Circle: an attempt at social commentary through psychological horror

SPOILERS

Sometimes I fall down a particular rabbit hole on YouTube that leads me to videos by a channel called 'Nerd Explains'. The videos on this channel are usually titled 'How to Beat [...]', and centre around horror/thrillers that contain certain death traps or games. One day, I came across one of these videos about a film called Circle (2015). Despite the fact that I wasn't familiar with the film, I watched the video anyway. I thought it sounded interesting, and shelved the film in the back of my mind to potentially watch one day.

The other night, I decided just to watch it. I was pleasantly surprised - the film, while far from perfect, definitely exceeded my expectations. The premise is as follows: fifty people wake up in a room, positioned as above. Every two minutes, the orb in the middle of the room will omit a beam of energy and kill someone. At first, the selections seem to be random, but the group soon realise that they can, in fact, vote on who dies. So begins an exploration of social issues, morality, and basic human decency.

Very few of the characters are actually given names - the subtitles refer to most of them either as 'Unnamed' or by a designation depending on their personality or looks. For example, one character is simply called 'The Soldier', while another is called 'The Atheist'. It soon becomes apparent that these characters are based upon common archetypes which does, unfortunately, mean that the film leans into stereotypes. The film's engagement with social issues is, at times, superficial, but I think that is to be expected of something of this length and format. There isn't really enough time to get to know the characters properly and to explore the nuances in their opinions; hence, the characters end up as caricatures, as placeholders for certain social issues and positions. It bears striking similarities to 12 Angry Men, which actually inspired the script.

The film is largely set in the same room, with fifty people slowly being diminished down to just one. It is established early on that stepping off your own circle will result in you being killed. Thus - the characters cannot move and are stuck in the same room for as long as it takes. Not being able to run is undoubtedly one of the most terrifying features of horror films. It is why the first few Five Nights at Freddy's games work so well, too. You cannot move, you cannot run, you cannot hide - you are at the mercy of the people that put you there.

There is some really effective camera work involved that ramps up the tension even further; positioned in the centre of the room, the camera spins in a circle and catalogues the faces of everyone it passes. The movement is eerily similar to the movement of the arrows on the floor during voting, and drives home the fact that these people - mostly strangers - have the lives of everyone else in the room in their hands.

The last quarter of the film is a bit of a struggle. Mass eliminations occur; four people go at once, which is just frustrating. The final three players are Eric, Katie (Little Girl), and the Pregnant Woman. Eric has spent the whole film promising that, if it came down to it, he would sacrifice himself to save either the Little Girl or the Pregnant Woman. He has been peaceable and helpful, while also standing up for his beliefs. His betrayal is a shock - he convinces Katie to step off her circle in sacrifice, and as she does so casts a last-second vote to kill the Pregnant Woman. He believes this will leave him as the last living player, but he finds himself in a tie with the Pregnant Woman's unborn baby. They cannot vote, so Eric votes for them and is effectively the 'winner'. He wakes up in Los Angeles, finding his way to a group of other survivors - the majority of which are pregnant woman and children. This in itself is a bit of a predictable ending, as well as downright impossible. Eric's game proved that the woman and the unborn child are considered separate entities - therefore, it should be impossible for them to survive. Unless all of the pregnant women voted to kill their unborn children so that they could survive, which is extremely dark.

I think the film's ending was pretty lacklustre, to be honest. I think it would've been better if it had cut to black after showing us Eric tied with the unborn child. I suppose at that point the ending is really a foregone conclusion, but it would've been interesting nonetheless.

I don't think Circle is a bad film, per se. I think it just falls short of the mark on a few elements. Its handling of social issues - especially religion - was quite superficial, and stereotypical at best. I suppose that is to be expected of a film dealing with archetypes and caricatures, though. I liked the design choices, and I thought that framing the characters against the darkness was really effective. It leaves you wondering what the room would look like if it was fully lit - would the dead bodies be stacked up against the walls? When someone dies, their body is dragged away - but where to?

The film definitely builds and sustains tension pretty well, owing to the cinematography and casting choices. Most of the actors are relatively unknown, meaning that the audience will have no preconceptions about any of them. This emphasises the fact that these people could be anyone. Some of the characters are utterly deplorable and have no reservations about killing others to save their own skin. Other characters have compelling stories and are kind and helpful to others, despite the situation. I suppose they are meant to represent society, but in microcosm, with differing priorities and opinions.

Ultimately, I did enjoy Circle. I would recommend it if you have a spare hour and a half - I was hooked and wanted to keep watching to see what would happen next. I did also get quite invested in some of the 'nicer' characters, despite the fact that we learn very little about them. It is an interesting exploration of morality, if a little superficial at times.