Paranormal Activity
Fear is an incredibly subjective emotion. What scares one person may make another laugh, or barely raise the pulse of still another person. Since horror films deal in fear, it's only natural that eventually the artform would become proactive in directly manipulating the way in which people experience a film. The first-person, or "found footage" horror narrative, is designed to do exactly that. By placing the audience in the driver's seat of the horror, you are attempting to limit their ability to retreat from what they are seeing, make it nearly impossible to separate yourself from the screen and therefore the events unfolding in-front of you. How well this manipulation is pulled off is key to the success of a film like "Paranormal Activity".
We start out by meeting our couple, Katie and Micah, the latter of which has just purchased and brought home a rather pricey piece of camera equipment. Through an introductory conversation we learn that Katie has been experiencing strange phenomena at night while the couple sleeps, and this is Micah's attempt at figuring out exactly what is happening. Katie is uneasy about the proposition, but decides to let Micah try his hand at playing Paranormal Investigator.
What we don't learn until later, is that Katie has experienced these occurrences her entire life, and the entity that is following her from place to place is getting stronger. It's a fact that Micah was unaware of until the couple moved in together, although based on his nonchalant demeanor throughout the majority of the film, it's clearly not something that he's overly concerned with. He would rather play his stereotypical macho power games, shouting into the shadows and calling the demon out for not being man enough to step out into the light and face him head on. It's a typical American male way to respond to such a situation, and one that we know is going to get him in trouble sooner or later. After all, unlike these two, we've seen plenty of ghost movies.
Which is what at its core "Paranormal Activity" really is. It's every ghost movie you've ever seen, or at least a stripped down version of one. It comes decorated with all of the cheap parlor tricks and accouterments that you would expect from such a film. Loud banging sounds, lights flickering on and off, doors slamming shut, and even the good old Ouija board thrown in for good measure. The biggest difference of course is the first person narrative style, which does allow director Oren Peli to extract a bit more mileage out of these staples than they have no doubt seen in quite some time.
There are some genuinely creepy moments in this film. Mainly it traffics in the type of scares familiar to those who have ever been sent a viral link asking them to "stare at your screen and find what's wrong with this picture". After mashing your face up against your computer monitor like a rube for about :30 seconds or so, typically a screaming ghost will come flying at you and make some Godawful noise that is sure to cause you to soil your underpants. Some of the best moments in "Paranormal Activity" come from that exact same ruse. The couple sets the camera at the foot of their bed every night, and it just so happens that on the left side of their wide-angle lens you have a clear view down a dark, spooky hallway. In moments of silent fear, you can't help but stare down that abyss and let your imagination run wild as to what is happening on the other side.
It's a simple and effective tactic, but it's also one that tends to grow old after too long. Despite its innovative pretense, the first hour of this film is still filled with the same William Castle inspired dreck that makes modern ghost films almost unbearable to sit through. The pacing suffers not only from this, but from the extremely limited cast. There are 4, and only 4, people on screen in this entire film. About 90% of it plays out with just the main couple. That is a tough scenario for anyone to work with, let alone an independent director making a film for $15,000.
And I think that may be the most important point to take home here. As an independent film shot on a limited budget, Oren Peli has crafted something that he can be very proud of. Had I viewed this at a film festival, or a horror convention with an amped up crowd, I may have been more wowed by what was unfolding onscreen. Normally when a film is over and I hear a patron next to me exclaim, "that's it?", my horror fan instinct kicks in and I immediately feel the need to defend the film. That didn't happen this time.
The midnight screenings it has enjoyed over the last few weeks have no doubt been made up predominantly of those who love horror films and were willing to go along for the ride. Now, facing the harsh judgment of the cynical mainstream movie audience, something tells me it will not fair quite as well. Considering how little the film cost to make, there's no earthly way for it to be a losing proposition for anyone at this point. That is, except for those who buy too deeply into Paramount's own masterfully manipulative promotional campaign. Trust me, in order to fully enjoy "Paranormal Activity", separating yourself from that hype is the best course of action.
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Comments
Join the Conversation!
What's New?
