I recently saw "Disappearances" at a private screening at my college. Jay Craven was there to offer some insights into the film and to prepare us for it. It was a small audience, mostly college students and teachers, the latter apparently being the only ones who "got" the movie.
Jay Craven's work is famous for its breathtaking visuals and ambiance, courtesy of the still relatively undeveloped Northeast Kingdom of Vermont (where I live) - and his latest film doesn't disappoint in this respect. What's disappointing about Disappearances is that it unwisely shifts its mood from that of the cold, hard realism of Vermont circa 1930s, and as the movie progresses, becomes increasingly focused on the "magical realism" that is tied to the back story behind its characters. While such an approach might have worked in the book on which the film is based, it leaves the audience puzzled and somewhat removed from the film.
There are elements of the film that do indeed shine, demonstrating to the uninitiated how Jay Craven manages to attract big names to his films with such limited resources (Kris Kristofferson is the most well-known actor in this particular film). The dialogue is clever and well-written, and there are quite a few moments, mostly in the first half of the film, where you'll be pleasantly surprised by Craven's ability to tell a story and keep a plot moving seamlessly.
In fact, had the entire film stayed true to the theme shown in the beginning of the film - harsh and unforgiving realism - Disappearances might have been remembered as one of Craven's better films. Unfortunately, it tries to do more with its script than the film can manage without overwhelming the viewer, and the ending seems rushed and somewhat terse. Disappearances might be the sort of film that improves with multiple viewings, but only a dedicated viewer will be able (or willing) to keep up with its inconsistent tone and pace and to find the deeper meanings that Craven hoped would be the driving force behind the film.
