OK, I'm done watching Tim Sutton movies.

It's not that Sutton isn't talented, but since his visually stunning debut "Pavillion", his creative vision keeps battering the same one wall, like a stymied writer-blocked film student.

Especially after "Dark Night", Sutton drew a lot of comparisons to Gus Van Sant, whose "Elephant" was similarly structured and themed. Sure, "Dark Night" meandered, as all of Sutton's films do, but it did it in such a curiously intriguing way, showing you characters and situations that when they weren't odd or slightly askew in a way you had to work to articulate, the film was at bare minimum striking to look at. On a macro level, it had a lot to say.

"Funny Face" has a premise that seems intriguing, but it's hung on a cast of the dullest characters Sutton has yet created. They aren't exactly unlikable, and for brief periods the boy-girl protag's relationship and shared grief over lives lost/ abandoned does work.

But then it's as if Sutton remembered he's also got a plot to run. This constant down and up shifting in the pacing only emphasizes Funny Face's threadbare conceits --- it's attempts to draw parallels between the protagonist and antagonist, and the few sledgehammer blows of symbolism (the pink neon sign was laughable) make it self-conscious and embarrassing. The limited character palettes guarantee all the performances come across as either stilted or overplayed (especially by the villain).

If Sutton's previous films did nothing else, they carried a bit of subtlety and grace. Funny Face's repetitive nature and lack of any substantial dialogue, combined with the basic ordinariness or ugliness of it's surroundings and leaden juxtaposition add up to nothing, at least nothing worth sitting still for at 93 minutes.

I had expectations for this one. That's why it is so hard to admit that I didn't really like it.

The film is subtle, is an art house film, I knew that before. I knew the pace wouldn't be a typical Hollywood pace, I knew that was a drama and not a vigilante movie or something similar. So, that was not my issue with the film. The silence and the lack of much dialogue doesn't bother me either (I like or love most of Kim Ki-duk films, that are much more raw than this regarding that).

However, for the most time, I can't say that something relevant for the plot was happening in scene. They ate a lot and don't like to speak while they are eating. I get that.

The film plays with your patience, drags a lot, with some cool shots, a nice cinematography and a good score. Unfortunately, the substance is not there and I was really bored during most of his duration, as there is no material here to fill 90 minutes.

Not my cup of tea, even if there are here and there some good appointments to take. Almost all in the technical aspects.

PS: That would be a pretty cool mask for a new slasher movie.

Two strangers who are dealing with their own form of grief, bound over the course of 48 hours.

This could have concluded in 30 minutes or less. The run time is stretched out because of long shots of walking, or other activities the characters take part in. I wouldn't have minded this if the story was strong. We have a guy dealing with his family home getting demolished, and woman dealing with death. These characters don't have personality. The female lead was kinda pointless, she didn't add anything to the story. They don't do anything, but mope around. Maybe that was the point, cause in real life people deal with trauma internally, not everyone is going to react like joker. But I think it could have been more engaging. It's advertised as a thriller or horror, but is nothing like that at all.

There was one scene where a shoplifting is taking place, and this was very well done. It put me in the perspective of the shoplifter and what it would be like to get caught. I got excited cause I thought the rest of the movie would have stuff like this, but this was short lived.