| Author | Message | ||
     Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.157.22.201 |
I really can't decide about this one... http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/paranormalactivity/large_t1.html | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.247.202 |
There's controversy over this trailer. Those audiences reaction shots and quotes were actually culled from the screening of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfDXlgmKFyU | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.196.228 |
I started a thread about this last year! I'm surprised to see it taking off like this now. Lucius Shepard was enthusiastic about it, usually a good sign (his 'bullshit detector' is usually trustworthy). It looks like a sort of cross between Blair Witch and The Grudge... | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.241.9 |
Speaking as a fan of this kind of thing, this is nothing more than "Youtube Ghost Videos: The Movie." It's looks garbagey. That trailer alone is embarrassing. Next it'll be CATASTIC, something about a cat caught on tape who does amazing things to amuse his owners. A real-time, caught-on-tape feel good comedy. Next after that, the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse arrive. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.196.228 |
I agree the trailer isn't exactly overwhelming. I'd go to see Catastic. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.234.129 |
This comment regarding PA from youtube: "omg wow mi and my lil brother (hes 6 years old) watched it and nnot even he was scared omg if yhu scared of this then wow yhu must have no life.... and look at life with fera wtf is wornge with yhu poeple" | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.186.164 |
Yes, well, we all know how seriously to take such illiterate outbursts as commonly grace youtube, amazon and the imdb... The Blair Witch Project was subjected to many such comments when it was released, but a lot of people also consider it one of the scariest films made. | ||
| Chris_morris (Chris_morris) Username: Chris_morris Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 12.165.240.116 |
Craig is resistant to the hype, which is fair enough I suppose -- but there's always the possibility that the hype is deserved, no? Me, I'm in. Can't wait for it to hit the local mulitplex. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.238.224 |
I do admire it - don't get me wrong. It was made for $11k and shot over a weekend at the director's home: this is innovative, inventive, admirable filmmaking! I guess I'm more perturbed by that trailer, which - sorry, just mho - has got to be the worst trailer in years. It's embarrassing to watch - I'm alone watching it, and I'm embarrassed. It's friggin' goofy. But maybe, indeed, the film itself pulls it off.... | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.238.224 |
I'm not holding my breath though.... Meanwhile, people, there's reason to be excited: this film is suddenly being made available next week!!!! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0862856/ This was supposed to be released to theatres a while back (filmed in 2006!), but for some reasons, deals kept falling through, and I guess they decided on a dvd dump - I had heard since one of the stories dealt with younger kids, it was deemed too disturbing, but who knows.... Anyway, it got great audience reactions the few times it was screened (at horror conventions), I've heard. The most looked-forward to horror movie of the year, for me (next to ANTICHRIST).... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.153.151.6 |
These little films feel like a conscious effort to look for something a bit new, don't they? Sweet little things. That Paranormal Activity trailer is bad, but a couple of scenes feel like the film might be better... | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.239.62 |
I guess I shouldn't judge a film by its trailer.... http://www.deadline.com/hollywood/freakishly-good-gross-for-paranormal-activity/ (btw, fwiw: Entertainment Weekly gave PARANORMAL ACTIVITY a high rating, and said it was firmly in the BLAIR WITCH genre - except that this one was better) | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 76.238.190.27 |
It does look freaky! Is it showing in the UK? | ||
| Chris_morris (Chris_morris) Username: Chris_morris Registered: 04-2008 Posted From: 98.220.97.79 |
Saw it last night. Big crowd. People were really affected by the film: shouting at the screen, screaming. A woman behind me broke into uncontrollable tears halfway through and had to leave the theater. The man sitting next to me, visibly shaken, abruptly stood up and left. Haven't seen this sort of thing at a horror movie since the 70s. I'm not sure the movie would work as well on home video -- The crowd reaction was almost as interesting as the movie. And the movie? Blair Witch meets The Exorcist. I'd say believe the hype. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Oh, now I'm REALLY psyched!!! | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Me, too. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.182.226 |
And me - I'm really getting excited about this one. It sounds like one of those films that have more impact when seen on the big screen, in a dark theatre with other people (as long as they are not gabbing on their cell phones or munching disgusting hot dogs). | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.206.153 |
Sounds wonderful! Like Ghostwatch with an audience. According to Wikipedia, "The film will get it's UK release on 27 November, 2009." | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.152.206.153 |
That greengrocer's apostrophe is Wikipedia's, not mine. | ||
| Karim Ghahwagi (Karim) Username: Karim Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.10.20.129 |
Just watched this. For me this film didn't quite work in the places where the first Blair Witch Project film really was effective for me. Also the intensive advertising campaign removed the mystery and enjoyment that this film could otherwise have provided. Again I think that it is wonderful for such a small picture to reach such a wide audience. This film relies on the viewer's own beliefs in a sense, which is interesting. Good sound editing BTW. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
The trailer sbsolutely terrifies me, you know. I'm actually scared to go and see it.  | ||
| Karim Ghahwagi (Karim) Username: Karim Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.10.20.129 |
If you let the film work on you, it is terrifying. I just wish that the origin of the video wasn't demystified I suppose. The trailer was fine, otherwise. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I've only seen the teasre trailers - they're incredibly effective. I usually buy into films 100% when I'm watching them, let them do their work on me. What's the point otherwise? | ||
| Karim Ghahwagi (Karim) Username: Karim Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 217.10.20.129 |
Whats the point?- if it is poorly done then it will not work on me, and I feel like the life left to me on this earth is being sucked out and wasted forever. Hairs turning slowly gray. I don't want to waste my time. ;-) | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I just stay away from films I know will have that effect one me, and watch stuff I tink I might like. As far as film goes, I'm fussy yet easily pleased. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.242.85 |
