Paranormal Activity [Archive]

Ezee E

09-16-2009, 01:06 AM

Filmed for just $11,000, it did so well at the film festivals, that its getting a wide release.

My brothers saw it, and said that while it is mostly Blair Witch in a Bedroom, it certainly has its freaky moments.

Trailer (http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/paranormalactivity/)

I'll take one of these over any of the October horror releases.

megladon8

09-16-2009, 01:08 AM

Yeah, I mentioned this in the horror thread, and I REALLY want to see it.

Thanks for posting the trailer. I hadn't seen that 'til now.

number8

09-16-2009, 01:43 AM

It sucks that it's opening in Santa Cruz next weekend, because I'm going down there this weekend.

BuffaloWilder

09-16-2009, 02:22 AM

You know, it may very well be the scariest film of the year, BUT a door slowly shutting by itself really - well, it's not an attention grabber, I'll say.

Ivan Drago

09-16-2009, 03:59 AM

Looks cool. I'll probably see it.

Ezee E

09-16-2009, 04:11 AM

You know, it may very well be the scariest film of the year, BUT a door slowly shutting by itself really - well, it's not an attention grabber, I'll say.
Sad thing is that's the scariest thing i've seen in trailers recently.

eternity

09-16-2009, 05:30 AM

Dukefrukem

09-16-2009, 12:58 PM

Yup i also said in the horror thread i want to see this. What else is new though?

Wryan

09-16-2009, 05:22 PM

You know, it may very well be the scariest film of the year, BUT a door slowly shutting by itself really - well, it's not an attention grabber, I'll say.

Or...a door really quickly shutting by itself?

Or a body flying backward toward the camera as if heaved by a mighty force?

Seems interesting to me.

number8

09-25-2009, 10:00 AM

Hee hee, this was very fun. Crowd was freaked.

Great unexpected use of the Ouija board.

number8

09-27-2009, 05:32 AM

This is playing very well. Sold out shows everywhere. It deserves it, I think.

number8

09-29-2009, 02:26 AM

20 more cities this weekend!

eternity

10-09-2009, 06:49 PM

I'm conflicted. It's one of the most well realized horror films or otherwise I've seen in a long time, the way it builds up, the way the whole thing is put together is just amazing. The direction really gnaws at you as it toys you around and casually builds up both in intensity and hints of the backstory, making all these little things so damn real and frightening. Only then do things get insane and once you think the movie already has you reeled in, it thrashes you around to the point of emotional whiplash. It's a shame that the parts between all the "sleeping", while contributing a whole lot to the buildup of intensity in the beginning, showing us these people and how they react to the things that happened to them previously while they weren't awake, getting completely corroded as it goes on as their reactions and everything that happens in the night becomes completely irrelevant and glossed upon as if some of the incredible shit that happens is just minor.

There's still so many great ideas here that I can't help but to gush, but I can't really call this the masterpiece that parts of the film imply that it is. It sure brings a lot of new techniques to the table that I'm sure inferior films will cliche the hell out of in the future.

Ezee E

10-10-2009, 12:38 AM

In a good amount of theaters now. Saw it today myself, and it is very freaky. It builds and builds as well, and actually resonated with me as well. I got home, walked my dog, left the door open, returned, and it was closed and I couldn't get in. Yes, it was because I locked my door handle and couldn't get it, but I was a little spooked still.

This is going to be very popular methinks. The crowd was eating it up.

eternity

10-11-2009, 07:47 PM

Made 7 million out of 150 theaters this weekend. Over a 45k PTA. Record breaking.

Fezzik

10-12-2009, 04:19 PM

Just checked the updated city listing. Still not going to be playing anywhere near here the next few weeks.

I figure they'd target classic college towns like Tallahassee...here's hoping it expands again.

megladon8

10-12-2009, 10:23 PM

A friend in NYC went to see this the other night and left an hour in because he couldn't take it.

Spun Lepton

10-12-2009, 11:05 PM

Paranormal Activity becomes a huge hit, but it's not a sequel nor a remake. So, Hollywood will ignore its success as being indicative of anything at all.

Dead & Messed Up

10-12-2009, 11:30 PM

Paranormal Activity becomes a huge hit, but it's not a sequel nor a remake. So, Hollywood will ignore its success as being indicative of anything at all.

As per usual, they'll duplicate the basic tropes but not the process.

eternity

10-12-2009, 11:44 PM

Paranormal Activity becomes a huge hit, but it's not a sequel nor a remake. So, Hollywood will ignore its success as being indicative of anything at all.
It is only successful because of using an innovative, untapped way of building internet hype and transferring it to actually selling seats. The only person that can be attributed to the success of this film is whoever decided to release it and whoever in marketing came up with the idea. I can speak for myself that the hype and the mystique of it all STILL makes me oversell it.

Ezee E

10-13-2009, 01:54 AM

It is only successful because of using an innovative, untapped way of building internet hype and transferring it to actually selling seats. The only person that can be attributed to the success of this film is whoever decided to release it and whoever in marketing came up with the idea. I can speak for myself that the hype and the mystique of it all STILL makes me oversell it.
Yeesh. Go watch Jennifer's Body.

Ezee E

10-13-2009, 01:55 AM

A friend in NYC went to see this the other night and left an hour in because he couldn't take it.
Silly man.

Spun Lepton

10-13-2009, 02:11 AM

number8

10-13-2009, 05:37 AM

Silly man.

He's not the only one. I've heard the same thing from several people.

Ezee E

10-14-2009, 10:52 AM

Ebert's review says it just right:

It illustrates one of my favorite points, that silence and waiting can be more entertaining than frantic fast-cutting and berserk f/x. For extended periods here, nothing at all is happening, and believe me, you won't be bored.

MadMan

10-17-2009, 05:34 AM

The theater I work at is the only one in town showing this movie. Several fellow employees saw it at a midnight show last night and said it was scary. Yes I'm going to go see it.

The Mike

10-17-2009, 07:25 AM

This shook me....literally. What a blast.

Rowland

10-17-2009, 05:20 PM

This shook me....literally.Did William Castle install your theater's seats?

eternity

10-17-2009, 08:13 PM

Yeesh. Go watch Jennifer's Body.
Condescending douche is condescending.

Ivan Drago

10-18-2009, 05:02 AM

I never get scared at horror movies.

THIS scared the shit out of me. Fucking awesome movie.

The Mike

10-19-2009, 05:25 AM

Thoughts on the final moments?

While I thought it worked in the moment, the final shot of her approaching the camera seems cheap to me in retrospect. For a movie that seemed so much about showing the characters in their natural setting and being "real", it's not much different than all those stupid recent horrors that have had a screaming zombie pop up in front of the camera before the credits roll. And I don't know why the demon would really want to eat the camera.

Then again, it had me pushing back in to my chair and getting ready to run, so maybe it did work fine.

number8

10-19-2009, 07:45 AM

They re-shot the whole ending at the studio's insistence.

The original ending was...

Katie goes downstairs in trance, then she starts screaming. Micah wakes up and runs down. They both start screaming. Suddenly stops. Katie walks back into the room covered in blood and holding a knife, still in trance. She sits on the floor next to the bed, gently rocking (they use this shot in the trailer). She keeps on rocking to daytime, where we hear Katie's girlfriend leave a message on their answering machine wondering where they are. Katie keeps rocking all day and night, never moving. The next day, we hear the friend comes in downstairs and call out for them. She presumably sees Micah's body and starts screaming and calls the cops. Fast forward several minutes later, the cops arrive and go up the stairs to check the bedroom. Right at that moment, Katie wakes up from her trance and doesn't know what's going on. The cops tell her to stay put, but she's so confused that she moves towards them, and she has a knife. The cops shoot her dead. Fade to black.

megladon8

10-19-2009, 11:02 PM

Another person I know saw this and was terribly freaked.

Jen's niece went with her boyfriend. Apparently she was crying in the theatre she was so scared. Then that night she went to sleep hugging a Bible.

She also now needs a night-light, and doesn't ever want to be alone.

The Mike

10-20-2009, 12:26 AM

I shouldn't have talked about this movie right before bed last night. It's still messin' with me. :frustrated:

Lucky

10-20-2009, 12:32 AM

I woke up in the middle of the night last night and made the mistake of checking the clock...

3:04.

I couldn't fall back asleep. I was convinced something paranormal was going to happen in 10 minutes. I had to move to the living room and fall asleep to the TV.

Skitch

10-20-2009, 12:37 AM

Dammit you guys better not be getting me over-amped for this.

Ivan Drago

10-20-2009, 03:09 AM

I shouldn't have talked about this movie right before bed last night. It's still messin' with me. :frustrated:

The night I saw it, I layed in bed until 3:30 in the morning just thinking about it. Such an awesome movie.

And I hope to see the alternate endings on the DVD.

eternity

10-21-2009, 01:34 AM

The night I saw it, I layed in bed until 3:30 in the morning just thinking about it. Such an awesome movie.

And I hope to see the alternate endings on the DVD.Oren Peli is the director's name. It's literally the only name in the end credits.

Derek

10-21-2009, 04:15 AM

Dammit you guys better not be getting me over-amped for this.

No kidding, though I have committed my life to our Lord and savior Jesus Christ in return for his protection during the nights following my viewing just for safe measure.

Watashi

10-21-2009, 04:35 AM

I saw the ending out of context yesterday at work.

It was pretty stupid.

Some dude literally shitted his pants from watching it over the weekend.

Kurosawa Fan

10-21-2009, 02:45 PM

Finally arrived at my local theater. Gonna try to see it before Halloween, but it would have to be an afternoon show because people get shot too often at evening horror showings.

