In the Heat of Madness and in the Clutches of Nightmare

A review of the short film Bay For Blood, directed by Harry Waldman

Films that take place entirely in a closed space, whether a house, a school, or a workshop, generally take a serious risk. This is because when a director confines themselves to a single enclosed location, they effectively forgo a very important element of attraction: the variety of spaces. With the loss of spatial variety and confinement to one place, there arises the danger that the viewer may gradually feel boredom. Famous feature films such as 12 Angry Men (1957), which unfolds entirely within the closed space of a jury room, or the even more extreme Buried (2010), which takes place entirely inside a coffin, are in effect showcasing the power of their cinematic creativity and artistry by limiting themselves. These films demonstrate that spatial restriction can greatly intensify tension, focus on character, and dialogue. Harry Waldman, in his short film Bay For Blood, has undertaken a similar action and has confined his three characters inside a house for the entire duration of the film. From the very outset, the filmmaker has set himself a challenge that other works do not face: how to create imagery that is inviting and engaging, varied, at the same time credible, and of course cinematic, within a closed space? Harry Waldman arrives at a praiseworthy result.

Waldman skillfully succeeds in finding a worthy substitute for the limitation of location, and that is by turning toward two subjects: one is the psychology of the characters, and the other is dialogue and, of course, the delivery of dialogue. Both male actors, namely David Neylon and Jasper Hammer, know well how to reveal the psychological aspects of their characters by changing the tone of their voices, by acting even with their eyes, and through movements that have a sudden outburst. On the one hand, the extent to which these characters are traumatized in their own world, and on the other, how they display these psychological wounds in their encounters with one another, is a matter that has not been easy to execute. These shifts in mood are sometimes shown merely by a change in the actor’s breathing rhythm, and sometimes by a small, unusual smile.

Another important feature of the film is that until the first third, the viewer has no idea of the nature or manner of the storyline and does not know what is actually happening. Although details such as the nature of the relationship between Jessica and James become more or less clear to us, in the first third of the film we still do not know what kind of work we are dealing with. This feature—creating a form of ambiguity—helps the film enrich its psychological aspects. These psychological aspects are the keys to entering the world of the film: a dark and bitter drama that, through the tensions between the characters, addresses the important subject of the failure to establish human connection. The human isolation arising from the lack of healthy communication among the characters, at the center of which stands James, begins to expand gradually from the very beginning of the narrative. Pay attention to the unusual conversation about pizza, or to James and Jessica’s inability to clearly explain the nature of their relationship. What we initially imagine to be the connection between a drug dealer and his customer suddenly, because of a nervous collapse, turns into an awkward and uncomfortable situation.

Here it is necessary to speak about one of the film’s important features, which is that almost all of its situations are so simple and natural that we imagine them to be completely everyday scenes. Like talking about food, or a simple transaction involving two grams of a substance. Yet these seemingly simple situations are suddenly drawn into violence—an anxiety-inducing violence. Thus the filmmaker points to the fact that violence is everywhere around us and can at any moment occur in the form of a terrible and shocking event precisely from those around us and from people we know.

James’s mental problems, as the central character of the story, are generally a combination of insecurity in the presence of others, uncontrolled anger, and of course self-loathing. One can remember when he suddenly lunges toward Jessica to kiss her and fails: how he uses his own victimhood to pressure the real victim and put her under pressure. What he says about his own “good intentions,” the fact that he continually launches verbal and physical attacks on others, shows that he is a danger toothers. To understand James’s condition it is enough to observe Jessica’s reactions. She first politely distances herself from approaching James, but then becomes afraid of his reaction and afterward tries to leave the house without saying anything that would wound the man’s feelings. Yet the film does not stop there and transforms from a psychological work into a thriller—a thriller in which James, like a dangerous avenger, seeks to punish others.

The interior space of the house—the narrow corridors, the white doors, the steel refrigerator, the wall posters, and so on—givesthe viewer a stifling and uncomfortable feeling. It is as if we are inside James’s mind. This house and James’s position within it are in fact a symbol of James’s own position in his life: a manconfined in a closed environment who has no choice but to endure the large and small nightmares he sees every day. Even these characters, while being realistic, can in a way be symbolic, and in reality James is arguing with them inside his own head. The central themes of the film, such as the inability to accept rejection, self-victimization and the victimization of others, and the unmarked nature of the cycle of violence, clearly describe James’s situation in this bitter position. The reference to punishment through damaging others’ hearing is by no means accidental. Rather, the filmmaker is metaphorically emphasizing the matter of becoming deaf and one’s inability to hear the opinions of others. By stressing James’s damaging of his friend’s hearing, the director is in fact conveying the point that sometimes the very individual who is incapable of hearing the views and words of others deliberately causes them not to hear as well.

The ending of the film, which is both violent and effective, arrives suddenly and leaves the viewer alone with the emotional processing of what they have seen. Bay For Blood is one of those films that settles in the viewer after it ends, and remains with them. The director’s skill lies in showing how everyday interactions can rapidly slide into the realm of control, anger, and violence, yet the violent person does not change their perspective and continues to regard themselves as the victim. The director asks the audience, instead of simple identification, to understand the discomfort flowing through the space. As a character study and a study of unhealthy relationships, it remains thought-provoking. The film’s closing title, after the sight of blood and violence, acquires a bitter resonance: here there is neither a hero nor an absolute victim; only a cycle of harm that continues.

The film strives, by using claustrophobia, by attending to the inequality of the characters’ mental health, and by considering the role of conversation in human life, to share with us the dual nature of these characters. That Jessica can at the same time appear as a girl interested in connection and also claim her rights. That James himself, despite his savage acts toward the other two characters, becomes completely human in moments and reveals a side of himself that we have certainly not seen in his arguments. Bay For Blood is worth watching in every respect: in terms of its performances, in terms of its style of cinematography, in terms of its storyline, and above all in terms of what it does by making ordinary situations extraordinary.