I have an ambivalent relationship to work that churns out the aesthetic of 80's genre films to maximise a nostalgic kick. Although Luz has an incredible visual reference, one that could feasibly trick people as to what year it was made, it's more experimental than the work it emulates. The sound design and use of performance intrigue, its use of suggestion reminding me of Pontypool. Impressive.
By bringing to mind horror genre artists like Carpenter in widescreen framing and Zulawski in elaborate extended, methodically-moving long takes, as much as it does the nightmare logic and atmosphere of Fulci, Luz is more impressive for what it is— a graduate thesis that compellingly recalls these auteurs— if not exactly showing its director as fully capable of solidifying the art or emotion of yet.
Scores points for being 70 minutes long and shot on 16mm...but kids in film school really need it drilled into them that they're not John Carpenter and that they're too young to remember/'be nostalgic for' the (now-tiresome) '80s horror aesthetic anyway.
doesn't really deliver everything it promises especially when it comes to script but this Zulawski-alike atmosphere left my heart so warm that I can't say it wasn't a truly enjoyable experience. definitely my type of shit. looking forward to a next film from this guy.
If only the director had found the time to dig a better ending and engender better sequences to mere plot points with potential, maybe Luz could have been the surprise of the year within the limits of a saturated horror genre. (2.5 stars)
An interesting but flawed tale of demonic possession that subverts the tropes you usually expect. However, for every masterstroke there are severe missteps mostly tied to the underwhelming plot that leaves too many holes and questions when the credits roll. The mood, music, sets, photo is stellar and show that Singer is a director to watch. Now he just need to brush up on his writing...