BuffaloWilder

10-22-2009, 05:00 AM

Saw the screener. This is a good movie, and the ending works very well, although - those are some jumpy policemen - I'll say that much. More thoughts later on at the site. Refuse to see theatrical cut, if rumors about the ending being altered are true.

number8

10-22-2009, 05:04 AM

...You downloaded the old version?

number8

10-22-2009, 05:07 AM

FYI, the theatrical cut didn't just change the ending. They rearranged the scenes and restructured the pacing. Everyone I know who've seen both cuts agree that, outside of the ending, the theatrical cut is a big improvement.

Ivan Drago

10-22-2009, 05:18 AM

Gah, the more I think about this movie, the more and more I like it. Bring on the old version!

BuffaloWilder

10-22-2009, 10:47 AM

...You downloaded the old version?

It's online, yes.

Kurosawa Fan

10-23-2009, 02:21 AM

What a HUGE disappointment. A few tense moments. That's it. Not terribly scary, heavily cliched, terrible ending. It doesn't separate itself from the pack at all. None of their reactions/decisions made a lick of sense with common sense, and throughout the entire film I wanted to punch Micah in the face. I'm so bummed right now. And I don't think this is a case of a film being overhyped. If I'm scared, I'm scared. Doesn't matter how much hype a film receives. In this case, I was tense at times, but never scared.

Oh well. At least I had Drag Me to Hell this year. That makes up for the failings of this one.

BuffaloWilder

10-23-2009, 02:23 AM

Perhaps that is because you identified with the characters in Drag Me to Hell more.

Hmmm.

Kurosawa Fan

10-23-2009, 02:24 AM

Perhaps that is because you identified with the characters in Drag Me to Hell more.

Hmmm.

Nope. Just a far more enjoyable experience. I guess that's just my type of horror film, and when a film goes for straight terror, I lose interest. Though I'm a fan of Blair Witch, so that throws a wrench into that theory.

number8

10-23-2009, 03:01 AM

I'm seeing a recurring theme where your extreme dislike of a character, regardless of whether or not its intentional, corresponds with your disliking of the movie/tv show itself.

Kurosawa Fan

10-23-2009, 12:50 PM

I'm seeing a recurring theme where your extreme dislike of a character, regardless of whether or not its intentional, corresponds with your disliking of the movie/tv show itself.

Absolutely untrue. I had a great time with Cloverfield even though I couldn't stand the guy holding the camera. Wanted to punch him too.

My biggest problem with this film is that the two characters do NOTHING. They're faced with all this evidence, and they do nothing about it. It's a stupid gimmick. The reason Blair Witch worked so well was because those characters were lost in the woods and helpless. These two had an infinite number of options, and instead spent four weeks in the same house doing nothing to help their situation. It was lame.

BuffaloWilder

10-24-2009, 01:57 AM

Well - they do do something about it. That's the whole point of the movie.

Sxottlan

10-24-2009, 02:43 AM

This was an effective little movie. Micah was too much of a jackhole though.

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 02:44 AM

Well - they do do something about it. That's the whole point of the movie.

No. They don't. They sit in the same house, contact no one until it's too late, and do nothing but document the happenings. Even when things are obviously serious (like the Ouija board incident), they still make no attempt to change anything. They just keep videotaping their bedroom at night. Why don't they leave? Get a hotel, or stay in their car, or stay with parents or friends? Because some psychic told them they can't run away? The same psychic that Micah thinks is full of shit? On that note, why doesn't Katie contact the demonologist much sooner? Why is it up to Micah? If things are up to him, then why wouldn't they leave the house rather than staying for weeks? Micah didn't believe anything the psychic said. Their actions aren't consistent with human reaction to their situation. They are convenient to the plot and that's it. And that might be fine in a different movie, but for a movie trying to pass itself off as "real", with its faux-documentary style and its opening and closing titles, it doesn't work.

megladon8

10-24-2009, 02:49 AM

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 02:51 AM

I thought it was made pretty clear - even outside what the psychic told them - that leaving the house wouldn't do jack shit. The demon is attached to her, not the house.

And mildly unrelated - Katie was HOT.

But how was it made clear? Because it showed up a few times when she was eight? She couldn't have been having problems of this severity all these years. So obviously leaving the burned-down house had some effect. I'd still try something, anything. They do nothing. Nothing but videotaping.

megladon8

10-24-2009, 02:55 AM

But how was it made clear? Because it showed up a few times when she was eight? She couldn't have been having problems of this severity all these years. So obviously leaving the burned-down house had some effect. I'd still try something, anything. They do nothing. Nothing but videotaping.

We were given tons of information that made it clear it was attached to her. That she's been having these experiences all her life. The internet research Micah did showing that case that exactly mirrored Katie's, and how that demon seems to hop from target to target, tormenting that specific person.

I thought that Micah's opinion of the psychic was meant to be seen as ignorant and ignoring the facts - which was, really, his character in a nutshell.

The psychic was an authority on the subject, and I thought the film tried to paint what he said as being what was truly going on. He really did want to help them. An interesting twist since often in horror films a psychic of this kind is presented as a phony and a fraud.

Finding that photo in the attic of her as a child was evidence of this.

I can understand where you're coming from, KF, in that it angered me, too, that they didn't contact the demonologist sooner. But I do believe it was made abundantly clear that leaving the house was not going to solve anything at all.

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 03:01 AM

I'm not saying it would have helped, I'm saying I would have tried, and so would any normal human being. You don't just take some random psychics word for it when your life is potentially on the line. It doesn't make sense. I agree that the psychic knew what he was talking about, and I agree that it probably wouldn't have helped. They could have incorporated the fact that it wouldn't or didn't help into the film and it would have been much better. Have them leave the house and have it follow them wherever they go. Have them contact a priest weeks before he finds that web article (because at that point any rational person would have done something about the things that were taking place). Have them contact the police. Have them do ANYTHING other than just sit there and sleep in the same bedroom every night with a camera running.

And this is only part of my complaint with the film. It also wasn't very frightening. Tense at times, but not scary by any means.

BuffaloWilder

10-24-2009, 03:06 AM

megladon8

10-24-2009, 03:06 AM

I found some of it pretty frightening. I never even got close to "I NEED TO LEAVE THE THEATRE NOW" levels (speaking of which, a teenage guy who was there with a group of friends bailed about 20 minutes before the movie ended).

I found the shadow-work quite creepy. And her being pulled out of bed and dragged.

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 03:17 AM

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 03:19 AM

As everybody said, the ghost has been with her her entire life - it wasn't just something the psychiatrist said, she knew that it wouldn't help. I mean, she reiterates this several times throughout the film, and she even gives her own reasons as to why she doesn't want to leave her home.

Like I've said already, then do something else. Anything else. She had unlimited resources, yet they make no effort other than looking up an article online and calling a demonologist two weeks too late. Ridiculous.

BuffaloWilder

10-24-2009, 04:01 AM

Like I've said already, then do something else. Anything else.

...like?

I mean, you realize the Ghostbusters don't exist, right?

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 04:18 AM

...like?

I mean, you realize the Ghostbusters don't exist, right?

Really? That's the best you can do?

Let me ask you this: if it was you, would you have tried to do something about it or just sit around taping yourself while things got worse? I mean, they both left the house every day. Plus there's the fact that between the ages of 8 and however old Katie is in the film, she lived relatively undisturbed. A whisper here, a creaking there, but nothing of any significance. So obviously there's some way of making this thing remain dormant. Wouldn't you have done anything in your power to make that happen again? And now answer this: what did they do to solve the problem? Like I said before, it's not a normal response to the situation. There was no common sense involved. I've already, off the top of my head, brought up two things I would have done: tried to run anyway or contacted a priest/authorities/professors/anyone who might be able to look at those tapes and help me. With weeks, or in Katie's case, years to think things over, I'd have come up with many, many others. This is her life. Why is it not important enough to get help?

number8

10-24-2009, 05:12 AM

megladon8

10-24-2009, 12:28 PM

I thought Micah was the reason why it got so angry. He kept taunting it, antagonizing it, threatening it.

Like the psychic said at the beginning, if you acknowledge its presence and try to battle it in any way, you're just inviting it in.

Moral of the story: even demons don't like douchebags.

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 12:54 PM

Well... They did spend like 90 minutes arguing about getting help and leaving. She wanted to do everything you said, KF, but Micah kept insisting that he's under control. I thought that was one of the very few character development that the movie did—since most of it focused more on scares—that Micah wouldn't allow anyone else but him to save her, because he believed that it's his duty.

You know, the old "won't ask for directions" thing.

They spent 90 movie minutes. The timeline in the film was almost 4 weeks. And I don't care how stubborn Micah was, if Katie was strong enough to call a psychic in the first place, she obviously had enough pull to say "fuck you, we're doing this" any time she wanted. So duty or not, I'm not buying into their decision-making as anything but devices to keep the movie in the house and drive the plot from point A to point B. It was gimmicky and hurt the film for me.

megladon8

10-24-2009, 01:20 PM

Absolutely understandable, KF. I can see your gripes. It was just something I honestly didn't even clue into while watching the movie.

And I think this movie affected me more than I thought, because I'm here at work, totally alone in the building, and I'm a little freaked.

Skitch

10-24-2009, 01:40 PM

Thanks for the spoiler tags guys.

*leaves thread*

megladon8

10-24-2009, 01:52 PM

I don't think anything spoilerish has really been said, Skitch.

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 02:08 PM

Thanks for the spoiler tags guys.

*leaves thread*

It's not a secret that the entire film takes place in the house. What else was spoiled?

Lucky

10-24-2009, 04:30 PM

Kurosawa Fan

10-24-2009, 06:13 PM

I agree with K-Fan's complaints completely, but characters acting rationally is not a prerequisite for me to enjoy a film in this particular genre. Also, knowing the bare-bones production behind this movie helps me turn a blind eye to that kind of criticism. Taking the big picture into account ($14,000 budget, the director using his own home, etc.), I think it's a wildly successful production. A good horror movie? Absolutely. A good film? Debatable.

