It does not help that Sykes has a terrible habit of telling and not showing most of what is happening. The opening infraction of infidelity- told not shown. Then the six girls, in groups of three and three, talk, mainly about nothing, in particular, only to wind up at the park (?) where the fight happens. How many days after Chloe cheated is this? Was a challenge thrown down, or did Tracy and her goons just figure out where the others were going to be? Answers to these, which would give much-needed context for how impulsive or carefully plotted this avenging act is, never come.
Also causing Drunken Butterflies: The Director’s Cut to feel disjointed and all over the place are the things it does show the viewer. At a bar, one of the girl trios, gets into a fight with a drunken bachelorette. The fight is all awkward close-ups and confusing geography, making it impossible to follow. Also hard to understand… the point of this scene! It is the definition of grinding gears for no reason. It does not further the main plot, it does not add depth to anyone, and the payoff, later on, is brief, dumb, and ultimately pointless.
“…disjointed and all over the place…”
There is one positive to this trainwreck masquerading as a film; the acting is pretty good. It is my understanding that the story and dialogue were all improvised or scripted day of by the actors themselves. This explains Drunken Butterflies: The Director’s Cut jumbled feeling, as its clear they were doing things they thought would be cool or interesting day of, without regard if it made sense overall. But, they are all clearly having fun and ably embody their characters with ease. Tracy Bell, as Tracy, is very believable as a (seemingly) vapid, easy to anger person. As the movie progresses, the actress is able to show a growth that the poor story construction and even worse directing could not.
It is my understanding that Drunken Butterflies: The Director’s Cut strips away the original’s reality-TV aesthetic (based on the press release). But in doing so, he created a film that’s sole identity is that of being afraid of medium and wide shots (discombobulating extreme close-ups are the norm here), which is not the same thing. The directing is messy, with only one scene near the end, finding a natural rhythm and momentum before quickly cutting to something confusing and pointless.
Basically, all this movie proves is that sometimes, the director is wrong, because every choice Sykes made to reinvent Drunken Butterflies for society now was the wrong one. The directing is a mess, favoring close-ups without establishing shots, leaving the audience confused. He tells and does not show, leaving the viewer disinterested. The story is only concerned with the present scene, leaving all watching until the end disheartened. Nothing here works, save for the cast.
"…there is one positive to this trainwreck masquerading as a film; the acting..."
