwhelming. This was low-budget, and the flaws that come from those restrictions were clearly evident.

However, I'm 100% sure that if this movie had the budget of even a "mainstream" indie, it wouldn't be half the movie that it is. Despite its occasional flaws, I have to give this 10 of 10, simply for the pure ambition of the filmmakers. Ink is challenging stuff.

This is a difficult, but meaningful and thought provoking story which requires complete attention. It's not enough to watch it casually, as it'll be completely missed. It's slow starting, but give it a chance and the film is inescapable and deeply affecting.

I've seen enough movies of all sorts that I genuinely appreciate when a filmmaker shows me something entirely new and different. Ink delivers, in spades.

I regret that I watched a pirated download of this movie. It was fantastic, and it truly deserves my money. However, that said, I don't know how else I would have found out about this absolute gem of independent film-making if it wasn't for seeing it on a list of downloads and feeling curious. My ONLY quarrel with Ink is the quality of the visuals themselves. I understand the desire to create a dreamlike, otherworldly atmosphere; but blowing out all the whites and softening the image can only be tolerated for so long. In some ways it makes the movie look cheap, which couldn't be more misleading. I think it's best to go into Ink curious. I didn't really know what the film was about when I began watching it other than it dealt with the idea of parallel worlds (and I think one review equated it with The Matrix some how); but it was a pleasure to let the film unfold in front of me, never knowing exactly where it was going and letting all of the puzzle pieces eventually drop perfectly into place. Although sometimes the costuming leaves something to be desired, the actors wear them confidently and never let you feel like you're being swindled. That said, the acting was top notch. Especially from lead Chris Kelly. Keeping everything I just said in mind, I would like to reiterate that Ink is an INDIE. Those looking for a big-budget thrill-ride will be slightly disappointed. But it is a remarkable indie. It doesn't let it's budget get in the way of a great story, startlingly impressive special effects (car crash scene is top-notch), visionary directing, and chameleon acting. This IS indie film-making. And it's the furthest thing from that soft-spined 'mumblecore' that lovers of independent film have been forced to sleep through for the past decade. I can't wait to see what's next from Jamin Winans. In the meantime I'm going to track down a copy of Ink all legal-like to add to my collection. In fact, if you're reading this post and are interested in watching it, try to find it legally - only because it's worth the purchase and it lets investors see audiences appreciate intelligent independent film-making. It's well worth the purchase.