Thank you. You too meg. I mean, it's one thing to disagree with me (which I knew most were going to anyway), but to not see my point at all is a bit frustrating.

The reason I struggled with looking past this particular complaint is that they were striving for realism. Normally in a horror film I can be more forgiving, but when you try to insinuate that it's a true story with the title cards, and shot the entire thing in faux-doc style, I feel like the characters and their reactions/decisions should mirror real life as well.

megladon8

10-24-2009, 06:40 PM

Absolutely, KF. Like I said, I totally understand where you're coming from. It just wasn't something that bothered me, really :)

I was thinking last night how this was like a different take on the same kind of story told in Drag Me to Hell. The young couple being tormented by a classic "fire and brimstone" type demon, with everything seemingly centering around the girl.

It would be neat to do a little retrospective write-up looking at all the different ways demonic hauntings/possessions have been done on film. Look at what was most effectively scary, visual/idealogical trends, etc.

When we see the footprints of the demon, it reminded me very much of, again, the Lamia in Drag Me to Hell. I imagined the demon being the same kind of cross between animal and man.

EDIT: And on another note, does anyone else find those classic wood-cuttings/engravings of demons from the middle ages to be very creepy? Stuff like this...

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/5341/schongauermartinanthony.jpg

http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/3122/demon222.jpg

Images like this were used in this movie, The Exorcist, Drag Me to Hell and The Ninth Gate (to name a few) and I find they really add something.

balmakboor

10-24-2009, 09:04 PM

I just got home from watching an early show. This definitely freaked out the audience, even during the day time. I was shaking as I left the theater. Not so much because I was scared, although I found the movie very scary and unnerving, but because I was convinced that I'd just seen a true classic of the genre.

I hear KF's complaint loud and clear about the characters not doing anything. But I do think on the surface that the movie makes it abundantly clear that leaving won't make a difference, but I think there is another reason for their lack of taking steps to alleviate the situation. I think it is an allegory of sorts for an abusive relationship. Call it abuse by video camera if you like.

When I was a kid, the nextdoor neighbors were kinda odd. They kept to themselves. They didn't come out of the house much. He was a pianist, she a housewife, their daughter an only child. One night, I woke up at about 2:00 in the morning and heard sounds. Faint pop pop pop. I rolled over and went back to sleep. I awoke in the morning to a freaked out mother and cop cars parked all over the cul-de-sac. The housewife and shot the pianist dead at the top of the stairs during the night in front of their daughter.

It came out over time that he had been abusing her for years. A little bit at first and gradually building over time. She had been pushed somehow to the edge that night and had taken her final action against him. But why did they continue to live in this situation for years? The abuse had been there with the heat ever so gradually rising and yet they didn't seek help. She didn't move out. They continued to live pretty much alone and cut off from the world until something really bad finally happened.

Micah is a jerk. He and Katie's relationship starts off fine although she's clearly not crazy about the whole camera idea. As things go, their relationship grows more and more strained and the use of profanity builds. Where they once had sex in the bed, it increasingly becomes more and more of a battlefield with her even prefering to sit outside in the cold than share his warm bed. There is also a point where she comes close to sending him to the couch for the night until they awkwarding kiss and make up.

It's interesting that he seems to have no problem sleeping at night. As the abuser, he feels really good about things. She is the one with nightmares and the one who gets out of bed and stares at his sleeping body and goes downstairs. She's the one feeling the effects of the abuse.

And the source of so much discomfort between them is his camera and how he wields it. The way he always grabs it before running to see why she is screaming. In the ending we have, it actually seems appropriate that the last thing she does is attack the camera.

The one thing that bothered me while watching was my wondering, "With all this shit going on, how can they continue to fall asleep at night?" But, you know, the pianist and his wife and his daughter continued to fall asleep at night with a lot of shit going on, until he no longer could ever again.

Sxottlan

10-25-2009, 01:15 AM

An effective little movie. None of the scares were anything beyond what I see in a typical episode of Ghost Hunters and the best one, the final shot, was already spoiled in the trailer. I think I found most disturbing Katie's trances where she would stand for hours in one place. The dragging scene I am also hard pressed to figure out how they pulled it off.

The relationship between Micah and Katie seems more troubled than you originally think. He almost seems to be using the video camera to try and distance himself from what's going on. As if seeing it through a viewfinder will somehow make it less real. He seems to engage in that kind of hair splitting. "I didn't buy an Ouiji board. I borrowed it." Please. He's a total child.

The only thing I found ringing false was the psychic saying the demonologist is out the country. Probably should have mentioned that the first time. I didn't find his performance too convincing.

Bosco B Thug

10-25-2009, 01:25 AM

Images like this were used in this movie, The Exorcist, Drag Me to Hell and The Ninth Gate (to name a few) and I find they really add something. Yeah, I find them especially frightening, too. Curse/Night of the Demon uses them to great effect, as well.

I'll get to this movie by next weekend. :pritch:

balmakboor

10-25-2009, 01:38 PM

It really may just be that a connection between PA and a childhood memory entered my mind, but this movie has really resonated with me. I emailed a link to my full review to my niece in Seattle. She had recommended I see the movie several weeks ago.

http://blogcritics.org/video/article/movie-review-paranormal-activity1/

She replied (in part): "I completely agree, the subtlety is what scared me and what I liked the most about the movie. Horror movies are way too exaggerated now. It seems like they're all trying to compete with Saw...Your comparison with domestic violence is interesting. I'm glad you liked it!"

I emailed back some more thoughts:

Funny, there is even a nice poetic symmetry between the words "Paranormal Activity" and "Domestic Violence." A few other things I noticed but didn't have room to include in my review: As the abuser (abuse by over-zealous videotaping?) Micah has no problem sleeping at night. As the abused, it is Katie who wakes up every night in fear. Domestic violence is something passed on from generation to generation. Both the man and the woman accept it because they were taught to accept it by their parents. It is interesting how strongly the point is made that the haunting has been going on for Katie since childhood and that the photo of her as a child is burned. And, finally, all of the film's animus is directed toward Micah, the man, the abuser.

I can easily imagine the director watching all of the many first person video type movies like Diary of the Dead, [Rec], and Cloverfield and saying, "Wow. In all of these, the camera is characterized as a weapon, a tool of aggression between the cameraman and his (always his) often female victims (I mean subjects). All that was left was the idea of using the bedroom as principle place of conflict and PA probably wrote itself.

Sxottlan

10-26-2009, 03:00 AM

Funny, there is even a nice poetic symmetry between the words "Paranormal Activity" and "Domestic Violence."

Is the demon really Katie's subconscious id retaliating?

There's a theory (i.e. complete conjecture) in some of these ghost shows that these hauntings revolving around a person, mostly women, are somehow created by the affected person on a subconscious level.

megladon8

10-26-2009, 03:31 AM

It's nice to be putting some deep thought into the film, but it makes no sense whatsoever.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 03:43 AM

Is the demon really Katie's subconscious id retaliating?

That's not really what I'm trying to suggest. I fear I've been suggesting pretty badly though as usual. The demon in the movie is merely a demon.

I think the movie is also an allegory though where each element in the demon possession story symbolizes something in a parallel story about domestic violence. I'll try to flesh out what I mean tomorrow. It's getting pretty late here.

megladon8

10-26-2009, 03:46 AM

number8

10-26-2009, 04:15 AM

Allegory ≠ subtext.

In the former, it doesn't have to actually happen.

megladon8

10-26-2009, 04:15 AM

Regardless, it wasn't there.

number8

10-26-2009, 04:21 AM

What's not there?

megladon8

10-26-2009, 04:21 AM

What's not there?

Domestic violence.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 04:27 AM

I'm sorry but I do not see at all how Micah could be considered abusive.

He was a typical stubborn macho-man. There was something wrong with his house/girlfriend, and he didn't want to accept the idea that he couldn't fix it himself.

I do not think there's much credence to the domestic violence subtext. We were never even given insinuations that there was physical abuse occurring in their relationship, let alone emotional.

I think the crux of my argument is this: in movies of this type, whenever a man (so often a man) points a camera at a woman (so often a woman) and keeps filming her even after she has asked him to stop, we have on our hands an abusive act. My favorite moment in Diary of the Dead makes this explicit. The male lead has been filming others including the female lead despite their insistence that he stop. Suddenly the female finds herself with a camera in her hands as well and her first action is to turn the tables on the male lead and point her camera at him -- it is a truly castrating moment.

PA contains constant variations on her asking Micah to stop and he almost never does (just once to get sex). And tensions build between them steadily. The use of profanity pointedly escalates throughout the film. It's actually very clever use of profanity. She almost makes him leave the bedroom and sleep elsewhere with his camera before they sort of kiss and make up. And her going downstairs and outside at night can be read as escaping from the camera's gaze. And her final act of first throwing his body at the camera and then attacking the camera itself seems entirely logical.

So, I guess I'm suggesting that the film is a nice, scary little demon story about a guy who is a bit of an immature jerk and his girlfriend. It is also a study in domestic violence by way of tropes present in the use of the camera in films from this particular first person video genre.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 04:29 AM

Allegory ≠ subtext.

In the former, it doesn't have to actually happen.

And yes, I haven't helped matters by mixing up my use of those two terms.

number8

10-26-2009, 05:40 AM

And yes, I haven't helped matters by mixing up my use of those two terms.

You called it an allegory, which is completely valid. If you want to suggest that it's a subtext, there has to be something in the movie that points to it.

But domestic violence doesn't have to occur or happen between the couple for the movie to be an allegory of domestic violence.

It's not there because it's already represented by the haunting.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 11:45 AM

You called it an allegory, which is completely valid. If you want to suggest that it's a subtext, there has to be something in the movie that points to it.

But domestic violence doesn't have to occur or happen between the couple for the movie to be an allegory of domestic violence.

It's not there because it's already represented by the haunting.

