{shortcode-6e8013102969e8532e8f012ec5a89db8c46ade3a}“Bad Times at the El Royale” is everything that “The Hateful Eight” should have been. Now, since I’m a Quentin Tarantino fan, those words were hard to type. But, it is impossible to ignore that writer and director Drew Goddard (“The Martian,” “Cabin in the Woods”) has taken Tarantino’s single-location style and perfected it. From the first moments of the film, which are completely devoid of dialogue, to the first bloody gunshot, viewers are left engrossed and in suspense. Goddard escalates the tension that is key to this film’s success. With enough twists and turns to give you whiplash, the film is gripping and all-around entertaining from start to finish, owing to this sense of mystery, intrigue, and confusion that surrounds everything that the characters do.

Unlike most modern films, the trailer for “Bad Times at the El Royale” is surprisingly vague, largely owing to the mystery, confusion, and multiple plot twists that are crucial to the film’s efficacy. Therefore, it’s hard to say anything about this film besides, “Go see it.” Nonetheless, to give any indication of what to expect: In the late 1960s, seven strangers converge on the once-proud “El Royale” motel, split in half by the California-Nevada border. All of them are there with a purpose, all of them have secrets, and as their paths cross and interests overlap, the situation becomes more and more dangerous. People are lost, alliances are formed, and the suspense builds up to an exhilarating, heart-pounding finale.

Suspense is critical to the film’s potency and Goddard achieves it through his brilliant use of “show don’t tell” filmmaking. Too often nowadays, filmmakers and writers resort to clunky exposition and cheap backstories as a way of feeding the audience crucial information about the characters. A film’s action or plot will seemingly halt while a character delivers a crucial piece of information. In “Bad Times at the El Royale,” this is never the case. Each piece of information that is necessary for understanding the characters is blended seamlessly into the narrative. The conversations feel natural and lend depth and believability to each of the seven strangers. Their lives, backstories, and motivations have weight. Furthermore, there comes a point where it stops feeling like we are watching a film, and more as though we have been dropped straight into the lives of these characters. The characters’ stories are entirely their own, and we only learn that which they are willing to share. This adds a degree of realism to the slightly-absurd premise, and makes for a compelling mystery. The realism is enhanced by strong performances from Jon Hamm (Laramie Sullivan, a vacuum salesman), Jeff Bridges (Father Daniel Flynn), and relative newcomer Cynthia Erivo (Darlene Sweet, a singer).

Furthermore, the film continuously defies audience expectations with its twisting narrative, making each moment interesting and unpredictable. Since direction of the plot is unexpected, the film is never dull, as simple moments can have large consequences and effects. Near the middle of the film, as two characters have a tense discussion in a car with one pointing a pistol at the other, we are never entirely sure whether or not that pistol will go off and, if it does, who will be on the receiving end of the bullet.

The cinematography also works well for the overall tone of the film. Goddard’s use of long takes, where several minutes pass without the camera cutting, further adds to the realism of the scenes. Giving the actors several minutes of uncut screen-time allows them to play off each other’s inflections, tones, and expressions, making each conversation and interaction flow more naturally than if a series of rapid cuts were used. Additionally, Goddard uses distance as a key factor in setting up his shots. The camera is either far away from the character or object that is, seemingly, the object of focus for a scene, or extremely zoomed-in. The closeups are clear indicators of the importance of an object or a scene, and as the camera zooms-in, the tension and suspense go up. Goddard expertly weaves his shots together to manipulate the emotions and viewpoints of the audience to maximize the effectiveness of each scene.

Despite the quality of the film, there are a few glaring issues. While there are some strong performances, Chris Hemsworth’s cult leader character and the “final showdown” feel tonally out of place in what was an otherwise compelling mystery. Once the mystery dissolves, and the blood starts flowing, the film shifts into more of an action-film, leaving behind what made it compelling in the first place. And while Hemsworth tries his best to pull off a California accent, he can’t help but let some of the Australian slip through, which takes away from the scene when it becomes apparent that he’s just acting.

But perhaps the most glaring issue is that, after the dust has settled and the survivors are left to regroup, Goddard leaves viewers with the question, “What’s the point of all this?” Throughout the film there is an emphasis on the juxtaposition of two opposing sides (e.g. the Nevada-California border, good vs. evil, right vs. wrong). While this is an important thematic element, there is nothing really to take away from the film. The film does seem to pose the question of whether these characters are redeemable, but the answer seems fairly clear: “No.”

Despite a few problems, “Bad Times at the El Royale” takes the best elements from previous, similar films (“Reservoir Dogs,” “The Hateful Eight”) and perfects them. The uncertainty and suspense that underlie each scene make for an exhilarating film from start to finish. And ultimately, the benchmark for what should make a good movie is, “Does this film entertain?” This one absolutely does. You’ll have a good time at the “El Royale.”