Directed by Graeme Arnfield, a nightmarish essay film on the history of the doorbell, tracing its invention and constant reinventions through 19th century labour struggles, the nascent years of narrative cinema, and contemporary surveillance cultures.
Kicking things off with another reminder of how women’s, and particularly women of colour’s, achievements in history have been ignored or forgotten, Graeme Arnfield explores how Marie Van Brittan Brown’s invention was the beginning of modern home security. It’s a great way to highlight her contribution and lead into the creation of the Ring doorbell, and its discussion of safety, privacy, anxiety and paranoia.
Arnfield takes a lot of risks with Home Invasion because he’s ardently committed to one singular, static style. The entire film is viewed through the typical doorbell style, which has its advantages and disadvantages. It can feel apt and poignant, but it can also feel restrictive and even unnecessary at times. However, Arnfield does have a clever concept in combining the modern love of viral videos and genuine debate about the risks and benefits of technological advancement.
It asks interesting questions about the idea of being watched and whether it makes us safer or if it simply makes it easier for others to use it against us. As well as the question of whether that constant awareness and knowledge of what’s going on around your home actually makes you feel more unsafe.
However, in its latter half the film then takes a wild tangent to discuss the history of those publicly opposed to technology. That’s where things go off the rails, it entirely takes over Home Invasion and leaves little room for anything else. It’s worth including but poorly placed and far too drawn out, whereas its exploration of how home security plays into cinema is done really well. Especially combining that idea of being watched and how over the years it has become so prevalent in horror, moving from an outside threat, to inside your own home.
Home Invasion has a clever foundation of melding together a discussion of safety and security in the modern age, with the popular obsession with viral, candid and shocking video. It feels like its initial style work well but becomes more restrictive over time and the progression is strong initially but loses itself in the latter half. There’s an interesting debate to be found but leaving centuries old examples of responses to technology until so late and taking over such a big portion of the runtime dampens the film overall.
FilmCarnage.com 