As far as film goes, I'm fussy yet easily pleased. This is sort of the spot I've reached in my film-watching. I forgive oh so much, and hold those I can't forgive over giant pits of fire.... | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.193.155 |
I've just watched this alone and with all the lights out (naturally), and it's the creepiest thing I've seen in quite a while (it's 2:00am and I now have all the lights on). This film builds up a real sense of dread. Nothing much is explained, and a lot is left to the imagination. One thing I really liked is that, for the most part, the frightening things happen when the camera is still, so that you're sitting there in anticipation of the next dreadful thing that might or might not happen. It would have been far less effective had it been all done with shakey-cam. Really good stuff. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.193.155 |
Zed, I think you will love this.  | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 99.227.90.149 |
Just saw it last night, too. I think Blair Witch is a more consistent film, but this one definitely has its frightening moments. My favourite being when the heroine ** ****** ** ** ** *** ****** **** ** ***. I don't want to hype it too much, but it's definitely a film that still has me a bit spooked. It's almost the anti-Blair Witch, in that where the first was filled with shaky-cam, this is filled with mounted-cam. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
I'm actually scared to see this - it has all the elements I find utterly terrifying ("footage", ghosts/possession, ordinary people terrorised by something "other"). I scare myself watching Most Haunted in the dark, though, so my opinion's probabably not worth that much... | ||
| Stephen Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Zed, you can't really mean you find 'Most Haunted' scary?!?! Please tell me you're taking the piss. The only thing scary about it to me is that the bloody show is so popular!! | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I turn out the lights and watch it in the dark. It's the way they all get so into it that scares me; and I pretend it's real, like an extension of Volk's "Ghostwatch". Occasionally, it works a treat. :-) I love "Most Haunted": the ultimate guilty pleasure. | ||
| Stephen Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
But that Derek Acorah... every time I see him I want to throw something at the telly!! | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.126 |
"I scare myself watching Most Haunted in the dark, though, so my opinion's probabably not worth that much..." "Mary loves Dich! Mary loves Dich!" | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Derek Acorah hasn't been on the show for ages, man. Come on, keep up. ;-) | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.126 |
Oh, I'm way behind the times then. The replacement can't be as entertaining. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I meant Stephen Proto - I didn't even understand your comment! :-) | ||
| Stephen Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
I've just experienced a very real and spooky feeling of deja vu... I'm positive I've had this conversation before.  | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
You're probably right - we're like old drunks on here, constantly going round in circles with our conversations. Next I'll be putting you ina headlock whilst yelling: "I love you, but I'll fight you!". | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.126 |
"Mary loves Dich! Mary loves Dich!" That was a famous clip of Acorah shouting "Mary loves Dick." | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.247.142 |
The guy who made PARANORMAL ACTIVITY, his second film, now in the can - AREA 51 I think it's called; same gimmick, about two guys with camcorders running around that installation, record creepy things, etc. - it cost $5 million... and despite his phenomenal success, as of this writing, no one's picked it up yet... must not be very good?... | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.188.223 |
Yeah, I heard about that - it's a bit disappointing that he's going with the same 'found footage' thing again, but hey, maybe it'll be good. I hope so. Have you seen Paranormal Activity, Craig? It's really good. Genuinely frightening (to me, at least). | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.247.142 |
Not seen it yet, Huw, but I do want to. One buzz I've heard is that the studios, etc., are sure that this "phenomena" (the success of this film) is a fluke, like I guess they were aware that BLAIR WITCH was a fluke - why there were no more such films following in the wake of that one, and why there's not a rush to find/make/release films like this one now.... Of course, someone handed these guys $5 million to make a genre/style sequel, of sorts. Nothing makes any sense out here. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Just back from seeing it (alone, alas!) and I'm feeling wildly ambivalent. Its strengths definitely lie with the static camera and the agonising anticipation as you wait, wait, wait. It's more about dread than the kind of sustained terror of [REC] or the finale of BLAIR WITCH. The sounds are excellent and the two "victims" are very believable. It never goes too far and it never feels like it's trying too hard (as it no doubt would have had it been made by a big studio). There are some seriously creepy moments and a couple of genuine jolts. ("Fookin 'ell!" screamed a Geordie guy behind me near the end.) So why wasn't I blown away when the trailer alone had me psyched out of my mind? Is it because it was de-mystified? I'm actually not sure. I saw BLAIR WITCH the day it came out, having steadfastly refused to read anything about it, so there was the constant question in my mind as to how much was really REAL. I didn't fully buy the "found footage" concept hyped on the poster and TV spots but there was still a magical little "what if?" in my mind. There was none of that with PARANORMAL ACTIVITY. However, there was none of that with [REC] either and Lord P can testify to the effects of that one on me. It was a double bill of sorts for him; he couldn't stop sniggering at me every time I jumped or clung to him in anticipation of a jolt I knew was coming any second. Like a proper mad scientist, he said it was a treat to observe the effects of the film on me. Well, that's exactly how I felt watching PARANORMAL ACTIVITY. Most of my enjoyment came from BEHIND the camera, so to speak. "Oh yeah, THIS is how it's done!" I kept thinking. I was next to two lads whose tension I could literally feel every time the film got spooky and I immensely enjoyed their jumps and nervous laughter. I jumped too, of course, but it just wasn't the same. Perhaps it's a film best watched all alone in the house, late at night with the lights off. | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.253.225 |
I was thinking, too bad [REC] and QUARANTINE both didn't get released until a little later - they might have benefited by the PA juggernaut. I think trailers have the touch of ineffable perfection, because they conjure in our minds the perfect movie, that by definition can't exist. I thought the trailer for THE FOURTH KIND promises a movie of sheer perfection. I wonder if I should just not see it, and live that fantasy.... | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.107.13 |
The Fourth Kind was awful. I sort of wish I hadn't seen it. It was as near an experience of 'un'watching a film I've ever got. Not awful, not great, not even particularly anything but 'there'. Each scene was more or less an unambitious remake of the one previous to it. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.122.107.13 |
