Defending The Ruins

Look deep into my hole...

...and you'll find my Top 5 reasons why The Ruins is one of the best horror films of the decade. Critics just don't understand.

(Spoilers pop up like weeds below.)

Reason 1: It defies the conventions it respects.

For a film that has so few characters (five principles and some glorified extras) and so few locations (one, basically: a big hill), that bringing it to the stage would be a snap, The Ruins is relatively complex.

Tons of things separate it from contemporary horror fare, and the most outstanding one is that there's a fairy tale crawling just beneath the surface of this movie. That fairy tale squirms and twitches like possessed vines under the skin of the dumb white kids who literally stumble upon the ancient architecture during a one-off day of roughing it on their otherwise cushy Mexican vacation. Like the vivisection in Red Riding Hood or the intended cannibalism in Hansel and Gretel or the eye-pecking birds in Cinderella, these antagonistic vines are whimsically gruesome. They're almost cute, despite their nature.

The five dumb Americans are as set in their nature as the fearsome foliage they come up against. They mistake the warning of a dude on a horse screaming at them in a language they don't understand for a hold-up and, as capitalists, attempt to buy their way out of danger.

Ultimately, they're up against not only nature (said native and his fellow villagers set up camp around the hill, quarantining the kids and effectively sentencing them to death by vine), but also themselves as things intensify and the vines turn them against each other via their voice mimicry capabilities (so the dynamic really is nature versus man versus man). Watching the film for the first time, I didn't even realize how ridiculous all this was (any Little Shop of Horrors comparison came to me way after the fact), because of the film's expert pacing, which is something like a slasher movie: something horrific happens every 10 minutes or so with varying fatality but a mounting intensity. There's even a final girl and everything...

In the theatrical version, she lives, although in the just-out-this-week unrated DVD version, the last shot of her that we see, lets us know that she, too, has been infected by the vine:

The bleakness is more in line with Scott Smith's book, which I read randomly when it came out and all the while thought, "God, this is basically a screenplay without all the blank lines. The only thing that could hold this back from being made is its gruesomeness." However, I was wrong, for you see...

Reason 2: It really goes there...and there.

Not quite a slasher (for plants can't hold knives and axes) and certainly not torture porn (the savagery has a supporting role, not a featured one), The Ruins just does not hold back. This is much to its credit, as most of today's horror that seemingly aims to be a torture-porn alternative does so merely with PG-13 lameness (even something like Hancock, which I fucking hated by the way, features dismemberment in the most namby-pamby suggestive way possible, so that it can have its cake and shove it down the throats of a tween audience, too -- now, that level of pretension, is what I call disgusting). I won't post the shots straight-up, because they really are stomach-turning, but if you want an idea of The Ruins' brutality, click here, here and here.

This bone-scraping nastiness is tempered with a dark sense of humor throughout, and often simultaneous with the most horrific moments. Not long after undergoing a double amputation, Mattias (pictured above) meets his end by being suffocated by the vines, prompting one character to quip, "Well, thank god we cut his legs off." When the character Stacy complains to her boyfriend that she feels the vine inside of her, her boyfriend explains it away to the others with, "You know how she is. She gets something in her head and she convinces herself." Less than 10 minutes later, we see...

...Stacy. With something in her head.

And, when Stacy is pushed to madness, as she cuts herself with the goal of getting every last vine out of her body, she inadvertently gashes the hand of Jeff (the guy who isn't her boyfriend or dead). Turning back to tend to herself, offers a snarled, disembodied, "Sorry." She has bigger fish to fry, bigger wounds to tend to and create.

That's not to say that there's a camp element to the film (otherwise, it would have been very easy for me to comprehend the movie's ridiculousness from the offset). Instead, the humor is like a salve that's used sparingly. It's a rare bit of conventionality, but it's completely welcome.

Reason 3: It looks great.

For real:

Cinematographer Darius Khondji (Delicatessen, City of Lost Children and Se7en are among handsome films under his belt) deserves major credit for lifting this film out of its admittedly b-movie framework and into something that resembles art possibly too frequently for its own good. With the exception of the last shot pictured directly above (which I posted because I think it's bad-ass), Khondji's best shots in The Ruins emphasize the characters' diminutive size in relation to nature. Being engulfed is a motif, visually and thematically. And, as with the flower that mocks and controls the kids, doom and beauty are constantly intertwined.

