Six minutes wasted right off the bat, more than were needed to serve as contrast for what is to come. One scene of stark violence; two minutes of dubious editing and dialogue; 14 minutes of exposition. Even as some of the preceding moments are woven into the narrative thereafter, it's not until one-third of the runtime has passed that it seems like the movie begins in earnest. The concept sounds promising, and surely grotesque; the execution is distinctly uneven and wanting, sometimes needlessly obscene, and less than convincing. Whatever you think you're going to get out of 'No reason,' there's at best a 50-50 chance that you're right. For my part, I'm at best unsure this was worth my time.
Credit where it's due: the blood and gore looks good, and the effects generally. The violence and otherwise ghastly imagery is emphatically extreme, graphic, explicit, and excessive, including genital mutilation amidst near-constant nudity. Yet the crimson and viscera are also the bread and butter of the film, with any sense of plot being little more than an excuse for the visuals, so by that measure one would certainly hope this element is executed well. To that point, the makeup, prosthetics, and costume design mostly look pretty great, and mostly equally wretched. The exception is the cephalopod being, whose mask especially betrays the pointedly low-budget nature of the production, and the voice effects for whom are downright tawdry. I appreciate the set design and decoration, especially in the more gnarly scenes, and if a little on the nose, the use of lighting is pretty swell.
All this is well and good. On the other hand, the acting generally leaves much to be desired. The editing is wildly overzealous - presumably trying to compensate for weak material - including disjointed sequencing that adjoins poor writing. Individual scenes are mostly fine in theory (and do come off well in the bloodiest of instances); dialogue is laughably bad, and never more so than when there's any attempt at profundity (including the ending). Characters are a hodgepodge of half-baked ideas, as seemingly unfinished in concept as the story. No feature can survive poor writing. There are good ideas here, and the root premise of an ultra-violent journey through one's personal hell is a fantastic idea for a horror film. Yet the plot feels meagerly plastered together, barely attaining cohesiveness, and it's flimsy all the while. Again, it's clear the blood and gore were the top priority, but that's "no reason" for shortchanging the glue that holds a picture together. Olaf Ittenbach needed to spend more time developing his screenplay and less time imagining different ways to spill blood.
If all you want out of a horror film are a few scenes that arguably make it seem like the Cenobites exercise restraint, then you might get a kick out of 'No reason' as long as you fast-forward through about a collective half of the runtime otherwise. If you need more out of your genre flicks than simple, brutal violence, you've altogether come to the wrong place. I had high hopes, and they were dashed: it's a notion I'd like to see explored more earnestly, but this isn't the movie for any major degree of thoughtful storytelling or mindful film-making.