We are creative when we see a trailer, sadly more so than the filmmakers might be. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
I've always said there's a real art to making trailers. The trailer of DRAG ME TO HELL was a film worth seeing while the entire 2 hours of it was tiresome and predictable. If you've seen any of the "recut" trailers on YouTube you know how easy it is to turn THE SHINING into a romantic comedy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmkVWuP_sO0 Or TOP GUN into a gay love story: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXxi9IKZSA&feature=fvw | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 147.252.230.126 |
There's one about MARY POPPINS as a horror film, too, which is really well done. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Oh yes - how could I forget that one? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T5_0AGdFic | ||
| Craig (Craig) Username: Craig Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 75.4.249.143 |
Kate - and all - you have to see this, I just saw this last night - fucking brilliant: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ7gzSPQgCk | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.183.66 |
I bet Ramsey would enjoy that one! | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.11.80 |
That's genius! Managed to name check every film as it went past too! | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 88.202.210.68 |
I watched PARANORMAL ACTIVITY today (alone alas as well) and was distinctly underwhelmed by the experience, as was the audience I saw it with. Perhaps I am an as-yet unrealised Michael Bay / Stephen Sommers poke-you-in-the-eye-every-minute kind of person because this almost sent me to sleep in places. At the end no-one in the audience moved and we all sat watching the black screen expecting something else to happen. Eventually a girl's voice from the back called out 'does anyone know if it's finished yet?' as the lights came up. It felt like a home movie to me, starring two unendearing unsympathetic frankly annoying central characters and using the kind of parlour tricks that reminded me of old episodes of Morecambe and Wise. Things did finally get a little intense for the last quarter of an hour but my overall impression was that this was a huge missed opportunity. I may well have been in an unforgiving mood (and indeed the temporary absence of Lady P is I suspect causing me to be a less forgiving and slightly more irascible JLP at the moment) but I really didn't find this scary or disturbing at all. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.11.80 |
I watched PARANORMAL ACTIVITY yesterday and would say that I found it quite disappointing, as was DRAG ME TO HELL when I saw that a few weeks back. Maybe I should ignore any thread with film recommendations on here and just watch things without such high expectations (or expectorations, in the case of DRAG ME TO HELL)... | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Do as I do, Mick: watch films with zero expectations. I find I enjoy a lot more of them that way. For instance, I went in to DRAG ME TO HELL expecting it to be a bit rubbish, and loved every fun-filled minute. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 88.202.210.68 |
And as a footnote to that I decided to complete my shakycam day today by watching CLOVERFIELD - a movie which I had somehow managed to avoid all hype, reviews and plot summaries of. In fact I hardly knew what it was about And I thought it was bloody brilliant. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.11.80 |
Me too - I only saw it on DVD, so the shaky-cam effect probably wasn't particularly nauseating - thought it was great, and the coda particularly touching. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Good men! I really enjoyed CLOVERFIELD, too. The subway scene was exceptional. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
That's all you have to do: avoid the hype. I do it all the time - no reviews, no trailers (except the occasional teaser I see by mistake) and just watch with an open mind. I find that I enjoy films much more these days. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.10.250.234 |
The subway scene in CLOVERFIELD made me jump cringe and shout 'Oh No!' at the screen, which doesn't happen often. Full marks. And the bit where the monster picked him up scared the hell out of me. Perfect ending as well, and another perfect movie clocking in at just over 70 minutes minus the titles (the other is [Rec]) | ||
| Ian Alexander Martin (Iam) Username: Iam Registered: 10-2009 Posted From: 64.180.64.74 |
I certainly take this attitude most of the time. It might make things un-naturally easy on the film-makers, but it's more fun for me. Especially when watching porn. True, this also an option, but as most of that takes place without the aid of a film, I choose to opt for the movie taking over so as to be able to tell when 'real life' returns after the film's done. Which explains why he has such affection for me. Especially the 'easily pleased' bit. Granted, next he'll be putting me in a headlock whilst simultaneously shreiking "I love you, but I'll fight you!" while both Probert and Strantzas sell tickets and take wagers. I've not seen a 'scary movie' for some time. The most recent would probably end-up being The Shining and Lifeforce. One was cold, disturbing and brilliant; the other was… erm… not any of those things. Perhaps someone might film Zed attacking me with a shaky-cam and we can all make a packet that way? | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
Finally got to see it last night. Me and my wife were by far the oldest people in the audience. The average age of everyone else was about 16. When I first realised this my heart sank. I expected non-stop chatter, popcorn packets rattling, mobile phones going off, etc. But I was pleasantly surprised. The majority of the kids in there were glued to the film, even though the first two thirds of it are a very slow burn. Ironically, considering that I regard myself as a connoisseur of atmospheric movies (as oppose to slashers), I was actually bored. It was quite creepy, and there was undoubtedly a building sense of dread. But the general uneventfulness of it, the undeveloping narrative, the lack of even the most sparse storyline - while it reflected real documentary footage, was maddening after a while. I also thought that the pay-off, though it was an effective shock moment, was inadequate after the long wait. That said, I was thinking about it all night afterwards. The scenes in which (SPOILER ALERT) the two victims were asleep in bed, and terribly vulnerable, while things were going on around them, made for very uncomfortable viewing. On reflection, I will add it to my collection when it comes available on DVD. But after all the hype I was a tad disappointed. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.253.174.81 |
SPOILER ALERT The scenes in which (SPOILER ALERT) the two victims were asleep in bed, and terribly vulnerable, while things were going on around them, made for very uncomfortable viewing. But if you were sleeping in a house where there was something scary wouldn't you shut the bloody door before going to bed? | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
SPOILER ALERT Yes, I would, John. Also, if I was the director, I'd have tried to make more use of that long passage leading off into shadow. As a viewer, my eyes were constantly drawn to it - I was expecting (hoping?) to see something approach along it at some point, but all we really got were sound effects, which made that interesting camera angle redundant. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.253.174.81 |
