STING

Arachnophobes beware!

When 12 year-old Charlotte (Alyla Browne) stumbles upon a tiny, newly hatched, spider she does what - in my opinion - only the criminally insane would do.

She smuggles it in a matchbox and decides to keep it as a pet.

Named Sting, in a nod to The Lord of the Rings (Shelob, naturally, would be a far less snappy movie title), the spider shows an uncommon ability to hunt - webbing up cockroaches quicker the Peter Parker on speed - and, more importantly, an unheard of capacity to grow.

Physically, you understand. Not in an emotional sense. Theres little of that here.

They do try to give us some emotional stakes, with time dedicated to Charlottes relationship with her family, but realistically, most of us are here for the big spider.

On a technical level Sting is a proficiently made film. 

It’s opening scene, in which we meet Frank (Jermaine Fowler), a pest exterminator called out to deal with “something in the walls”, plants some seeds and drops some clues for what’s to come, before jumping back four days to see how he got there, is a fun way of introducing the lpotential threat from an early point.

The directors use of shadows, and every day object, that look vaguely arachnoid is a nice way of keeping the viewers visually engaged with what’s on screen.

And the use of vents at the start, with Charlotte racing back to her room to avoid the wrath of her aunt Gunter (Robyn Nevin) (after using them to sneak into her apartment) was a cool way of introducing us to the building tenants, and the setting for the film - set, as it is, almost exclusively in this apartment block.

Sting, the spider, also looks good, with some effective CGI work, but where the spider works best is off screen. Much like Jaws, in which you barely see the shark, for the first two acts of Sting we barely see the spider. The idea of it is enough, and often more anxiety inducing, than the thing itself.

So, on a technical level, a big thumbs up.

Emotionally though… it left me cold.

Crucially, Sting is not scary. I used the term anxiety-inducing previously, and it does build a certain level of unease, but it never managed to manufacture any scares from it.

Theres a lot of good groundwork on display, but the filmmakers seemed unsure of how to stick the landing.

And I never cared about the family dynamics or any of the characters themselves. Frank the exterminator is good fun, but the rest of the family were fairly dull and lifeless and I found myself not really caring which, if any of them, lived or died. 

Narratively, and somewhat expectedly, Sting has set itself up for a potential franchise, however its modest opening weekend may well stop it in its tracks. It might make its money back, but I think it’s unlikely to be enough to make them want to bother making another. 

All in all, I think Sting is a bit of a shame. There is a lot of good work on display with it, it just wasn’t quite enough. The technical prowess can’t mask the fact that it has unmemorable characters and virtually no scares.

Remember that myth about Daddy Long Legs? How they have powerful venom but no means of injecting anyone with it? Well, take that as a metaphor for Sting.