Is it that the film is depicting the brutality, inhumanity, homophobia, and transphobia of a horrifically and inherently corrupt system, and the power struggles therein? Or is it that the film is itself homophobic and transphobic in how it depicts this specific dormitory, and portrays and refers to those within? The lack of trans and otherwise queer representation in the casting, and indifference to pronouns in the dialogue, don't help to assuage the latter concern. That the narrative is in no small part a story of self-empowerment, and asserting oneself in circumstances where that power has been ripped away, does.
Is it that filmmaker Jules Stewart is incapable, or possibly her cast, resulting in somewhat leaden, passive pacing and an unbothered air? Or is it that the setting and course of events so thoroughly strips its characters of emotion and humanity that any expression thereof, or heightened drama generally, feels overwrought just by comparison? It's a delicate balance being struck here, and I'm unsure if the end result is somehow "just right," or "endlessly teetering on the edge."
Excise the particulars (setting, characters) and recognizable names and faces, and 'K-11' is one prison drama among many. It's not bad, and in light of the course of events that unfolds, ultimately I think it's kind of good. In fact, I'd like to say I like it even more than I do. It's just that the movie's handling of the subject matter struggles to not seem as problematic as the institution at the heart of the feature. Moreover, for most of the length, the lead character Raymond Saxx feels less like a protagonist and more like a bystander, and the content similarly feels less like a plot and more like a detached portrait of "life in the Big House." When within the last third Saxx experiences a turn-around, and thus the narrative as well, it feels a bit unnatural, and even contrived. The picture gradually gathers all its parts and gels into a cohesive, modestly compelling whole, but for perhaps half the runtime the most dominant element is the question of whether the bigotry is only on the inside radiating out, or if it's also on the outside dripping in.
The cast is restricted by writing and direction that consciously hamstrings their contributions in much the same way as the setting constrains its characters. All the same, I think the assembled actors are pretty swell in realizing their characters with emphatic range, personality, and physicality. That especially goes for Kate del Castillo as charismatic Mousey, and Portia Doubleday as troubled Butterfly - though, again, I'm taken aback by the fact that a picture centering LGBTQ+ characters didn't seem especially concerned about centering LGBTQ+ performers. And I should say, too: I keep hammering a little bit on Stewart, but I don't think there's any one thing wrong with her work in 'K-11.' Only, I've already spoken to everything that seems off about the film, and to whatever extent this construction is intentional versus accidental, the finished product just isn't as successful and convincing as it ideally should or could be. A strong effort, incompletely rendered.
I think the contributions of those behind the scenes are just fine - costume design, hair and makeup, editing, blood, set decoration, and so on. 'K-11' is well made from a technical standpoint, and mildly engaging at large. Nonetheless, there are issues here that never feel entirely resolved for me, and despite the work all put in, the dubiousness that pervades the title from one angle or another just holds it down from climbing any higher. Content warnings are necessary for the indicated homophobia and transphobia, as well as violence and drug use, but overall I do think this is a feature reasonably deserving of one's time should you come across it. But don't go out of your way for it, and just keep in mind that in one fashion or another, 'K-11' has caveats attached.
Is it that filmmaker Jules Stewart is incapable, or possibly her cast, resulting in somewhat leaden, passive pacing and an unbothered air? Or is it that the setting and course of events so thoroughly strips its characters of emotion and humanity that any expression thereof, or heightened drama generally, feels overwrought just by comparison? It's a delicate balance being struck here, and I'm unsure if the end result is somehow "just right," or "endlessly teetering on the edge."
Excise the particulars (setting, characters) and recognizable names and faces, and 'K-11' is one prison drama among many. It's not bad, and in light of the course of events that unfolds, ultimately I think it's kind of good. In fact, I'd like to say I like it even more than I do. It's just that the movie's handling of the subject matter struggles to not seem as problematic as the institution at the heart of the feature. Moreover, for most of the length, the lead character Raymond Saxx feels less like a protagonist and more like a bystander, and the content similarly feels less like a plot and more like a detached portrait of "life in the Big House." When within the last third Saxx experiences a turn-around, and thus the narrative as well, it feels a bit unnatural, and even contrived. The picture gradually gathers all its parts and gels into a cohesive, modestly compelling whole, but for perhaps half the runtime the most dominant element is the question of whether the bigotry is only on the inside radiating out, or if it's also on the outside dripping in.
The cast is restricted by writing and direction that consciously hamstrings their contributions in much the same way as the setting constrains its characters. All the same, I think the assembled actors are pretty swell in realizing their characters with emphatic range, personality, and physicality. That especially goes for Kate del Castillo as charismatic Mousey, and Portia Doubleday as troubled Butterfly - though, again, I'm taken aback by the fact that a picture centering LGBTQ+ characters didn't seem especially concerned about centering LGBTQ+ performers. And I should say, too: I keep hammering a little bit on Stewart, but I don't think there's any one thing wrong with her work in 'K-11.' Only, I've already spoken to everything that seems off about the film, and to whatever extent this construction is intentional versus accidental, the finished product just isn't as successful and convincing as it ideally should or could be. A strong effort, incompletely rendered.
I think the contributions of those behind the scenes are just fine - costume design, hair and makeup, editing, blood, set decoration, and so on. 'K-11' is well made from a technical standpoint, and mildly engaging at large. Nonetheless, there are issues here that never feel entirely resolved for me, and despite the work all put in, the dubiousness that pervades the title from one angle or another just holds it down from climbing any higher. Content warnings are necessary for the indicated homophobia and transphobia, as well as violence and drug use, but overall I do think this is a feature reasonably deserving of one's time should you come across it. But don't go out of your way for it, and just keep in mind that in one fashion or another, 'K-11' has caveats attached.