I would have loved the clock on the camera to freeze at some point so that the events were taking place 'outside time' | ||
| Stephen Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 194.32.31.1 |
Have to admit I'm getting bad vibes (and not the right sort) about this film. Sounds like another case of hype over substance to me... and I was completely underwhelmed by 'The Blair Witch Project'. Maybe I'm wrong but somehow I doubt it. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.12.102 |
So what happened in the end of the film? I've seen it on a US pre-release DVD but read a review in Sight & Sound wghich described a different ending. +-+-+-+SPOILER ALERT+-+-+ I I I I I I I I I I I I I In the version I saw, the girl spends 24 hours sitting by the bed after she's done away with her boyfriend, and is then shot by the police. In Sight & Sound they describe the ending as having the girl rush towards the camera after she's killed her boyfriend. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.191.247 |
I saw the same version as you, Mick. I thought Paranormal Activity was a good film, though I've no particular desire to see it again. Strangely enough, I had the opposite experience with The Blair Witch Project - underwhelmed at first, but more impressed on successive viewings. | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.61.175.43 |
The ending to the North American release (at least) to follow.. SPOILERS! The ending is the same until just after the screaming downstairs ends. Then, we hear footsteps coming up towards the room, too many footsteps, really, then WHOOSH we see the body of the boyfriend fly into the camera and fall to the floor. This reveals the girlfriends standing in the doorway, covered in blood. She drops to the floor and crawls toward the body which is just beneath the camera and starts to sniff it. Then, she looks up at the camera and smiles, then lunges at it. Film is over. The "where are they now" says the body was discovered a few days later, the girlfriend is never seen again. Shocking ending, and more exciting than the "waiting for the police" ending, but in terms of story payoff it's inferior. In the police ending, if you watch, you see down the hallway that a light goes on in the far room, then off just as the police make it upstairs. Suddenly, the girlfriend is herself again. I have to admit, despite the failure of many here to like the film, I'm still affected by it when the lights go out. I guess I'm not as desensitized as others. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.191.247 |
Yes, I still feel a little tingle up my spine when I think of it, Simon. I think watching it alone in the early hours with all the lights out was a good decision. Despite what I said above I probably will watch it again. It won't be quite the same though, knowing what happens in advance. I think I'll wait for the DVD, which will, I hope, include the ending you mentioned above. | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
I don't think it's by any means a weak film. I also think that, given the restricted budget, they did a very good job in making it a thoroughly professional looking effort. But perhaps a more involving storyline, and a more satisfying finale, would have helped. | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.151.243.114 |
We can't have it both ways guys! We bemoan most new 'horror' releases because of the huge budget special effects or CGI and big name stars or directors churning out loud, brash, 'in yer face' remakes. Then we still moan when an initially little known film made on a miniscule budget with no name actors which consciously tries to build atmosphere through tension and direction does well for itself. I think the 'hype' was justified as the only way to get this type of very low budget movie seen by the 'Transformers' and 'Saw' generation. Hopefully it's success will make the top studio execs take a step back and rethink their plans before filming starts on 'Saw 30' or a CGI packed 'Exorcist' remake ! These low budget efforts deserve our support even if they aren't five star efforts. Personally I'm hoping it will begin a 'less is more' revolution in horror film making and we will see more movies like the original 'The Haunting' or 'The Innocents'. What are the chances ? | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.61.175.43 |
Nil. | ||
| Seanmcd (Seanmcd) Username: Seanmcd Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 86.151.243.114 |
Thought as much.  | ||
| Paul_finch (Paul_finch) Username: Paul_finch Registered: 11-2009 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
Sean - it got my support. I went to see it and will buy the DVD. But if I think a film fails in certain departments (not necessarily to do with lack of resources, as in this case), I'm going to say it. I don't disagree that it's a good thing the lemon popsicle crowd were drawn in by the publicity. From what I could see, they seemed to enjoy it and that definitely bodes well for the genre. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.150.201.252 |
I watched this last night - my youngest's friend lent me a pirate his gran had (I don't usually watch such things I hasten to add)- and it scared the life out of me. I very rarely get really scared by film, but this did it. Marie was away and i watched it alone with the lights out (apart from the hall - the kids always like the hall light on). Anyway, at one point, a scary point, the hall lights go out and there's the sounds of cups and things being disturbed in the kitchen. Middle kid has only gone and got himself a drink - IN THE DARK. He NEVER does this. Needless to say I could have done without that. But let me add, there are one or two scenes that were just terrible - one involving a ouija board, which is ok till the end of that scene, and one involving a person on the internet. The make-up in that scene is so bad my fear levels shrank considerably. THANK GOD. But yes - the first night I've walked round the house turning on every light in about 6 or 7 years, and lay in bed with the radio on while I slept. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.148.79 |
Sounds like it's the kind of film that shrivels in the disbelief of a cinema audience. Would you say it's like Ghostwatch in that it fits the television format better? | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.61.175.43 |
Most people i know who disliked it saw it on television. I think it needs to be a communal experience, but with people in tune with its goals. It's a very dividing film, much like the Blair Witch Project. Like comedy, I think good horror does that: there's no middle ground. Either you like it or you don't. Horror that pleases everyone actually pleases no one. | ||
| Carolinec (Carolinec) Username: Carolinec Registered: 06-2009 Posted From: 82.38.75.85 |
Oooo, I've not been on this thread before as I hadn't heard of the film, but reading through this it looks like just the kind of film I might enjoy. I'll have to watch out for it.  | ||
| Hubert (Hubert) Username: Hubert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.21.232.191 |