I agree with what you're saying except your last sentence, sort of. For the movie to be an allegory of an abusive relationship such as the one of my childhood experience, two of the things that need to be represented are the abusive behavior of the man and the growing resistance to that abuse of the woman that ends with her taking a final action to end it. I think the man's abuse is represented by the camera and how he wields it. I think the haunting, the demon, represents her growing resistance.

The ending titles work as allegory. In the case of the pianist and his wife, police found him dead and the wife was never seen again, by her neighbors anyway.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 02:21 PM

If you want to suggest that it's a subtext, there has to be something in the movie that points to it.

I'm trying to learn as I go here -- always trying to learn as I go.

What sort of thing would you be looking for in the text that would point to domestic violence as a subtext? And, if having domestic violence as a subtext requires that there be domestic violence in the text, wouldn't that make the text and subtext more or less the same?

Raiders

10-26-2009, 03:31 PM

Meh. Didn't really enjoy this very much. I saw it during the late afternoon and my audience was by and large not particularly vocal. I imagine the best way, only way really, to experience this film is at midnight with a crazy audience. The hype machine has already destroyed it and try as I might, I can't get beyond it. When it was a little indie feature that you snuck out late at night to see with a bunch of other horror enthusiasts, I imagine every amateur bump-in-the-night was an act of terror. But now, in a multiplex with dozens of teenage girls looking for a reason to cling to the dude next to them, it is essentially every other horror film and on the basis of its actual quality, it struck me as middling at best. When Blair Witch was released ten years ago, it was different and raw and has almost single-handedly brought about the wave of first-person POV, handheld horror films. This film arrives late to the party and really, when you get past the fact that we are seeing no-budget constraints at work, the scares are pretty standard stuff for the genre. This has the same illogical actions and petty character interplay as pretty much all other mainstream horror films and none of the actual craft that goes into creating some of the best and most atmospheric of the psychological horror genre.

Armond White, for all his insanity, was right when he said in an interview years ago that modern technology has left us with a lot of people making moves who shouldn't. That isn't exactly the case here; Peli certainly understands how to milk a concept for every last little bump and twitch, but there's nothing particularly cinematic about the experience. It felt like watching an episode of Scare Tactics. Movies like this are effective in the moment as we all picture ourselves lying asleep and strange and demonic events happening. But there's no craft, no elegantly composed sequence to bring me back. Maybe it is just a personal issue but I don't go to the movies to see what someone can do for next-to-nothing. I wasn't compelled by any driving idea behind the film since essentially it is a 90-minute exercise in scaring you to pieces and if the efforts don't prevail and you don't have any communal experience with the audience, you're left with nothing.

Kurosawa Fan

10-26-2009, 03:35 PM

YES!!! YES!!!!! THANK YOU!!!

number8

10-26-2009, 05:34 PM

I believe the complete opposite. I think a crazy vocal midnight crowd would lessen the experience. I think this movie would play best on DVD.

Ezee E

10-26-2009, 06:26 PM

I believe the complete opposite. I think a crazy vocal midnight crowd would lessen the experience. I think this movie would play best on DVD.
Nah. The best thing about the movie was hearing the others freak out at the right parts.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 08:20 PM

I've been reading through the comments on blogcritics to my review and to other reviews and I'm amazed by how much people out there hate this movie. Or rather that they hate that it was even made. It seems all blown out of proportion with one guy pissed off that some rich kid got this made and released while it took Stallone something like 10 years to get Rocky made. (I'm not sure what that had anything to do with anything, but that's what he said.)

I can understand people being bored by it and not scared by it and even sickened by the camerawork. But most of these commentors aren't even saying anything about the movie itself.

megladon8

10-26-2009, 08:21 PM

This film has gotten me kind of interested in classic demonology.

Does anyone have any knowledge in this area? Any good books to check out?

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 08:31 PM

This film has gotten me kind of interested in classic demonology.

Does anyone have any knowledge in this area? Any good books to check out?

The images of demons from books in the movie were quite sweet. I'd like to get my hands on some of those books.

My mind has wandered off exploring the movie in other ways because I don't have any particular interest or belief in demons. I told a movie loving friend at church on Sunday that she should see the movie and she said, "No way! Don't you believe that stuff could really happen? It's just to freaky for me to watch." I told her that I don't believe in demons. I wondered later if that wasn't basically the same as admitting to her that I'm an atheist. (Don't ask why an atheist goes to church on Sunday and serves as a deacon no less. Long story.)

Sycophant

10-26-2009, 08:35 PM

(Don't ask why an atheist goes to church on Sunday and serves as a deacon no less. Long story.)

I'm now, like, insanely curious about this. But I won't ask you since you said not to. At least not in this thread.

BuffaloWilder

10-26-2009, 10:18 PM

Paranormal Activity as an allegory about domestic abuse/

Shut up shut up shut up shut up

Sycophant

10-26-2009, 10:21 PM

No you.

Ezee E

10-26-2009, 11:17 PM

I actually like the allegory idea.

balmakboor

10-26-2009, 11:34 PM

I expanded my review of Paranormal Activity to try to better present my allegory idea. I post it here in hopes of getting comments I can use to further develop it.

---

In Paranormal Activity [2007], a young woman, Katie, shares a home with her boyfriend Micah. After moving in together, she had shared with him that she’s been haunted since childhood. His response was to buy an expensive video camera and try to catch the ghosts in the act. She’s not crazy about the idea, but he’s so enthusiastic, like a boy with a new toy.

The early scenes have the slow, uneventful quality of home movies. The camera watches them sleep. A title on the screen says, “Night #1.” Nothing happens. I think a few people in the audience found the first ten minutes a bit trying. But, trust me on this, the movie is masterfully paced. It’s like placing a pot of water on a stove, calm at first, but, once the first bubbles appear, it is well on its way to a full boil.

One of the marvelous things about Paranormal Activity is that it scares you silly without showing you much. It’s like the great horror movies of the distant past such as Cat People [1942] and I Walked with a Zombie [1943]. Those drew their scares from shadows and silence. If you’re turned off by all the gore in recent horror movies, this may just be the ticket.

A friend complained about the movie. He said, “With all of the freaky things going on, why don’t the characters do something? Why don’t they go to a hotel?” “Well,” I replied, “the movie does say that the haunting goes wherever she goes, so not much point in leaving.” But later I wondered, “Maybe their inaction meant something more.”

When I was a kid, the next door neighbors were odd. They didn't leave the house much. He was a pianist, she a housewife. One night, I awoke at 3:00 a.m. and heard a faint popping sound. I went back to sleep. In the morning, my mother was distraught and there were police cars everywhere. The housewife had shot the pianist dead during the night.

It came out that he had been abusing his wife for years, gradually building over time, until she was finally pushed over the edge. But why did they continue to live in this situation? Why didn't she seek help or move out? They remained cut off from the world, until something really bad finally happened.

So, I’m asking you to consider this: Paranormal Activity is in one sense a nice, scary little demon-possession story about a guy who is a bit of an immature jerk sharing a haunted house with his girlfriend. And it is also an allegory representing something of a case studio in domestic violence.

I first noted a nice poetic symmetry between the title Paranormal Activity and the phrase “Domestic Violence.” Then I noticed a strange echo between the movie’s end titles and my childhood experience. Micah has been found dead by the police just as was the pianist. Katie has not been seen since just as was the case with the pianist’s wife – at least not by her neighbors. I then wondered what was going on, lurking just out of sight, between the beginning and the end.

As the abuser (abuse by over-zealous videoing?), Micah has no problem sleeping at night. As the abused, it is Katie who wakes up every night in fear. The abuser is in control, is the one with peace of mind. The victim is the one who suffers. Katie is always the one to awaken in the very early morning hours, sometimes screaming. Micah is such a sound sleeper that he even remains conked out after his blanket has been pulled from him.

Victims of abuse characteristically experience the feelings of there being no way out and no one to help them. The movie clearly makes the point that the demon will follow Katie wherever she goes. They could pack their bags and check into a motel, but it would be to no avail. There’s no escaping the terror. A psychic is invited into the home on two occasions. He is characterized as being ridiculously ineffective though. On his second visit, he can hardly wait to make tracks.

Abusive situations are often the latest in a long history of abuses. Both the man and the woman accept the behavior because they were taught to accept it by their parents. It is interesting how strongly the point is made that the haunting has been going on for Katie since childhood. And when her childhood photo is discovered, it has been burned around the edges. It has a similar visual effect as if she had rolled up her sleeve to reveal a cigarette burn on her arm, left there long ago by her father.

For the movie to be an allegory for an abusive relationship such as the one of my childhood experience, there are two things that must be represented: the abusive behavior of the man and the growing resistance to that abuse by the woman, her ultimately taking some final action to end it. The haunting, the demon, clearly represents the woman’s growing resistance. Along this line of thought, Katie’s final action of attacking the camera seems quite logical. It also makes sense that the demon’s entire animus is directed toward Micah – remember the photograph on the wall and Micah’s saying, “Why did it only scratch my face?”

The man's abuse is represented by the camera and how Micah wields it. In movies of this first person video type, whenever a man (so often a man) points a camera at a woman (so often a woman) and keeps filming her even after she has asked him to stop, she is being violated, abused. Paranormal Activity contains constant variations on Katie asking Micah to stop and he only complies once, to get sex. Tensions build between them steadily. The use of profanity pointedly escalates throughout the film. She almost makes him leave the bedroom and sleep elsewhere with his camera at one point before they tentatively kiss and make up. And Katie’s going downstairs and outside at night can be read as escaping from the camera's cruel gaze.

Paranormal Activity will go down in history as a movie that made countless people afraid to go to bed at night, like Psycho [1960] made people afraid to take showers. But the fear I’ll always remember is what must’ve been in the wife’s eyes as she looked into those of the pianist for the last time.

balmakboor

10-27-2009, 01:08 AM

Interesting typo.

Yes, I can typo with the best.