Reason 4: It doesn't over-explain.

So, what is that plant, and why is is there? Was it once used for some Mayan rituals? And why do the villagers salt the soil around it, instead of on the plant itself? Are they stupid, or are they attempting to preserve it (albeit a contained preservation)? Or is it just a hole in the plot to match the one in the hill? Who knows? Who cares? Language barrier being what it is, any sort of explanation delving into the whys of this thing would just seem contrived. The Ruins is unafraid of the unknown, and it seems wiser for it.

Reason 5: The kids are all right.

One of the biggest points of criticism The Ruins has faced is that its characters are one-dimensional and frivolous, this impossible to care about. This brings up one of my biggest pet peeves of movie reviews: the assumption that one most emotionally wrap himself around a film to appreciate it. So not true! But more than that, of course what happens to these characters is so much bigger than they are. They're consumed by a tangle of vines on ancient Mayan ruins. I'm not sure that any character would be a match for that, and it seems foolish to go looking for Anna Karenina in plant food, anyway, you know?

The group of five that we spend the most time with play Gin, lament lost earrings, talk about feces in their ice-infused margaritas, rhapsodize make-your-own taco night, talk about playing trombone in high school, get literally fall-down drunk, bet oral sex and throw up. They're the banal balance in a film that's blooming with magical realism. Because of them, The Ruins can ring true in a singular, fantastical way.

Comments

[Bapril]

Have you seen Teeth? If so, please review it. I fucking loved it...

[james derek dwyer]

"One of the biggest points of criticism The Ruins has faced is that its characters are one-dimensional and frivolous, this impossible to care about. This brings up one of my biggest pet peeves of movie reviews: the assumption that one most emotionally wrap himself around a film to appreciate it. So not true!"

THANK YOU!!! That made my day. one of the biggest flaws in most American film criticism today.

[michael seth novick]

thank you for loving this movie like i do. you should definitely check out carter smith's first short film, bug crush. it's on the short film compilation, boys life 6. you can watch the trailer here: www.bugcrush.net

it will probably change your life.

[Jason]

All of Bugcrush is on YouTube as well. I posted the whole thing at my blog (it's in four parts) right here. It is really fantastic.

I had issues with The Ruins in some respects - I thought a lot of important aspects of the progressively worsening situation these kids find themselves in - the slow starvation, the dehydration - were lost in translation from book to screen to the film's deficit, but there is a lot to like as well. It is a beautiful film to look at, and I thought the two girls performances in particular were absolutely wonderful.

[Audrey C]

"I'm not sure that any character would be a match for that, and it seems foolish to go looking for Anna Karenina in plant food, anyway, you know?"

Well put!

[Emily]

I was a little bummed at first when I saw that Jenna Malone was in this, because she's a pretty great (and underrated, IMHO) actress and this looked...well...not good. Your review, however, gives me hope. I may actually see this now. Thanks!

[Pipawik]

Sorry, but there's no way she should've gotten off that hill alive. The Mayans had been guarding it for generations; they knew every trick in the book, and therefore would not have been so easily distracted. I agree with you on all the other points (wish they hadn't felt the need to eliminate one of the stranded characters from the book, but that's a minor squabble), but the filmmakers should have gotten some guts and had the last remaining girl die sitting down, facing her enemies, as she did in the book.

[spazmo]

Maybe this was explained in the book, but why didn't the Mayan natives just shoot everyone as soon as they wandered past the point of no return, instead of watching them die slow, horrible deaths?

I think I just answered my own question: as *BANG*BANG*BANG*BANG*BANG* "Adios, gringos!" would have made for a pretty short story, huh?

The Ruins worked for me, too. It sold the muggy, sweaty, suffocating jungle atmosphere very well. It must've been complete hell for the actors who had to spend weeks covered in sticky Kayo syrup.

[Tasty]

While I enjoyed The Ruins more as a B-grade version of The Descent, I thank you for defending it. Most people still can't get over the fact that the 'thing' is a killer vine. Plausibility and reality in cinema are vastly overrated. Give me something imaginative and far-fetched any day.