Ah, I see they're showing it in Kinepolis over here. Maybe I'll go and see it tomorrow night. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Well, I've just watched PARANORMAL ACIVITY, in the dark, on my own. I wanted to like this a lot, I really did, and I wanted it to scare me. Unfortunately I found it a disinctly average experience. ILS scared me so much I couldn't sleep, after watching REC I was honestly too afraid to get up and turn on the light, and THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT terrified me to the point that I genuinely thought I was being haunted...but PARANORMAL ACIVITY failed on just about every level for me. The scary bits were too normal, and the pacing of the haunting was off - things happened near the end that should've happened a bit earlier, so the build-up was flawed. I tried to do my usual trick and let the film make me pretend it was real, but the indifferent filmmaking kept pulling me out of the illusion. The best part for me was the first 40 mins, when nothing much happens, and the sense of dread works a treat - alas when events escalate, it starts to go off the rails. And the ending (same one Mick saw) was flat as a fart. It's not a bad film as such, just a very pedestrain one - which, in this case, is even worse. SPOILER As Tony intimated above, the Ouija scene was comical and the online exorcism footage was just pathetic - like a bad facebook tribute to THE EXORCIST. MOST HAUNTED Scares me more than this did, I'm afraid. Save your money and buy COLIN on DVD for a fiver instead. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
I've just realised what would have made the film work much better: If it was set on a rundown British housing estate, with a single-parent trying to cope with all that stuff in a crummy council flat. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Another comment: the material isn't at fault in this film. It's the direction. I've been thinking about this, and I just don't think the director has any real talent. Put the exact same film - with all the same constraints, etc - in the hands of a better creative mind, and this would have been brilliant. There's a superb and utterly terrifying film somewhere in here, but it gets lost in the prosaic presentation. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Can you tell I'm gutted? On paper, this film has me written all over it... | ||
| Karim Ghahwagi (Karim) Username: Karim Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 80.167.108.253 |
This film lost me during the ouija board scene as well. As mentioned above, I think it depends on how much you want the film to work on you. The premise is great, and how can it not be terrifying to watch two helpless people asleep etc. But Blair Witch was put together in a much more effective way, even the final scare is really impossible to forget, and it did the impossible, and made the build-up of tension worthwile and delivered at the end, making the viewer use his imagination. But anyways, still great that it reached such a wide audience. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.12.102 |
Be interested to hear your thoughts on TRIANGLE, Zed - so far I agree with pretty much all you said about PA, but I really liked TRIANGLE, even though it was slightly more a regular film (but at the same time not at all). | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.184.12 |
Tony, I'm glad the film scared you as much as it did me (sounds like we watched it under similar conditions). As for you, Zed.... Tony, strip him of one of his epaulettes. I'm surprised that so many here were underwhelmed. I found it genuinely creepy. Not a perfect film, by any means, but I think it works well within its low-budget limitations. SPOILER I liked the start of the ouija scene, when the plants began to rustle, signaling a presence. I felt the fire was a bit much, though. | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 99.227.90.149 |
My feeling exactly, Huw. | ||
| Stephen Walsh (Stephenw) Username: Stephenw Registered: 03-2009 Posted From: 82.0.107.17 |
Still don't like the sound of this one but all the comments have me curiously wanting to watch 'The Blair Witch Project' for the first time since I swore I never would again in the cinema. 'Triangle' was very mediocre for me. Like a 'Twilight Zone' episode extended way beyond its natural length by having lots of "screaming and running around covered in blood" slasher elements shoehorned in. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Zed, are we the same person??? I had *exactly* the same response to all the films you mentioned and you put my confusion over not liking PARANORMAL ACTIVITY into words for me. Like you, that film had me written all over it, but I tried just as hard as you did to pretend and it just didn't work. I was gutted too. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Zed I love you!!!! (In a very different way from Lady P you understand) You've hit all its problems on the head. SPOILERS: The ouija scene is what I meant when I said I was reminded of Morecambe & Wise, or any other 70s comedy sketch show where there was a 'Poltergoost' sketch. When the planchette started to move it was comical. By the end of the first thirty minutes I was falling asleep because so little had happened apart from a really hamfisted attempt at backstory. I thought the direction was hopeless and yes, the material itself wasn't flawed but its execution was very poor. I've just realised what would have made the film work much better: If it was set on a rundown British housing estate, with a single-parent trying to cope with all that stuff in a crummy council flat. When I told Lady P how much better I thought Ghostwatch was than this she asked if that was because it was British and I wondered if she was right. This would have terrified me if it had had the setting you describe, even though that's probably just my preference for British material. There's a superb and utterly terrifying film somewhere in here, but it gets lost in the prosaic presentation. As I said above - I think this film is a massive missed opportunity. I spotted so many chances for this film to be very scary and it never capitalised on them. It wouldn't have needed any more money or onscreen talent - just someone who understood horror and I don't think the director here does. Finally - I really didn't like the couple and I wanted the monster to get them. But I'm a bastard. | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Oh, and the ending I saw was the more dramatic one. Someone behind me screamed. I jumped, but I was more *wishing* I were scared than actually *being* scared. Boo hoo. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
It wouldn't have needed any more money or onscreen talent - just someone who understood horror and I don't think the director here does. Nail hit on head, sir. GHOSTWATCH was made by people who understand how to creep a viewer out...the biuld-up is pitch-perfect (until the end, when things get silly), and it was all done as cheap as chips. There's a deep understanding about what is scary in that modest little shocker - and PA lacked this. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Boo hoo, indeed, fair lady. I wish I'd seen the shock ending: Simon's description above makes it sound terrific. The ending with the cops is...well, lame. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I recently watched a documentary about the Enfield Exorcist that was ten times scarier than PA...a simple documentary, but it was put together to maximise the inherent creepiness of the material. Smeone should make a film about that case...a 1970s period piece. God, that would be great. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSEXE8I0DpE&NR=1 | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
And here's the programme I saw: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/interview-with-a-poltergeist/episode-guide/se ries-1/episode-1 Slightly cheesy in parts, but it spooked me. | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