Skitch

10-27-2009, 08:25 PM

It was enjoyable. The tales of people passing out and shitting they're pants were overboard hype though. Agree with 8, it will play better on dvd.

KK2.0

10-27-2009, 09:13 PM

I'm hyped for this now.

it reminded me of that Discovery Channel show about Haunted Houses, i'm always spooked by that show. I guess it's the semi-doc approach and the actual people that went through those events telling the story, it creates an instant connection with the audience and it doesn't matter how poorly acted and how shoddy the fx are, you are already involved. I believe the same tactics were used in this, sounds like a fun ride.

balmakboor

10-27-2009, 09:35 PM

My teenage daughter saw this last night with her boyfriend (a Saw fanatic). She called me from his house after the movie and told me she was scared to drive home and would I please turn on all the lights so she wouldn't have to come home to a dark house. She slept with the lights on and was especially freaked out because Katie's standing by the bed staring at Micah for hours reminded her of how her sister sleepwalks.

I asked if her boyfriend liked it, fully expecting her to say he hated it, and she said he loved it and the whole audience was jumping and screaming. She said a few people did say it was stupid as they were walking out though.

balmakboor

10-30-2009, 04:07 PM

By the way, my latest version of my thoughts on Paranormal Activity as allegory are the link of the day at The House Next Door.

http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/

The first commentor shot back with an interpretation that I find very interesting. An except:

"One aspect I haven't seen mentioned, though, is how the film plays with its own dog-that-didn't-bark: the young couple in the big new house... with no talk of children. But that's not to say children aren't a presence---at the other end of the hall from the bedroom there's a room we glimpse only in passing, with a big bed, and a giant teddy bear. That seems to be where the demon comes from in many of the scenes, and the stuffed animal suggests that it's the planned bedroom for the planned child, should Micah and Katie ever start filling this big house with something other than expensive toys.

"More explicit, but more witty, is the way the couple's dynamics get affected by Katie's haunting---they start out affectionate, though a little out of joint with each other. But as the hauntings get worse, sleep deprivation becomes the defining element of their relationship, and much of the "negative energy" that feeds the demon is generated by their snapping under the pressures of exhaustion, like many a young couple with a new visitor making their nights into constant vigilance. Similarly, a major turning point of the film into full-on horror is when an invisible presence crawls into bed with them, as though the demon itself is a nightmare-prone toddler determined to enact Oedipal rage."

Dukefrukem

10-31-2009, 06:01 PM

I think I'm with Raiders on this one. The film works best with the build up as the hauntings increase in intensity. I found myself holding my breath in some scenes so I could try to make out noises, voices and studying each part of the dimly lit room. There's definitely a lot of tension, and sudden loud noises caused me to jump once or twice, but I'm trying my best to understand why they chose the ending they did. I feel it was a huge cop out, trying to make the movie more believable, and give it a Blair Witch type ending... The movie IS effective, however, I doubt I'd be interested in watching this again...

Dukefrukem

10-31-2009, 06:06 PM

eternity

10-31-2009, 06:09 PM

It is rather fitting that every single little flaw with Paranormal Activity as interpreted as being exactly as it is presented is explained perfectly by the domestic abuse idea. Worth noting.

Eleven

10-31-2009, 08:35 PM

I wish he was here to explain himself, but apparently Daniel Davis is crazy in love with this.

Dukefrukem

10-31-2009, 09:15 PM

I wish he was here to explain himself, but apparently Daniel Davis is crazy in love with this.

where is he?

balmakboor

11-02-2009, 02:58 AM

It is rather fitting that every single little flaw with Paranormal Activity as interpreted as being exactly as it is presented is explained perfectly by the domestic abuse idea. Worth noting.

Just curious. Did you read the version of my essay that is posted at The House Next Door? It says more or less the same thing only a little bit better. But even better still is the back and forth I had with a guy who goes by That Fuzzy Bastard in the comments section. He suggested a whole allegorical take on the film that is different from mine and that I also like quite a bit.

http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/2009/10/link-for-day-october-30th-2009.html

balmakboor

11-02-2009, 02:59 AM

I wish he was here to explain himself, but apparently Daniel Davis is crazy in love with this.

I do miss DD.

eternity

11-02-2009, 03:39 AM

Just curious. Did you read the version of my essay that is posted at The House Next Door? It says more or less the same thing only a little bit better. But even better still is the back and forth I had with a guy who goes by That Fuzzy Bastard in the comments section. He suggested a whole allegorical take on the film that is different from mine and that I also like quite a bit.

http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/2009/10/link-for-day-october-30th-2009.html
I read it and I absolutely agree.

Eleven

11-02-2009, 03:52 PM

where is he?

http://www.playtime-magazine.com/2009/10/a-guide-to-horror-in-2009/#comments :

Paranormal Activity is still the scariest film I’ve seen this year, and probably in the last 10. It is at least the only film I’ve seen that caused my to lose almost 2 nights worth of sleep.

But Paranormal Activity > all! (just make sure to download it to watch it with the original ending, which is about a billion times better than the new one in the theaters.)

Dukefrukem

11-02-2009, 11:11 PM

http://www.playtime-magazine.com/2009/10/a-guide-to-horror-in-2009/#comments :

Yeh he liked it way too much.

Also, i think i lost all respect for him.

Trick R Treat is so much better than Drag Me to Hell. It really is a neat little film. It’s beautifully shot - reminds me a lot of Peter Pau’s cinematography (The Promise, Crouching Tiger, The Phantom Lover, and especially The Bride With White Hair). The premise and execution are light years ahead of Raimi’s latest effort, which seems amateurish in comparison.

But Paranormal Activity > all!

number8

11-02-2009, 11:15 PM

That statement is true. Trick R Treat is better than Drag Me To Hell. Significantly.

Bosco B Thug

11-03-2009, 06:39 AM

That statement is true. Trick R Treat is better than Drag Me To Hell. Significantly. Nahhhh. Really?

Do you have thoughts on Trick R Treat somewhere?

Dukefrukem

11-03-2009, 06:25 PM

sequel (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ib0e5fce5a1ad325c8178abbcf23 4f26a)?

Kurosawa Fan

11-03-2009, 06:34 PM

sequel (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ib0e5fce5a1ad325c8178abbcf23 4f26a)?

Consider me shocked.

Derek

11-03-2009, 06:35 PM

Consider me shocked.

Sarcasm, no?

Kurosawa Fan

11-03-2009, 06:38 PM

Sarcasm, no?

I know it's tough for sarcasm to come across on the internet, but I figured you could at least give me the benefit of the doubt on this one. Are you trying to hurt me right now? Is this because I won't let go of Chinese Roulette?

Derek

11-03-2009, 06:51 PM

I know it's tough for sarcasm to come across on the internet, but I figured you could at least give me the benefit of the doubt on this one. Are you trying to hurt me right now? Is this because I won't let go of Chinese Roulette?

Apologies. It's still morning on the west coast. I have no qualms with you as you're one of the few who was also less than impressed with this film. Hopefully the sequel will rely more on creepy drones in the sound design to generate scares.

Kurosawa Fan

11-03-2009, 07:40 PM

Apologies. It's still morning on the west coast. I have no qualms with you as you're one of the few who was also less than impressed with this film. Hopefully the sequel will rely more on creepy drones in the sound design to generate scares.

No problem. I just enjoy giving you shit. :P

Bosco B Thug

12-06-2009, 07:13 PM

Oh, well that was better than I expected it to be. It's more written and character-driven than I thought it would be (I knew nothing about the plot going in), and despite being gimmicky, it's not all that gimmicky.

I really liked the way the camera was used - a nosey and troublesome toy being constantly moved around by the insensitive Micah, that soon becomes a 2nd demon to the frazzled Katie. Also, there was something about the staging and framings of the between-bedroom plot development scenes that suggested there was thought put into where the camera was placed and how it interacted with the characters. Nothing to go crazy about, but Pell doesn't seem like a talentless buffoon behind the camera, as is common with up-and-coming hopeful horror film directors. And he seems to work well with actors, because I thought the performances were excellent and naturalistic.

It's also a slim, nicely paced film, the rigid structure working very strategically to create its effect of a creeping disease and its portrayal of Katie as someone getting increasingly fed up with living in fear. Her protestations when she's outside on the bench - the subtle venom and resentment in her voice - was probably the scariest bit for me.

On the con side, it's a limited film, both stylistically and content-wise, the screenplay nothing to write home about (oh, it's either a GHOST or a DEMON - wow, that's some in-depth demonology right there) and the scares more than a bit labored.

KK2.0

12-07-2009, 08:15 PM

sequel (http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3ib0e5fce5a1ad325c8178abbcf23 4f26a)?

there's definitely room for improvement.

Boner M

12-13-2009, 08:56 AM

One of the laziest in recent memory. A few scares toward the end, but they're cheap ones, the kind that the film had been resisting in favour of a feeble attempt at slow-burn freak-out. Even for a shoestring budget it's not that impressive, and actually gave me a newfound appreciation for how cleverly Cloverfield used its found-footage conceit at times. This was just artless, and not in a good way. Acting was decent, but the time spent by Peli attempting to make his characters likeable common folk was a complete waste, and only succeeded in making me impatient for them to be terrorised.

Plus it felt twice as long as its scant running time.

Bosco B Thug

12-13-2009, 04:14 PM

I'm just gonna say it: I'd take Paranormal Activity over Cloverfield, any day, easily. PA may be more than a little lame, but it's got integrity while Cloverfield lacked it.

The Mike

12-13-2009, 05:21 PM

eternity

12-13-2009, 09:42 PM

I understand the gimmick is the same, but does everyone have to compare this and Cloverfield? It's about the same as always comparing Die Hard and Lethal Weapon for being action movies set around Christmas.
They're both faux-reality films about supernatural occurrences potentially serving as an allegory for serious issues which are best channeled through the torment of its subjects

The Mike

12-13-2009, 09:55 PM

They're both faux-reality films about supernatural occurrences potentially serving as an allegory for serious issues which are best channeled through the torment of its subjects
And one's bound to a small set with an unseen force of destruction for two characters while focused on building tension through anticipation of what happens next while the other's set on a grand scale with a visible terror that causes visible destruction for millions of characters while building tension through this destruction and blood.