Latest Comments
Search
| Privacy Policy | About Us | Top
It's nice to see this movie
Submitted by Mr. Hex on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 03:33.It's nice to see this movie get a reasonable, fitting score for once.
My Opinion
Submitted by TheMovieGod on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 21:10.I didn't think it was anti-climatic at all. The film was perfect at length and the ending explained what the thing haunting them actually was. As for the ghost cliches, there is really no way around those these days. There hasn't been a truly original film in a long time. The only film that is truly original is Being John Malkovich.
Grumpy Pants
Submitted by Jon on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 23:04.Disagree on pretty much every point here. Was it the best movie ever made? No. No, it wasn't. Was it pretty awesome? Yes.
You make two wildly divergent comparisons here: the goofy stare-at-the-computer-and-get-screamed-at device, and William Castle movies. The latter is totally fair, and what I really enjoyed here. The former makes almost no sense to me whatsoever. Aside from one single instance that shouldn't be discussed for spoiler reasons, I can't think of a single jump-scare -- cheap or otherwise. Instead, there were small noises, small movements, and a lot of shadows, all of which escalated pretty effectively as the movie went on.
I found this to be a great update on the haunted house film. Hammering the movie for being cliched doesn't really carry any weight with me for a number of reasons, but primary among them is the fact that everything was so underdone and drawn out that it's hard to recognize some elements as cliched at all. And besides, maybe I'm not seeing the right movies, but other than "Haunting in Connecticut" I can't think of another "ghost movie" (which I don't think is the right categorization here) I've seen in theaters recently. I guess someone could argue "The Eye" or "The Unborn" but those were so bad I tried to forget them all together. But even still, are we really so tired of these movies that we can't enjoy one when it's well executed? I went into this movie expecting to be scared, preparing myself to be scared, and it still had me more freaked out then I've been in a theater in a long time (since "The Ring" remake I'd guess).
A couple of minor quibbles: the acting was not tremendous, the Ouija board stuff got to be a little too much, and the whole "explanation" sequence -- with the internet research -- added very little. Otherwise, I'd say, bravo.
Down boy
Submitted by Eric on Sat, 10/17/2009 - 23:23.Easy Schnaars, this was my positive take on the film. I barely mentioned how brutal the pacing is for the first hour.
I'm glad
Submitted by Skewered_Head79 on Sun, 10/18/2009 - 08:59.this movie was released nationwide so more people could see this because I truly feel this is something that the horror genre needed. It's not original, but it's a fresh take on something. Eric made some good points as did Schnaars....I may not agree completely with either one of you guys but we all have our opinions.
I didi think the pacing was good and yes the acting wasn't great but it was convincing enough for me to be able to enjoy this movie. I guess I really like this because I avoided any trailers or reviews of the film......hell the only thing I did was vote to get it played where I live.
This was such a fun film to see and it's the first film since The Blair Witch Project that genuinely freaked me out.
Jeff aka Skewered_Head79
something tells me
Submitted by gogilston on Sun, 10/18/2009 - 09:02.theres gonna be a podcast fight!
Gotta Disagree
Submitted by CG34 on Mon, 10/19/2009 - 03:10.I really enjoyed myself at this movie. I was one of the first to "vote" for my area and have been anticipating this highly and have to say it completely hit the mark for me. Barring the spoiled ending from the trailer I thought the movie was full of skin crawling sequences and the acting was adequate enough to pull me into the struggle. I found the pacing fine really and also looked forward to the night vision scenes as opposed to getting tired of them. I understand Eric's frustration here but have to disagree and say that this is a hell of a fun time to be had by all. If you can take away the idiots in the crowd who feel the need to make jokes during the films quietest and most intense scenes this is a very scary film. It's probably the best in theatre scare I've had in 5 years.
Im glad I went to see this
Submitted by Pete on Tue, 10/20/2009 - 04:44.Im glad I went to see this movie, cause it finally brought me back to your site. Not that you guys haven't been putting out quality material, I just have been real busy. I have to check out your 'Zombieland' and 'Jennifer's body' reviews, specifically for what you must have said Eric.
