How would you like it if, just for fun, I wrote here mini reviews about all those "first person screamer" mockumentary movies I've seen so far, then talked about the newest "found footage" sensation? Don't answer, read on.
Naturally the first one I saw was The Blair Witch Project from 1999. Great atmosphere, brilliant ending scene, shameful sequel. Back in those days filming something like this was a shockingly original idea.
In 2006 a Werner Herzog - Zak Penn production came out, titled Incident at Loch Ness. Hard to describe this one, I'd say it's a comedy-thriller-hoax, and I wouldn't call it a good film, but one that definitely worth a watch. Give it a try once.
Then came the Spanish [REC] in 2007, and its scene-to-scene American remake called Quarantine. The story is about zombies terrorizing firemen and a TV crew following them, trapped in a building estate. Don't watch this one if you can't handle jump scares, but otherwise it's highly recommended good fun, sometimes a bit predictable if anything. I should watch the sequel too.
Early 2008 Cloverfield was released worldwide, produced by J.J. Abrems, directed by Matt Reeves. It's a crazy, mindless giant monster piece, fast and exciting, a very nice tribute to all those Japanese kaiju eiga movies. Roland Emmerich should have done something like this with his American Godzilla. I can't deny how much I love this film, and would rather see a Clover-sequel instead of... wait, we'll get to that in time.
Probably The Fourth Kind (2009) has the most interesting concept. It's a thriller about alien abductions, set in Nome, Alaska, and it constantly shows allegedly real footages, interviews and audio recordings, while we are also watching a "regular movie" version of the story (they call it dramatization), with Milla Jovovich in the lead role. If it wasn't trying so hard to convince the viewer about the events being real, this film would be fine (as fake as it is, the story is bearable and the scares work - of course, this might be just me, since I was a kid I had an irrational phobia of little grey men.) . But the marketing's pathetic attempt to create a working hoax makes the whole thing look laughable. Universal actually ended up sued because the producers printed numerous fake articles about missing persons and murders in Nome's local newspapers. Does a half-assed marketing campaign worth this much?
The funny part is, some people actually do believe The Fourth Kind is real, and some think the same thing about the flick I saw tonight.
Useless trivia: while I was living in the UK I saw probably 10 buses a day with a huge banner on their sides recommending me Paranormal Activity with the tagline "Don't go alone." I didn't go to see it in a movie theatre at all, only now, months later can I tell that I've finished watching it - only a couple of minutes ago, simultaneously, but not together with that Faust guy. Watching creepy stuff alone in the night with lights off and headphones is good fun. Usually I prefer playing with Silent Hill, but movies could also be good choices. This time I was dancing with a womanizer demon.
Paranormal Activity is a low-budget production by all means, recorded during a 10-day shooting in director Oren Peli's own house with only one camera and about six non-professional actors (90% of the scenes contain only two of them onscreen). It was made in 2007, but not one studio bothered to release it until last year when Steven Spielberg himself saw a copy and allegedly ended up totally creeped out. His praise was good recommendation to DreamWorks, and last autumn the film finally hit the cinema screens, grossing 9.1 million dollars in the first week in the US - with a production budget only $15,000, this flick was definitely a good investment.
Is it a good film? Well, it has its moments. I don't want to talk about the story much (the less you know, the more you'll enjoy it), but here are the basics: the camera belongs to a young couple, called Micah and Katie who's home is haunted by a supernatural entity that becomes more and more violent by each passing day. We can follow their days and nights while they are trying to sort out what is actually happening to them, their attempts to capture evidence, fighting to keep their sanity as things go from bad to worse, and finally, to survive the nights.
I've sliced the film to three parts in my mind: a brilliant first half, a lame second half, and a cool ending. The first half reminds me of a clever quote by Swedish director Tomas Alfredson. The guy's critically praised vampire flick, Let the Right One In is one of my favorite movies, and honestly, I think it is the best drama, romance and horror film of the century so far. (Sadly, just like [REC], it is being Americanized right now, with Cloverfield's Matt Reeves as director. It's a real shame - good movies like LTR1I shouldn't be remade. Fun, brainless monster flicks on the other hand, should have fun, brainless sequels. Why couldn't you stick to the original "Clover2 in 2010" plans, Matt?)
In an interview Alfredson have said that "fear appears before the scary things happen." This is a great truth, and a fine description of how the first half of Paranormal Activity works. After the introduction, the unmissable "exploring-the-location" and "talking scary BS about ghosts and demons" scenes the film officially begins with its night sequences. From night to night, like a wingless guardian angel, the cam films Micah and Katie while they are sleeping in their bed besides the open bedroom door. The whole composition is somehow upsetting, it gives you an uneasy feeling while you are waiting for something to happen.
This is suspense at its best. You try to figure out what you are about to see, and when something does happen, even the most minor thing, your tension snaps. You feel yourself alright during the "thing" (just like Alfredson said), but when it starts, for a second fright gives a huge kick to your fear-level. Those adrenaline-pumper simple stuff like noises made by someone unseen's feet are what I consider good movie scares. For me, they are more disturbing than any roaring zombie that suddenly jumps towards your face. And Paranormal Activity uses them well. For a while.
The second half contains a scene that serves as a turning point from good to not-so-good. After an over the top Poltergeist-sequence, our heroes start to act way too silly and unbelievably toward their haunter and each other as well. The worst thing that ever could happen to a horror film: when scary things happen, we feel ashamed for how stupid our heroes are, and when there's no "action" going on, they start to bore us to hell. This part of the film should have been shorter and less "hardcore" from behalf of the supernatural presence. While it has a good take on the "people driven crazy by fear" scenario, the rest should be more subtle, leading to an epic ending. Because the endings (there are three different version) are neat, but could have been so much more impressive with a better lead-up. I smell a huge untapped chance here.
And this applies to the whole film. 20 minutes shorter, with a little more careful secret-revealing dynamics and smarter characters, Paranormal Activity could have became a classic. But in this form it's nothing more than a low-budget fearshow with some neat scares, that will shortly descend into the dark depths under your memory - and violently resurface every time a strange noise rouses you up in the middle of the night.
Six stings out of ten.
No comments:
Post a Comment