Like I said, the gimmick's the same, but there's no reason they should be judged against each other constantly. It's like Godzilla vs. A Boy and His Dog or Dr. Strangelove vs. Red Dawn. No need to always lump them together.

Kurosawa Fan

12-15-2009, 02:25 AM

I understand the gimmick is the same, but does everyone have to compare this and Cloverfield? It's about the same as always comparing Die Hard and Lethal Weapon for being action movies set around Christmas.

I've seen many more comparisons to Blair Witch than Cloverfield.

Boner M

12-15-2009, 08:20 AM

I'm just gonna say it: I'd take Paranormal Activity over Cloverfield, any day, easily. PA may be more than a little lame, but it's got integrity while Cloverfield lacked it.
Clovermonster vs. PA = Syphillis vs. HIV

balmakboor

12-15-2009, 12:52 PM

Dukefrukem

12-15-2009, 01:16 PM

I'm just gonna say it: I'd take Paranormal Activity over Cloverfield, any day, easily. PA may be more than a little lame, but it's got integrity while Cloverfield lacked it.

The only reason why I don't agree with this is because of repeat viewings. PA was way more effective bringing tension to the audience, but I have zero interest in watching it again. Cloverfield, although lacking substance, I could watch again purely on the fact that I may have missed something in my previous viewings. Cloverfield is a better movie.

eternity

12-15-2009, 10:55 PM

Yeah, Cloverfield is still far and away the best film of 2008 yaddi yaddi yaddah I get depressed just thinking about how impactful it was blah blah.

So Asylum's new opus, Paranormal Entity, leaked today:

http://www.horror-movies.ca/horror_17189.html

http://www.horror-movies.ca/AdvHTML_Upload/paranormal_large.jpg

Rowland

12-31-2009, 08:09 AM

Pretty fantastic stuff, certainly more going on than the mere film-as-haunted-house I was led to anticipate. Balmakboor's thoughts helped me flesh out my own ideas, so kudos there, and while I too prefer the original ending as a whole, the theatrical is fascinating as well. The bit with the husband being launched into the camera, while perhaps silly and more than a bit cheap, felt almost cathartic in a way, a sort of ejaculatory action that is fascinating for the gender dynamics at play.

Ezee E

12-31-2009, 02:40 PM

Ugh, I wish I didn't read that spoilered part Rowland.

D_Davis

12-31-2009, 04:01 PM

I don't know if this was actually a "good" movie, but I'll be damned if it isn't one of the most effective horror films I've ever seen.

It scared the freaking crap out of my wife and I. We saw the version with the original, far, far, far, far, FAR better ending, on DVD, and we both didn't sleep for more than a few hours for the next week. Seriously. No exaggeration. We actually started sleeping with our door closed because we were freaked out about what may be lurking in our house at night.

I've never, in my life, been more scared after seeing and experiencing something.

We watched Trick R Treat the same night, and while I think it is, artistically speaking, the better film (it's gorgeous and very entertaining), Paranormal Activity seriously screwed me up.

Dukefrukem

12-31-2009, 04:26 PM

I don't know if this was actually a "good" movie, but I'll be damned if it isn't one of the most effective horror films I've ever seen.

Same boat I'm in. It's good for the first showing but there's zero chance I'd watch it again in my lifetime, unless my gf wanted to see it, in which case i'd break up with her.

Welcome back Davis.

Grouchy

12-31-2009, 08:57 PM

I don't get it, Davis. I mean, sure, a few bumps and sly camera angles are scary on a theater viewing, but as soon as the movie ended, it was out of my head. I don't remember ANYTHING about this that could be particularly scary about this on the long run.

D_Davis

12-31-2009, 08:59 PM

That's what's so great about horror - the way certain things have different effects on different people. Different people are scared of different things.

Grouchy

12-31-2009, 09:01 PM

That's what's so great about horror - the way certain things have different effects on different people. Different people are scared of different things.
True that.

Scar

01-01-2010, 01:02 AM

megladon8

01-01-2010, 01:44 AM

Blair Witch will still creep me out. This one definitely doesn't have the impact. It was somewhat entertaining, and genuinely creepy for bits, but I definitely prefer the Blair Witch hands down to this.

Agreed completely, but I still did enjoy this one quite a bit :)

I think The Blair Witch Project is a horror classic, to be honest.

balmakboor

01-01-2010, 04:11 AM

...we both didn't sleep for more than a few hours for the next week. Seriously. No exaggeration. We actually started sleeping with our door closed because we were freaked out about what may be lurking in our house at night.

I've never, in my life, been more scared after seeing and experiencing something.

I take it you actually believe in spirits and ghosts, holy and otherwise.

I don't have, shall I say, the mind of a believer. So, I saw the movie very differently. I do think it's a horror classic though, including the final scene as shown in theaters.

The Mike

01-01-2010, 08:08 AM

This movie still messes with me almost nightly. So glad I have no plans to ever live with anyone again.

Sxottlan

01-01-2010, 08:13 AM

This movie still messes with me almost nightly. So glad I have no plans to ever live with anyone again.

Just in case they go all feral on you?

The Mike

01-01-2010, 04:13 PM

Just in case they go all feral on you?You never know....

Spinal

01-03-2010, 06:22 PM

I thought this was excellent. Great pacing. Solid acting. For the most part, they handled the "why-is-the-camera-on?" issue well. What I really liked is how they bridged the gap between everyday reality and the outlandlish. When you discuss consulting someone called a 'demonologist', that should sound absurd, and yet, because of their conviction, I bought into it. Nice variety of scares that build perfectly to a highly memorable finale. Bravo.

Spinal

01-03-2010, 06:31 PM

I don't think anything spoilerish has really been said, Skitch.

You revealed ...

... the moment of Katie being dragged from the bed.

This is one of the film's biggest thrills and Skitch was right to be annoyed. Glad I didn't read this thread before I saw it.

Spinal

01-03-2010, 06:42 PM

I believe the complete opposite. I think a crazy vocal midnight crowd would lessen the experience. I think this movie would play best on DVD.

Bingo. I'm so glad I waited to watch this alone after dark free from other people's impressions of what they were watching. Watching this in your own house while the characters are terrorized in theirs adds to the effect.

And in response to KF's criticisms, I think it's pretty clear that the major reason that they don't leave the house is because it's a low-budget film which is only using one setting. Either you accept the reasons they give you within the context of the film and enjoy the ride or you don't. Personally, I thought they did a reasonable job of offering an explanation and I let it go. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I don't really see the point of making a fuss about it when, in the back of your head, you probably know it's a decision of practicality.

Rowland

01-03-2010, 06:45 PM

In the 2009 Demon Haunting Sweepstakes, this movie > Drag Me to Hell. It's a real horror movie that ingeniously utilizes its DIY-aesthetic to mine dread out of classic horror means like offscreen space, stillness, silence, and anticipation. And in terms of sheer economical craft, I got more of a thrill out of the Ouija board scene, which subverts viewers expectations by first showing us what we expect to happen before throwing in that delightful detail with the sudden burst of flame, than any moment in Raimi's sub-Evil Dead, CGI-heavy antics.

Rowland

01-03-2010, 06:53 PM

And in response to KF's criticisms, I think it's pretty clear that the major reason that they don't leave the house is because it's a low-budget film which is only using one setting. Either you accept the reasons they give you within the context of the film and enjoy the ride or you don't. Personally, I thought they did a reasonable job of offering an explanation and I let it go. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I don't really see the point of making a fuss about it when. in the back of your head, you probably know it's a decision of practicality.There are psychological reasons as well, in respect to the wife being accustomed to the hauntings through past experience (why do the abused always stand by their abusers until the very end?) and the husband's technology-dependent machismo in facing off the primal force. It also lends considerable chills to one of the final twists, where the husband finally agrees to do the right thing by preparing to leave the house before his wife, in one of her borderline-trance states, tells him at the last minute she has decided they should stay at the house. I've read that if you listen carefully to her voice in this scene, you can hear a subtle vocal distortion underlining an already-clear influence.

Spinal

01-03-2010, 07:03 PM

Bosco B Thug

01-03-2010, 08:10 PM

I'm enjoying seeing appreciation for this film, for some reason. Cuz really, I hope this "first-person camera" fad dies soon.

What I like about this film is that it doesn't seem to be ruled by its first-person camera schtick. Its liberal fade-outs compliment its motions toward true mise en scene, and the way it frames Katie is bold instead of just playing the "verite" card. It frames, then re-frames her, then re-frames her again in consecutive shots, or she'll pop into the frame in discontinuity, emphasizing her place as the main subject which all this is taking its toll on. I'll mention that one looming shot of her on the couch knitting, with the bright camera light on her, as one I particularly like.

I also love that scene, when the psychic guy just deserts on them. Seriously, telling them "Don't try to leave, it won't do you ANY GOOD" was such a b*tch thing to do.

Rowland

01-03-2010, 08:29 PM

Bosco B Thug

01-03-2010, 09:08 PM

Also, I'll admit that one image here really resonates with me personally, being the two scenes where the wife gets out of bed and simply stands there watching her husband for hours (which is itself a manifestation of the childhood story the wife tells her husband about the shadow over her bed). I have had recurrent dreams since childhood of people standing in my bedroom at night staring at me that rank as my most haunting nightmares. In them, I'm usually too terrified to move or make a sound, and in the most memorable instance, the shadow moved forward and revealed itself to be my mother of all people, an emotionless face just staring at my as I'm frozen in terror.
Those moments were very effective. Caught me by surprise, too, because I had no idea this film had aspirations to be a personal story when I first saw it.