SPOILERS--- As far as this movie goes, the hype screwed up the entire experience for me. I kept picturing drawn out sequences where the viewer wouldn't know what was going on. The only scene that came close to that was the one that brought the camera outside. I also expected to see a microsecond glimpse at what 'The Demon' looked like, perhaps reflected in a television set or in one of the many mirrors in the house CG34 is completely right, the trailer ruins the ending, ala 'Quarantine'. I wouldn't give it a 6 out of 10, but you are right Eric, it certainly dragged on in certain points
Everyone tries to play off that they know more than they do"
A little disappointed
Submitted by vinnyg on Tue, 10/27/2009 - 16:53.After seeing the online ratings, and hearing all the hype, I broke down, and took my wife to see this. She isn't a horror fan, and usually scares easily; but when she kept asking "when is it going to get scary?" I knew I had been a victim of media hype.
The scenes were too drawn out, with very little happening to keep my interest. I had gotten sick from a previous (non-movie related) incident, and therefore missed the entire oujiboard scene. But from what I've heard, I didn't miss anything.
The scene that roused the dreaded "oh, come on!" statement of disappointment from me was the picture of Katie in the attic. It made it look like this was some horny demon stalking this girl by carrying around her picture.
In all, I thought there was maybe 15 min of good footage in the entire film. It should have been entitled "Very Little Paranormal Activity"
I wan't my money back....wait...I paid with vouchers! PHEW!
Submitted by B on Tue, 10/27/2009 - 17:58.My husband and I went to see this at the weekend!! I wanted to see Zombie Land and wished to hell we had!!
10 minutes into the film both of us were looking at one another in complete and utter disgust like "WTF is this?!"
This has to the poorest attempt at a movie since Babylon A.D. and Babylon A.D. was BETTER than this garbage!! (That's saying a LOT!).
The movie was slow, predictable, terribly acted, the scares were minimal and NOT scary at all!! The movie got it all wrong!
Yes, I know they made it on a budget but come on! Even I could have made something scarier!!
Whats the one thing you shouldn't do when you make a horror film!? DON'T for the love of everything holy, DON'T let the audience know when the scare is due! This negates the entire fright and renders it amusing at best.
The people who were sitting behind us screaming must have been watching a different movie!!
The movie cast the wrong couple, they weren't convincing and didn't deliver their lines very well. There weren't any real shadows or anything mildly paranormal - someone walking across the bathroom in a shadow or eyes in the dark hallway, something, ANYTHING but not T-REX footprints, for christs sake! Are you kidding me!???
This film is outrageously bad.
My husband and I both looked at one another and discussed walking out before it'd even reached the halfway marker. We didn't only due to the price we'd paid for the tickets.
How this film has gotten SO big is beyond all comprehension. I long for the day i see a real horror film with genuine scare tactics and a piss my pants reaction - it hasn't happened in YEARS which is probably due to the many asian horror flicks we've seen, but there HAS to be something...hasn't there?!?
Maybe we're finally immune, but i doubt it. This film was just god damn AWEFUL and we'll never get that time back...
waited for the hype to die
Submitted by Tor on Fri, 11/20/2009 - 19:39.I went to see this yesterday and I think it is deserving of both the praise and the criticism. Actually I think Eric is pretty well on target here. The jump scares, though many are auditory are both cheaply manipulative and pretty well done. The last few frames *Spolier* of the girl lunging at the camera is nearly a complete deal breaker. It would have been great if the Demon had been more, I dunno weird, felt like a conservative spirit that mostly just walked around for the bulk of the film.
This is where something like BWP was ingenious with it's kids' handprints, strange totems in the forest, etc. I think the photo was an attempt at this but it felt forced. Also the scariest aspect of the BWP was that there were so many possible explanations at films end. This film left you with pretty much one idea.
The last BWP comparison I'll make is that this film had about 20 "Mikey kicks the map in the river" moments. That being the moment in the BWP that most people go "What? Why would anyone do that?" Here, Micah's character is so inanely and inconsistently macho throughout it seems a device to deliberately frustrate the viewer more than the actions of a scared person. This coincides with some contrived plot turns to really sabotage the believability of it's found footage approach.
That said when the acting wasn't taking me out of it, pretty effective.