[R.Kitty]

I loved the book, the audio book and the movie!

Is Winnie allowed to watch this kind of fare?

[Faith]

guess ill be going out to by the book first and the flick second.

thats how i prefer it. lol

[HouseofJules]

"Look deep into my hole" might just be the best opening line in the history of EVER.
Jules
House of Jules

[Kira]

Meh, you liked the book? I thought it was boring and tedious and I couldn't even finish it. It just dragged on and on and on.

[Ellen]

This movie really did get overlooked. I thought the book was fantastic and gruesome, and the movie did a pretty good job of condensing it into 90 minutes, which is a feat. I thought Laura Ramsey gave an amazing performance, and managed to make her last scenes almost physically hurt the audience. The ending....meh. This was (supposed to be) a big Hollywood pic, what can you do. The rest was pretty stellar.

I could bitch about stuff left out from the book (I wish they wouldve included the drunkeness that took place on the hill, despite the fact that drinking only made thing worse) but that doesnt do much good.

[Rebecca]

wow, for the first time I'd have to say I disagreed with you.

I loved Hancock. I thought most people disliked it on principle either because 1)they thought it "ended completely different than where it began," which, I do believe is called a PLOT TWIST. I think they're just bitching because they weren't allowed to go into it expecting a twist and therefor didn't get to look for it and say "i told you so!!" Or 2) they just went into it with the preconception that they would dislike it anyway. I find people rarely go into movies these days fresh and with no preconceptions. But I will say I could have done without the hospital "superpowers" dialog. I think after all those years they'd know more than "we have powerz lol"

And I found the Ruins to be well...lame. It just didn't inspire me, or wasn't efficient enough at engaging me as an audience. I know the premise was inventive, but for me they failed at making it ~real~

[RaJ]

Just wondering, was it the racial politics that turned you off "Hancock"? I don't think the film is anti-miscegenation; however I can see how the ending might be interpreted as surrendering to the enemy.

Or was the problem that it wasn't political enough-- ie, that it tried to soft-pedal the race stuff, its most interesting aspect?

[franchesca]

oh rich. i just love you. i saw the ruins the other night and LOVED it. i screamed and squealed like a little girl throughout the gory parts but really enjoyed it. i'm planning on reading the book now after hearing it was better than the film. thanks for being so awesome.

[Jaguares]

Honestly, I LOVE your music posts but I wonder about your gore movie love. No plot, horrible dialogue, and lame effects. What is there to like? The movies aren't even campy enough to have fun with.

[RH]

Hmmn... I really, really hated the book ( I agree with your screenplay observation). I only finished it because I was on an airplane with nothing else to read and it gave me a headache, so when someone offered me a free ticket to the movie (another friend had bailed on them) I didn't even want to see it for free.
However, I generally trust your taste, (and am surprised that, yeah, it seems if nothing else, good-looking) so I might actually give this a try- after after a few drinks, anyway.

[Parker]

I thought the Ruins was visually well done but the story was horrible. Not that plants or anything ruined it for me..but it dragged on and on in a useless way. The material matched that of a short. Knock out 30 minutes and I would've been impressed.

Also, Re: Hancock..who knew superheroes weren't immune to bigotry? I haven't felt that uncomfortable in a theater in a long time. Fuckin Will Smith.

[meme]

Interesting insights about the movie, but I still hate it.

[debuci]

I agree "emotional development" is overrated.

[dodger]

nice, i liked it too, but not tothe degree you did. on seen theatrical and thought it just was just missed opportunities, it coulda gone further and still remained beautiful. the vine in the final girls face for instance, that shoulda been on the theatre screen. it did look great tho. i'm really glad you took the time to review this type of film, definatley one of the neater movies from 2008.

[joe funtime]

Didn't sway me, man. Still a very boring and pretty useless pic. Pretty screen shots or not. This film makes The Descent look like pure joyful genius.

[Nikita Tinypaws]

Thank goodness. I was starting to feel like the only person that liked this movie! I wish it would have been slightly longer, allowing for more elements of the book (like the starving, drinking, etc) and I think the book ending was scarier - just giving up to the horror.