Oh yeah: this most recent watch was the theatrical cut. The version I saw first was the original cut (the theatrical cut is a little choppy, btw, unless I'm imagining the differences). Anyway, I really have no preference for the ending, but

Katie's plain screaming accompanying the original ending is so much freakier than Katie screaming out Micah's name in the theatrical version. I don't understand why they'd change it.

Skitch

01-03-2010, 09:14 PM

While I thought the scare factor of this was extremely overhyped, seeing ads for the dvd made me pause. Seeing in theater was one thing...the thought of watching at home, cranked up loud, in the dark...gotta say, thinking about watching it under those conditions made my fucking skin crawl.

And an ad for Bioshock 2 as I type this. Awesome.

Spinal

01-05-2010, 07:04 AM

Just saw a TV commercial where they show the last shot of the movie. Why would you do that? Sigh.

Grouchy

01-05-2010, 07:38 AM

Still puzzled about this. The more I think about this movie, the worse it seems to me.

balmakboor

01-05-2010, 01:20 PM

Still puzzled about this. The more I think about this movie, the worse it seems to me.

Well, stop thinking about it. :)

Seriously, there was a week or so where it was all I wanted to think about until I reached a point where I was satisfied with my interpretation. I've hardly given it a thought since.

D_Davis

01-05-2010, 01:30 PM

Just saw a TV commercial where they show the last shot of the movie. Why would you do that? Sigh.

I wonder why they changed the ending at all - and then showed in the commercials. Two very, very odd choices.

balmakboor

01-05-2010, 03:37 PM

I wonder why they changed the ending at all - and then showed in the commercials. Two very, very odd choices.

That isn't quite the last shot, but I agree that the editor of the trailer should be thrown about by a demon for that decision.

Dukefrukem

01-05-2010, 04:47 PM

Just saw a TV commercial where they show the last shot of the movie. Why would you do that? Sigh.

I've seen that commercial too but are you sure it wasn't the second to last shot? Because the shot I think you're thinking of is also in the trailer.

Spinal

01-05-2010, 07:29 PM

OK, so it's the first part of the last shot. Not the final image, but close enough.

Kurosawa Fan

01-05-2010, 07:37 PM

And in response to KF's criticisms, I think it's pretty clear that the major reason that they don't leave the house is because it's a low-budget film which is only using one setting. Either you accept the reasons they give you within the context of the film and enjoy the ride or you don't. Personally, I thought they did a reasonable job of offering an explanation and I let it go. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that I don't really see the point of making a fuss about it when, in the back of your head, you probably know it's a decision of practicality.

I guess I just thought they handled it poorly. Don't make the film take place over six weeks, but rather six days. That makes it seem more reasonable. They'd have far less time to sit down and think rationally and come up with solutions. But a slowly escalating sense of danger over that length of time would make any sane, reasonable human being seek shelter elsewhere or beg for help from someone. It's a film that's shooting for realism, and I found that aspect terribly unrealistic and it detracted from the experience.

And you mentioned how well they handled the "why is the camera on" and consulting a "demonologist", and I'm in agreement there, but I thought they could have handled their reactions to the situation much better. They just didn't sell me on that. At all.

balmakboor

01-05-2010, 10:01 PM

I guess I just thought they handled it poorly. Don't make the film take place over six weeks, but rather six days. That makes it seem more reasonable. They'd have far less time to sit down and think rationally and come up with solutions. But a slowly escalating sense of danger over that length of time would make any sane, reasonable human being seek shelter elsewhere or beg for help from someone. It's a film that's shooting for realism, and I found that aspect terribly unrealistic and it detracted from the experience.

But domestic violence doesn't brew up quickly, it does so over a period of time. It simmers. It seems to go away. It erupts with little warning. So, this time frame that you find over extended works very well as allegory.

Derek

01-05-2010, 10:18 PM

But domestic violence doesn't brew up quickly, it does so over a period of time. It simmers. It seems to go away. It erupts with little warning. So, this time frame that you find over extended works very well as allegory.

You're making the assumption that he buys into the domestic abuse allegory.

Kurosawa Fan

01-05-2010, 11:59 PM

You're making the assumption that he buys into the domestic abuse allegory.

Which I don't. Or at least, that never struck me while watching it, and I'm not willing to watch it again. To me, allegories work if they hit you while watching the film. If you have to read about them from others long after your viewing, then either I'm not smart enough or the film didn't do enough to communicate that angle to me.

megladon8

01-06-2010, 12:44 AM

I don't buy the domestic abuse angle, either.

Ezee E

01-06-2010, 01:01 AM

I don't buy that as an intention from the filmmakers, but I like it still.

number8

01-06-2010, 01:10 AM

I like it a lot.

Derek

01-06-2010, 01:17 AM

I don't buy that as an intention from the filmmakers

That should have little to no bearing as to how a film is interpreted.

balmakboor

01-06-2010, 01:32 AM

You're making the assumption that he buys into the domestic abuse allegory.

No, I knew he didn't. I just hadn't written anything about the theory for a while and felt like going there.

Ezee E

01-06-2010, 01:38 AM

That should have little to no bearing as to how a film is interpreted.
Oh.

balmakboor

01-06-2010, 01:42 AM

I don't buy that as an intention from the filmmakers...

Why do you say that? The filmmaker doesn't seem to be stupid.

megladon8

01-06-2010, 01:46 AM

I don't think he was accusing the filmmakers of being too "simple" to have thought of that interpretation.

I think E just meant that he didn't think the filmmakers thought of it that way while making it.

Which I agree with.

And on a separate note, I don't see it there either. I think it's quite a stretch.

Derek

01-06-2010, 01:56 AM

Oh.

Not really directed at you, I'm just saying it because it's too often that people discount interpretations because they don't feel the filmmaker intended it. If someone makes a racist comment, does it matter if they intended to be racist? If someone makes a derogatory comment towards, can it be dismissed if they tell you "But I love women!"? Point being, the attitudes and multiplicity of meanings contained in a film can go beyond merely what the filmmakers intend. Not that there aren't wrong interpretations just as there are wrong opinions.

Intentionality can certainly be an issue, but I think it usually results in closing oneself off to the experience of art.

Spinal

01-06-2010, 06:18 AM

I'm a fan of balmakboor's interpretation. That specific idea did not occur to me personally, but I did remember thinking as I watched that this was a film that was made well enough to support an allegorical reading.

Rowland

01-06-2010, 07:54 AM

balmakboor

01-06-2010, 01:10 PM

My interpretation was more along the lines of a sexual abuse from the wife's childhood (the story about a shadow over her bed gave me the idea, reinforced by the photo) had so profoundly impacted her that the paranormal activity is a metaphysical manifestation of her vulnerability, and that the reason she is increasingly intent on her husband leaving the camera equipment alone is because his probing is in fact provoking these past traumas to resurface. This is why I found the almost sexual nature of the revised ending so effective, especially because we get the impression that they have sex only once over the entire duration of the recorded material.

I like this.

When I first watched it, I was filled with a feeling that there was much more going on than first met the eye. My particular theory was what spilled out of those thoughts that evening. I posted my final version of these thoughts on The House Next Door and some guy call That Fuzzy Bastard chimed in with his interpretation and I thought his was terrific.

http://www.thehousenextdooronline.com/2009/10/link-for-day-october-30th-2009.html

The Mike

01-07-2010, 12:44 AM

Y'all are wrong, the movie's about the wrong of cohabitation. The demon warned her when she was little, then things got calm, then she cohabitated and shit got real.

Duh.

D_Davis

01-07-2010, 12:54 AM

Nice essay, balmakboor.

balmakboor

01-07-2010, 01:17 AM

Nice essay, balmakboor.

Thx

Grouchy

01-08-2010, 05:03 AM

I think the movie is too sloppily made to really warrant these readings, but I guess they're entertaining.

balmakboor

01-08-2010, 11:46 AM

I think the movie is too sloppily made to really warrant these readings, but I guess they're entertaining.

I don't think it was sloppy at all. It was meant to look sloppy though.

megladon8

01-08-2010, 11:14 PM

The CGI wasn't photorealistic.

megladon8

01-09-2010, 08:01 PM

So the alternate ending on the DVD is not the original ending people here have been talking about.

And that one is not included on the DVD.

I was kind of disappointed about that.

eternity

01-10-2010, 01:46 AM

So the alternate ending on the DVD is not the original ending people here have been talking about.

And that one is not included on the DVD.

I was kind of disappointed about that.
It makes me angry that everyone thinks that the alternate ending I told them about was "a lie". By everyone, I mean four people.

Scar

01-10-2010, 01:52 AM

It makes me angry that everyone thinks that the alternate ending I told them about was "a lie". By everyone, I mean four people.

BASTARD!

Dead & Messed Up

01-10-2010, 03:30 AM

Finally saw this tonight, and...

...eh.

I really love the approach to the whole picture, and how it tries to build honest scares out of quiet and anticipation. I respect that. It sometimes works well, especially when I saw those three-toed tracks. Like Meg, I have a fondness and fear of those classical wood-cut engravings by Gustave Dore and the like.

But I found Micah to be such a profoundly irritating character, and so cruel to his girlfriend (why the fuck would any sensible boyfriend show that footage of a girl gnawing her arm off?!), and their own stubborn refusal to do anything of consequence (KF articulated what I felt during much of the film), that the whole thing started to feel like a big fat contrivance. These people weren't meant to have a fascinating or empathetic journey - they were placeholders for a series of occasionally frightening episodes.

Spinal

01-10-2010, 03:37 AM

Are we saying that Micah is not likable or not plausible? Because the former really shouldn't matter since we have Katie with which to connect. And I certainly wouldn't agree with the latter.

megladon8

01-10-2010, 03:38 AM

Video of a girl gnawing her arm off? What??

Just watched this again last night, and I don't remember that at all.