Someone should make a film about that case...a 1970s period piece. God, that would be great. A 1970s UK period piece about an exorcism called, perhaps 'Exorcism' and filmed over a weekend for peanuts with creepy UK locations? Who on earth might be up to the task? | ||
| Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey) Username: Ramsey Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
Well, Jenny and I saw Paranormal Activity - at least, she did, but I spent much of the film with my eyes shut because of nausea brought on by the shaky camera. I ended up opening them only when I sensed the camera was locked down again. I appreciated the film's ambition to convey spectral dread, and I actually thought it had some pretty effective moments, but a final verdict will have to await the DVD. Jenny rather liked the film - thought it was an attempt to create a contemporary American legend in the vein of Ringu. The irony is that we might as well have waited for the DVD - apart from us there were just four people in the cinema. | ||
| Hubert (Hubert) Username: Hubert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 78.22.225.3 |
All this doesn't sound very promising | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I do applaud the attempt made by this film, and a couple of scenes were indeed moderately effective, I just wish the people behind it had more of an understanding of this kind of material. GHOSTWATCH is a million times better. I plan to watch it again this week, so may slightly revise my initial comments. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.193.5 |
Why do you think the people who made it lack an understanding of this kind of material, Gary? It worked pretty well for me, and I'm neither easily impressed nor easily scared. The moments of dread were nicely orchestrated and there was a real sense of mounting fear and hopelessness. It seems about half the people who saw this thought it was really effective, and the other half thought it was rubbish! | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
Huw, you can easily disregard Lord P's opinion: he's just prejudiced against American films. I thought PA's effective moments were very effective. I did get creeped out and my heart did thump a little faster when the static camera made it obvious that something was going to happen *any moment*. I just wasn't able to disengage fully from reality to appreciate it the way I wanted to. So I certainly didn't think it was rubbish; it just lacked something for me. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
SLIGHT SPOILERS ABOUND! Why do you think the people who made it lack an understanding of this kind of material, Gary? Because, for me, even the most effective scenes were rendered almost unneffective by the lack of insight into what actually elicits fear or dread from viewers. Let's face it, this material is inherently terrifying...and yet, the film wasn't. The silly ouija scene is a prime example of this. Like JLP said above, it was like something out of Morcambe and Wise. The bits with the blanket moving also looked comical rather than scary. IMHO, the film was guilty of both going too far and not going far enough (I know, that statement probably only makes sense to me). I certainly didn't it film was rubbish, Huw. God,, no: you and I have both seen enough real rubbish for me to even pretend that it was.  No, I just thought - like JLP - that it was a missed opportunity. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
The first half of the film worked for me - mainly because of my own sense of expectation. I did get creeped out and my heart did thump a little faster when the static camera made it obvious that something was going to happen *any moment*. I just wasn't able to disengage fully from reality to appreciate it the way I wanted to. Perfectly put, dear lady. That's exactly it. Better execution would have improved the film tremendouly, methinks. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
s | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
The thing is, I am easily impressed by this kind of stuff - as I stated above, Most haunted scares me, because I allow it to disengage me from reality. PA failed to do that. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.193.5 |
Fair enough - I didn't think it was a great film, but it gave me the willies rather effectively (no puns please, Joel), and I felt it was surprisingly good for $10,000 or whatever it cost. Every time that static camera was set up at bedtime I was gazing intently into the shadows of that room (and especially the doorway) in anticipation of what might happen. I think that anticipation worked for me as much as anything that was actually shown. I was in just the right frame of mind for it, I suppose. Alone with all the lights out at 2am is really the way to go, folks! Lady P, I would never, never disregard the good Lord P's opinions on anything horror-related (or garment-related, for that matter!). I find we are in accord about 98.7% of the time... (same with Zedney) | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.12.102 |
I hadn't noticed anyone saying PA was rubbish - I simply found it disappointing - some scenes worked, some almost worked, and others were ridiculous. SPOILER!!! Unlike some others here I actually liked the girl squatting by the bed and just rocking back and forth for 24 hours at the end; I thought that was quite atmospheric, and certainly a change from the other ending which appears to be quite standard fare. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
SPOILER!!! The only part that worked well for me was when she stood staring at her sleeping boyfriend for over an hour. But then they just spoiled the effect by repeating the same trick later on in the film. I would've had her licking him, or something. Something strange and creepy like that. | ||
| Ramsey Campbell (Ramsey) Username: Ramsey Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 195.93.21.74 |
ANOTHER SPOILER To be clear, Mick, was the boyfriend's body not flung at the camera in the version you saw? Or did the scene you describe follow that? | ||
| John Llewellyn Probert (John_l_probert) Username: John_l_probert Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.253.174.81 |
SPOILER!!!! I would have definitely had her doing something different the second time. Oh, and I thought the sheets moving was funny as well. In fact I've just remembered the comedy show I'm thinking of - it was 'Newman & Baddiel in Pieces' - their follow up to The Mary Whitehouse Experience. There was a recurring sketch where a poltergeist does a lot of 'Paranormal Activity' -type stuff and in one it starts swearing when it realises everyone's gone out. 'Bollocks - they've gone to the shops' | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Ramsey, here's the ending both me and Mick saw: Footsteps coming up the stairs. Girl appears in doorway, blood on shirt, knife in hand. Girl sits on floor by bed and rocks. Hours pass. Sounds of her friend entering downstairs. A scream. More time passes. Police arrive, come upstairs. Girl gets up, still holding knife (cleaerly herself again). Police shoot girl in hallway outside bedroom door. None of the stuff with the guy being thrown at the camera occurs. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
I would have definitely had her doing something different the second time. I would have had her taking a shit on him. Imagine how creepy and plain wrong that would be. I'm being serious, too.  | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Which ending did Speilberg suggest? And does anyone know why there are two versions? | ||
