New On Demand from Utopia!
Directed by Pedro Kos.
Written by Steven Klein, Aaron Kogan, Clay Tweel.
Check out the trailer here!!
A young filmmaker Emily (Brittany O’Grady) seeks answers and to check up on her estranged mother Sam (Alanna Ubach) who is a recovering addict. With her cameraman Danny (E.J. Bonilla) in tow, Emily makes the trip from Los Angeles to New Mexico, hoping to make this reunion into some kind of documentary. But after an emotional reunion, Emily and Danny find that Sam disappears the very next day. In fear of a relapse, the filmmaking pair try to figure out where Sam is and if she is even still alive.
Are the actors successfully acting like they aren’t acting?
The acting is solid and believable. Both leads make comfortable banter between one another that feels very real. Like they have been friends for a while. The background characters seem to be real homeless people and again, do well with what they are given. All in all, everything feels authentic and unscripted.
Does the footage found seem authentic and untouched by additional production?
There is a leap at the very end that is outside of what would be called found footage. Other than that, everything seems to be coming from the same hand-held camera with very little edits. There are a few beats where some background noise is amplified that might have been added post production, but if it did, the added music wasn’t invasive. It all feels like raw footage.
Is there an up-nose BLAIR WITCH confessional or a REC-drag away from the camera?
There is a confessional of sorts giving a bit of context in the final act. This occurs at the beginning and then the scene is repeated in context at the end. It wasn’t obnoxious, given what transpires. I’m being intentionally vague to respect spoilers.
Why don’t they just drop the camera and get the hell out of there?
The point of the film is that Emily is making a documentary about reconnecting with her mom. So, the camera isn’t dropped for the sake of catching everything on film. When the camera is finally dropped during the climax, it’s picked up by someone else. So again, everything feels unforced.
Does anything actually happen? Is the lead in too long and the payoff too short?
Quite a bit of story is told in this film. The story of reconnecting with Emily’s mom is compelling, mainly because of the acting of the leads and the genuine look at the inner workings of the treatment center caring for these homeless and addicted souls. There is a mystery unfolding as Sam disappears halfway through and the search for her becomes the priority. This mystery unfolds in a way that doesn’t feel like a moment of filler.
Does the film add anything to the subgenre and is it worth watching?
It’s one thing that a film feels authentic, but that’s only half the battle to be a good movie. It also has to bring something new to the table or at least do something right. IN OUR BLOOD does a whole lot right. Mainly, it tells a compelling story that unfolds meticulously, leading the viewer along with small revelations that leads to a whopper of a surprise at the end. The movie might annoy those who need to know exactly what type of sub genre the film sits in right away, but if you let this one take you, I think you’ll be like me and be pleasantly surprised by the big finale. It made me want to rewatch and study the clues dropped throughout the story, which made the reveal obvious, but covered it with solid storytelling and engrossing performances. I highly recommend IN OUR BLOOD, especially for those who think the found footage sub-genre is stale. This one proved the nay-sayers wrong.