Dead & Messed Up

01-10-2010, 04:56 AM

Are we saying that Micah is not likable or not plausible? Because the former really shouldn't matter since we have Katie with which to connect. And I certainly wouldn't agree with the latter.

For me, not likable to a degree that it verges into not plausible. And I completely disagree with your first point. If Micah's so one-dimensionally cockholish, it becomes incredibly difficult for me to care for a girl who would elect to spend time with him, let alone three years of her life. What does she see in him? Why does she defect to him? Why, despite every single wrong move he makes, does she stay with him? But there is no significant insight into their relationship. They are together because it is necessary to the film that they are together.

Spinal

01-10-2010, 05:03 AM

Smart women being with immature men is an extraordinarily common occurance. I'm not really seeing the issue here. I assume they are together for the same reasons that imperfect couples I encounter in my everyday life are together.

number8

01-10-2010, 05:22 AM

I believe they call it "hot chicks with douchebags."

Dead & Messed Up

01-10-2010, 07:11 AM

I'm not talking about a couple I walked past on the street. I'm talking about a couple whose dynamic is supposed to form the emotional core of a narrative. And their dynamic struck me as flat and irritating, with no significant build or emotional deepening, apart from them saying "fuck" a lot more.

MadMan

01-10-2010, 08:15 AM

Considering how the movie slowly and quietly built up the tension and the scares, I'm kind of glad I did not see it in theaters. Very effective horror movie, and at this point I think I've liked all of the "Low budget video camera real looking movies," although there a few I haven't seen yet.

Considering that they were thinking of going to a hotel at one point, I almost wished they had because an even smaller area would have resulted in an even scarier, more clastrophibic feeling. Oh and the Oiji Board sequence freaked me out. But hands down the creepiest part was when Kate spoke with two voices. Yikes. The ending is highly effective, sure, but features way too much screaming, which almost dulls its power. Still, a damn scary way to end the movie, that's for sure.

Honsestly Micah's douchebag factor combined with his obsession with being macho really worked for the movie. I commented on how funny it is that half the time he wasn't taking it seriously, which to be honest is how my friend and I started out feeling about the actual movie until shit truly hit the fan. Interesting.

Bosco B Thug

01-10-2010, 09:46 AM

(why the fuck would any sensible boyfriend show that footage of a girl gnawing her arm off?!) Seriously.

It's a pretty stupid scene before anything's even said and done (it speaks to how lazy the writing is in the first place: a few Googles and PRESTO! Your demon's origin story!), but while I could accept its storyline simplicity on the terms of the whole film's simplicity, I thought the same thing you did and it makes the scene more than a little laughable.

Video of a girl gnawing her arm off? What??

Just watched this again last night, and I don't remember that at all. When he's showing her the website about the girl who "went through EXACTLY the same things you did!" or something like that, and we're treated with those silly Exorcist clips.

number8

01-10-2010, 02:38 PM

I kinda like how Google has replaced the horror movie convention of "going to the library to find that ancient book" or "talking to the one creepy person who knows about the history."

Bosco B Thug

01-10-2010, 04:45 PM

I kinda like how Google has replaced the horror movie convention of "going to the library to find that ancient book" or "talking to the one creepy person who knows about the history."
Speaks to the 20th century's gullibility with information, right? You can't scoff at books or newspapers, but you should a website with crappy HTML, as you would creepy guy who's crapped his overalls.

Dead & Messed Up

01-10-2010, 05:10 PM

Regardless of reliability, it's much more visually interesting to seeing a character wander towards that old guy's house or dig through the microfiche at the library.

megladon8

01-10-2010, 06:40 PM

Despite the fact that I also found Micah an unlikable asshat and wondered why Katie would bother with him, I did agree with one thing he pointed out.

It would have been like, super nice of Katie to have brought this stuff up with him before they moved in together.

I was totally on his side with that argument.

Spinal

01-10-2010, 06:51 PM

Doesn't the central conceit kind of require a character that is a little bit insensitive? If you don't have a character that is willing to turn on the camera when he probably shouldn't, you aren't going to actually see much. Indeed, the film actually does make use of events that happen off-camera: the presumed sexual intercourse, the major argument that leads to Micah's pledge, Micah rushing to investigate Katie's scream.

number8

01-10-2010, 08:15 PM

Absolutely. As I mentioned in my review, I think his character—while in the extremes because it involves a life-threatening situation—is not too far-off from the personality of a typical male-egotist.

The kind of person who refuses to ask for directions even when he's clearly lost, simply because he wants to put up a "capable male" front, one who can "take care of my woman," is Micah exactly. He's in way over his head and yet he's refusing to seek help because he believes he can take care of Katie, to the point where he's gambling with her life. I find that to be a pretty fascinating relationship dynamic, and especially appropriate in a horror movie.

It's also not a long leap from that to domestic abuse, which is why I like the allegory theory.

megladon8

01-10-2010, 08:24 PM

I wish that Katie had at least gone behind Micah's back and called the demonologist.

But then, I wonder if the demonologist would have been able to do anything. It seemed that demon was quite intent on tormenting Katie, and the way the film established the power of the demon, I doubt anyone would be able to "defeat" it, regardless of their knowledge of the supernatural.

Spinal

01-10-2010, 08:28 PM

I will give you this ...

It is kind of weird to bring up the demonologist and then never have him show up. I kind of wanted to see what that person would be like and what tactics he would use.

megladon8

01-10-2010, 08:31 PM

I will give you this ...

It is kind of weird to bring up the demonologist and then never have him show up. I kind of wanted to see what that person would be like and what tactics he would use.

I got the feeling it would have basically turned into The Exorcist.

I found it supremely unnerving when the psychic showed up again and was visibly shaken just entering the house. That was a great moment.

Grouchy

01-11-2010, 08:13 PM

I got the feeling it would have basically turned into The Exorcist.

I found it supremely unnerving when the psychic showed up again and was visibly shaken just entering the house. That was a great moment.
I found that same scene laughable in a really bad way.

I guess I'm just on a whole different page here and just getting further and further.

megladon8

01-11-2010, 08:27 PM

What was laughable about it?

Grouchy

01-11-2010, 08:37 PM

What was laughable about it?
The whole thing. They finally call the demonologist, he doesn't answer, they call the original guy again. WHY WAS THE DEMONOLOGIST EVEN IN THE SCRIPT?

The guy arrives and he doesn't make it past the door, saying "huh, no, I can't be here, I'll just make it very angry... huh... I have to go now" and disappears. I can't be the only one who finds that scene unnecessary, poorly staged and stupid beyond belief.

megladon8

01-11-2010, 08:38 PM

:sad:

The Mike

01-11-2010, 10:50 PM

I didn't mind that scene, or the mentions of the other character.

I liked the idea of the demonologist being mentioned because it helped add to that 'I'm stubborn and won't ask for help" aspect of Micah's character. Plus it shows how Katie isn't really standing up for herself in the situation by making the call despite the fact she wants to, until it's too late.

Also, the fact that the demonologist is supposed to be getting in touch soon could be what led the demon to finally act on that last night. Wasn't it the final day that they called and left the message?

balmakboor

01-12-2010, 12:41 AM

The whole thing. They finally call the demonologist, he doesn't answer, they call the original guy again. WHY WAS THE DEMONOLOGIST EVEN IN THE SCRIPT?

The guy arrives and he doesn't make it past the door, saying "huh, no, I can't be here, I'll just make it very angry... huh... I have to go now" and disappears. I can't be the only one who finds that scene unnecessary, poorly staged and stupid beyond belief.

While I know this sort of thing is most likely sloppy scripting, I read a book a while back about allegory and it made a point that things that don't quite make sense in the surface story often point to things that were necessary for the allegorical hidden story, but didn't comfortably have a counterpart in the surface story.

Grouchy

01-12-2010, 01:10 AM

MadMan

01-12-2010, 01:45 AM

balmakboor

01-12-2010, 02:18 AM

I'd accept that if I awarded this movie the smarts needed for having a subtext.

If you post what you think it means, though, I'll read it.

Actually, I suggest what it might mean in my essay on the movie. You can read it on my blog.

Sycophant

03-28-2010, 06:17 PM

Watched this last night and was more profoundly disturbed by it than almost any other horror movie I'd seen. I instantly remarked that this movie, being fairly shitty-looking (though artfully composed) digital home video, probably plays better on a TV in a darkened living room (or worse, bedroom) with at most a couple other people.

The only thing that didn't really work for me at first was the very last shot. The sudden use of shitty CG was jarring and I felt suddenly very disconnected. However, reading interpretations like balmakboor and Rowland's helps to justify the total moment for me. I like the alternate ending pretty well, too, though Rowland's comment about an ejaculatory act is something I like.

Biggest "oh shit" moment for me was when Katie stands still and watches Micah sleep for two hours. I'm sure part of the reason the film really resonated with me is exactly how many of my own fears, current and historical, the film tapped into. Every time a night sequence came up, my heart stopped for a moment. The recurring wide shot was really effective, drawing my eyes down the hallway, looking for any sign of disturbance, while wanting to keep an eye on the couple in bed.

Chac Mool

03-30-2010, 03:35 PM

While I know this sort of thing is most likely sloppy scripting, I read a book a while back about allegory and it made a point that things that don't quite make sense in the surface story often point to things that were necessary for the allegorical hidden story, but didn't comfortably have a counterpart in the surface story.

While I'm not a huge fan of the film, I don't think it's sloppy scripting at all. Rather, it actually adds to the "realism" of the film. A conventional horror film would have resorted in the demonologist (it's why we were all expecting) and in an exorcism-type scene. Real life --as portrayed in Paranormal Activity-- doesn't necessarily fit convention.

All in all, a good, effective horror film with some great moments (the find in the attic, the early possessions). It's greatest strength is what it keeps off-screen, unexplained; by the same token, its biggest weakness is its last shot.