| Kate (Kathleen) Username: Kathleen Registered: 09-2009 Posted From: 93.96.181.75 |
I heard the first ending (presumably the cops one) was anticlimactic and Spielberg suggested the more dynamic one. Which was: SPOILER Footsteps up the stairs. Boyfriend's body flung at camera. Girl rushing towards camera. Etc. Zed: Yes, creepy and plain wrong. Seriously disturbing. I like the licking idea better but your second suggestion would have got stuck in my head for... probably the rest of my life. | ||
| Simon Strantzas (Nomis) Username: Nomis Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 207.61.175.43 |
Licking, I think, give the game away. Until Micah is called downstairs, we have no idea what role she's ultimately going to play. I find the reaction to the this film interesting in that it mimics the reception the Blair Witch got. Some love, some hate. The haters think it's flawed and boring and doesn't know how to properly handle the material, the other half thinks the job was well done (or well done enough). I think it's fair to say that if the film managed to creep out half the people here who've seen it (some far more tolerant to this stuff than me) then it's not a failure of the film to deliver scares but rather a failure to deliver them to everyone. And I also think, once you remove "jump scares" from the equation, scaring more than half the audience is a touch thing to do. I suppose, if there's a failing in this film and the "Witch as well it's that the films have failed to deliver long-term scares. I don't mean the "afraid to turn out the lights a week later" scares, I mean the sort that make you question the way you see the world. PA cashes in, when it succeeds, on our fear of what's in the dark, but it doesn't give us anything NEW in the dark to fear. For a film to reach a wider audience and scare them, I think it needs to deliver on all three fronts (at the time of last count): 1) it needs to make the jump occasionally, just to unnerve them; 2) it needs to make them feel dread and that they are not safe; 3) it needs to make them feel that everything they though was wrong, and continue to think that when they leave the theatre. I think if these three are successful, its only from a good story and presentation of said story. The closer you get to this, the better the film. It still might not win everyone over, but it'll probably do better than 50%, which is what PA seems to be averaging. | ||
| Mick Curtis (Mick) Username: Mick Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.181.12.102 |
To be clear, Mick, was the boyfriend's body not flung at the camera in the version you saw? Or did the scene you describe follow that? The ending I saw was as Gary McM described, Ramsey, and having seen the other ending in a trailer (albeit very briefly) I prefer the one I saw, anticlimactic or not. | ||
| Huw (Huw) Username: Huw Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 218.168.193.5 |
Sorry, Mick, I should have said "unimpressive" or "disappointing" instead of "rubbish". | ||
| Richard_gavin (Richard_gavin) Username: Richard_gavin Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 69.157.38.37 |
I hope no one minds me bumping a bit of dust of this thread, but I finally had the chance to see Paranormal Activity last night and wanted to toss in my $.02 here. WARNING: SPOILERS I went into the film with severely mixed feelings. The reactions I'd heard from friends and horror fans I trust ran the gamut from "It's a terrifying masterpiece!" to "Utter garbage." The setting for my viewing was perfect: my favourite cinema was screening it. No megaplexes for this ghoul; my favourite cinema is a tiny fleapit that screens movies just before they hit DVD. It's cheap, its screens are likely smaller than your TV set, it's tucked away in an all but abandoned shopping concourse and the seats are almost always empty. I've been going there to see horror films since the '80s and these days I always think of Ligotti's "The Glamour" whenever I'm inside. But I digress... Paranormal Activity might have been a brilliant production if the filmmakers had looked at their ambitions and said "Okay, we have a limited bag of tricks, so let's make this a forty-minute short film." Instead, they protracted it too thinly into a feature. First, the positives: the overnight camera sequences were wonderful. Ye gods, when Katie is dragged down the hall, my jaw was hanging open. It was a true hackle-raiser, as was the moment when she/It comes lumbering back up the stairs to hurl Micah's corpse at the camera. Not to mention the photo in the attic and the clawprints appearing on the floor. Simple, magic stuff. But the negatives... There's a difference between creeping reticence and sluggish pacing. I'm afraid PA suffered from the latter. They needed to ratchet the tension up. Also, Micah was a self-centered jerk. Who would deny the person they loved the opportunity to seek help just because doing so might bruise their massive ego? (I especially liked his rant about how "This is MY house, you are MY girlfriend, I am going to fix this.") The dialogue was, for the most part, very bad ad-libbing where the actors were very obviously told "Okay, in this scene make sure you mention how you had weird experiences as a girl..." One realizes how convincing the acting in The Blair Witch Project was after seeing this. I also would've modified the ending. Katie's open-mouthed lunge for the camera was a cheap gimmick shot, I felt. And some of the poltergeist activity was foolish. (A burning Ouija board? Puh-leeze. Excluding children under the age of twelve or fundamentalists, who would find this image scary in 2009?) So, on the whole I think Paranormal Activity is one of those frustrating experiences where one sees an okay film that holds the potential to have been great. I'm very glad I saw it and would gladly watch it again, if only to savour those great poltergeist scenes again. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.77.197 |
***SPOILERS*** I went to see Paranormal Activity last night: pretty good. A bit 'paint by numbers' horror - daytime exposition scene followed nighttime fright scene repeatedly in a rigid manner. The acting was borderline ropey, but the characters had a convincing gender-appropriate realness which worked okay (eg, guy saying, I'll fix it!). Good fright scenes, and all in all refreshingly underplayed. The ouija board was ridiculous, as was the nonsensical Internet story. Liked the photo found in the loft - added an enigmatic quality to the film which, however, I'm not sure the rest of it earned. The final scene (I saw the lurch-at-the-camera version) should have forced us, the viewers, to look into the demon's eyes for a long time before that lurch: that was the engine of the whole film - our existential dread of confrontation with the otherworldly; they should have *made* us do this. Overall, to be applauded for scaring me a few times, though it needed to be less mechanical, more inventive and less obvious. It came across like a fiction rather than a reality (I had the same issue with the opening prologue-y sequence of THEM). 7/10. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 129.11.77.197 |
Also, Paul Finch is right: they should have made more *visual* use of that shot down the hallway. A waste. I was watching it nervously through the whole film. | ||
| Richard_gavin (Richard_gavin) Username: Richard_gavin Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 65.110.174.71 |
Very good review, Gary. I agree 100% with your appraisal. | ||
| Richard_gavin (Richard_gavin) Username: Richard_gavin Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 65.110.174.71 |
