r/Sardonicast

**Sorry in advance for the long post**

I missed Obsession in the cinema, but saw that it was getting great reviews across the board, including the Sard boyz, so I decided to rent it. I managed to avoid trailers and didn't read any reviews, so went in semi-blind.

I'm about 25 mins in to the movie and... Well... I can't stand the protagonist 'Bear'. To the point that I don't want to watch the rest of the film, because I don't like the idea of spending another hour in his snivelling company.

I get that having a chest-thumping, overly-confident, alpha-male douche is not what you want in a protagonist, in an dramatic indie horror like this. However, in my opinion, having an indecisive, insecure, introverted weakling as your protagonist is just as undesirable.

**Minor spoilers ahead**

The film opens with him practising a speech where he tells her how much he loves her. That he sees/hears her in everything, even in the music he listens to. He's loved her for years, and he'd like to be more than just friends. The film is very clear that she is the most important thing in his life. BUT....

The way he self-sabotages his opportunities to tell her he likes her, even after she straight-up asks him if he likes her, is (in my opinion) just unrealistically feeble and passive. After he makes the wish, and she's "under the spell", she asks if he wants to come in to her home. Another excellent opportunity to tell her but he declines. I understand that he thinks her behaviour is odd, but the character doesn't know that an evil spell is causing this behaviour, so it doesn't make sense that he wouldn't use this as another opportunity to tell her he likes her and then leave respectfully. After he declines to go in to her place, she asks to go to his home, and he very reluctantly agrees, even though he doesn't know that evil forces are at work, and this would be another good opportunity to tell her he likes her. They get to his place and she asks him to stay with her in the spare room bed. Again, he reluctantly agrees, even though this should be a dream-come-true, given how much he loves her. She removes her top and he spins around in total fear, like he's just witnessed some horrific incident. I think this moment/shot is played for laughs, but I just rolled my eyes.

That's where I stopped watching.

Is this how the rest of the film is? Bear being spineless and meek? Am I supposed to like this character? I don't mind a shy, underdog protagonist, but Bear's introverted persona is bordering on absurd.

Please help me understand, or convince me that I shouldn't waste £15 by not watching the rest of the film.

When I see bad movie reviews it's always from the perspective of the writing being bad, with very little commentary on the actual filmmaking.

Surely it's happened before where a great script is passed on to a studio and director who have literally no idea what they are doing?

https://youtu.be/qaZ9m2A2EGo?is=J6vxaKJALaiBDvvC

From the creator of the Minions characters come a whole new movie with brand new Dibbys!!!!!!!!!!

I was listening to the recent discussion about Obsession, and it really rubbed me the wrong way how quick the guys were to take the opportunity to trash Jason Blum. They went out of their way to emphasize that Blumhouse didn’t actually produce the movie and explicitly said "Jason Blum doesn't deserve the credit" and that "he is profiting" from it just because he helped picked it up at a festival. (Some of this may be from adams review of Obsession on his channel).

Firstly, strange how they didn't have any critism for Focus features who were doing the exact same thing in partnership with Blumhouse.

Secondly, Fine. If that’s the rule, let’s apply it across the board. Why is it that when NEON buys a festival film, they are treated like the saviors of cinema? Look at NTBTSTM. NEON didn’t fund that from the ground up; they stepped in as a distributor. Yet, the hosts act like it’s awesome that NEON is involved and praise them for it. Nobody on the pod is rushing to the mic to say, "Actually, NEON doesn't deserve any credit for this."

Lastly, when Blumhouse slaps their logo on an acquisition that ends up being garbage—like Unfriended or the green inferno—the hosts have zero problem letting Jason Blum take the heat for it. You never hear them say, "To be fair, Jason Blum doesn't deserve the blame for this, he just distributed it."

I don't even like Jason Blum or 95% of blumhouse films at all, but I just get irked by the knee jerk response of feeling the need to avoid crediting him at all costs to actually specifically separate him out as a factor in the films success, especially when it's clear they would never do this with any other movie.

Unless anyone can tell me why I'm wrong? Otherwise, I say well done to Jason Blum for helping fund the distribution of an incredible movie like this.