Gary Fry wrote: "The final scene (I saw the lurch-at-the-camera version) should have forced us, the viewers, to look into the demon's eyes for a long time before that lurch[...]" My idea for the ending was to have Micah's corpse flung into the camera, which then topples from its tripod and hits the floor. From this oblique angle we catch a quick glimpse of a bloody Katie standing in the doorframe so we know she didn't perish downstairs. She lunges to Micah, inadvertantly pushing his body up against the camera lens. In the darkness we heard the muffled sounds of Katie/the demon feeding... The camera shorts out. Hokey? Yeah, you're probably right... | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I’ve deliberately avoided this thread because of the spoiler alerts so if I repeat anything anyone else has said - apologies. I loved this film. The two central performances were so natural it made the whole thing so much more convincing. The use of sound was excellent and the slow build to the climactic violence was masterly. Assuming there was no use of digital effects then the lighting was fantastically clever as well, the shadow crossing the door when we can see the whole room and there’s nothing there to cast it was hugely effective. There were two girls sat behind me to my left who were whimpering all the way through, stifled screams and nervous laughs at every shock – and I have to admit that after the first twenty minutes I was completely sucked in and I had to hold my breath several times to avoid making noises that 30 something men should not make in a cinema. This wasn’t a film that tried to make you scared for the characters on screen. This was a film that dared you to put yourself in their place and empathise with them – and make you scared for yourself. In that it was at least 70% successful for me. The man sitting behind me to my right who announced “What a pile of shit!” as the film finished obviously didn’t share my enthusiasm – although the girls on my left, who were still shaking, really did. I think this is a definite love it or hate it film. There won’t be any middle ground on whether or not you find it scary. I did and I loved it for that. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Weber, if you check above, you'll see a lot of middle-ground dwellers. Me included. I didn't love it, nor did I hate it. It was...um, okay. People keep saying this is a love-it-or-hate-it film, but most of the people I've spoken to seem to think it was well, okay, but nothing flash. | ||
| Weber_gregston (Weber_gregston) Username: Weber_gregston Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 194.176.105.56 |
I was just giving my impression of it, compounded by the polarised opinions of the people behind me. Like I said at the start of my post, I hadn't read anything on this thread since the spoiler alerts appeared. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 213.219.8.243 |
Oh, I know - that post may have come across as a bit arsey, but it wasn't meant that way. Honest.  | ||
| Steve Bacon (Stevebacon) Username: Stevebacon Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 90.209.220.55 |
My biggest disappointment with this film was the wasted opportunity. There were a couple of okay moments, but I don't feel it realised its potential. It might be more effective on DVD, but in the cinema it lost its impact, in my opinion. | ||
| Richard_gavin (Richard_gavin) Username: Richard_gavin Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 69.157.38.37 |
"My biggest disappointment with this film was the wasted opportunity. There were a couple of okay moments, but I don't feel it realised its potential. It might be more effective on DVD, but in the cinema it lost its impact, in my opinion." I concur, Steve. I still think that if the filmmakers had done Paranormal Activity as a concentrated short film instead of a feature, it could've been tremendous. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Aye. Steve - how are you? did you get my email? | ||
| Steve Bacon (Stevebacon) Username: Stevebacon Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 90.209.220.55 |
Gary, I just emailed you. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
Bless you, sir - I just responded. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.157.23.81 |
PA really did frighten me though it hasn't lingered in my mind. It did make me put on all the lights and walk round backwards, however (for some reason 'walking round backwards' feels reasurring... :S). I thought the couple were very realistic, if I might say so. They weren't together, were they, those two? (the woman was lovely!) As an aside, is it me or is Kirsty Allsopp scrummy as heck? | ||
| Steve Bacon (Stevebacon) Username: Stevebacon Registered: 09-2008 Posted From: 90.209.220.55 |
I saw the version that ended with Micah being thrown towards the camera. I'm still not sure whether that is the better one. I'll always prefer 'creeps' to 'shocks'. | ||
| Zed (Gary_mc) Username: Gary_mc Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.96.240.106 |
As an aside, is it me or is Kirsty Allsopp scrummy as heck? Hell, yes.  I also though the girl in PA was rather lovely, Tony. In a very real way, if that makes any sense. | ||
| Tony (Tony) Username: Tony Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 81.157.23.81 |
Yes! She was a bit plump and plain, but just so nice. I bet we never see her again, and certainly will never see her ilk on screen. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.42.115 |
Seven months after the last post, I've finally seen this. I agree with pretty much everything said above - particularly that the static night shots were the most effective. And that ouija board scene was unintentionally hilarious. One thing nobody's mentioned is the establishment of a rhythm for the hauntings (danger at night, safety during the day) and the subsequent breaking of that rhythm for shock value - a good lesson for all horror artists. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.23.108.128 |
I didn't get as far as the rhythm trick. I just felt it was tick-tock predictable. The scares were cheap shots. Anyone could do that. The guy knows nothing about horror. But . . . I did kinda like it. Ghostwatch kicks it arse to hell and back, tho. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.23.108.128 |
You see this yet, Ramsey? What did you think? | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.42.115 |
Ramsey's comments are further up. Yes, it doesn't hold a candle to Ghostwatch. | ||
| Gary Fry (Gary_fry) Username: Gary_fry Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 86.23.108.128 |
No, he couldn't watch it. Shakycam. He was going to pick it up on DVD. | ||
| Protodroid (Protodroid) Username: Protodroid Registered: 03-2008 Posted From: 109.79.42.115 |
The director said something interesting on the commentary. SLIGHT SPOILER He digitally split the main actress' face (ugh!) so that her eyes smiled before her mouth did. I'm not sure how noticeable it is, but gods, it opens up new possibilities for messing with ordinary scenes. It's now standard working practice to digitally remove blinks or twitches from actors in Hollywood films. Pay attention, horror film-makers: there's a world of potential there for pushing a performance into the uncanny valley for deliberate, disturbing effect. | ||
| Matthew Fryer (Matthew_fryer) Username: Matthew_fryer Registered: 08-2009 Posted From: 90.202.180.87 |
Good point, Protodroid. I thought the film was fairly good, but many months later, it still lingers in my head. So perhaps it was better than I thought. |