Paranormal Activity (Its like the blair witch project but a hell of alot less scary and more boring)

[CaptainCrunch]

I wasn't completely sold on the idea in the first 30 minutes, though I came into it with a lot of skepticism (hated Blair Witch and Cloverfield). The pacing is very Exorcist, so nothing really big happens until half the movie is done. However, like the Exorcist, it maintains an interesting plot throughout (though it consists entirely of "act like an ass" -> rawr scary things happen).

Once the activity gets to be distinctly menacing, the little switch flipped on for me. It's certainly not my favorite horror film, and by no means did I find it scary. It didn't stop me from appreciating every moment, at least from a filmmaker's standpoint. They did a lot with very little, and the only genuine complaint I have is the very last scene. The "I just learned After Effects" demonface + jump scare technique is made of more than just fail. It's an entity unto itself, in a combined subset of failure, shame, and regret. It's like they made a halfway decent flick and ended it with an "over 9000" joke, knowing a worldwide sigh would be the result.

Seriously, why would you make Hitchcockian references, properly use handheld camera techniques, and make people stare at the screen trying to figure out where the scary thing is, only to shove it down their throats at the very last possible second?

Recommendation: Watch it once. Wait for DVD for optimal viewing experience. Wait for the Director's Cut if you're a horror nerd.

Edit: spoiler fail - I forgot you already spoiled it.

 

[VanityGirl]

I was wondering about this movie. I've heard some people say it's scary, then others say it epically fails towards the end. (I now know why.)

I used to be a big horror fan and I loved movies that built up the drama. Lately it seems as if horror movies have been going for the jump scares, which this movie doesn't seem to do, until the end that is.

I'm at a debate if I'll watch this or not.

 

[Cilliandrew]

The BWP was all about the unseen being scarier then the seen. It leaves alot to the viewer's imagination.. I love that style of horror.. It was all build-up and atmosphere and then in the final half hour the stuff hits the fan.

A great deal of horror films rely on the scariness of the things you don't see, usually because they have no special effects budget.

They manage to do so without being unutterably dull.

Eh, again i think it all depends on your character and A) how much you're willing to invest yourself in the world the film creates and B) what actually scares you.

I can remember when the movie came out alot of complaints against the film were that the protagonists swore too much, and that it was unrealistic for them to keep the cameras rolling the whole time and that they just didn't KNOW people like this.

I don't know who they're hanging out with. At the point when the movie was released i was in college and i knew MANY film students that were EXACTLY like those people.

If you paid attention to what was going on during the 'dull' bits, you're able to piece together what the ending is all about. You're given some "facts" that are true, and some that wind up apparently being bogus....

During the last half hour of the film the viewer is left to try to reason out what facts from the film are relevant to what's going on, and what aren't.

And i don't care what people say, the idea that someone (or something) is standing outside my tent while i sleep at night piling up rocks for no other reason then to fuck with me scares the tar out of me....


EDIT:not to derail this thread. I am looking forward to "Paranormal Activity"!

 

[Axikal]

-----SPOILERS POSSIBLE IN THE SUCCEEDING POST-----

It is posts like this--and the mindsets that fuel said posts--that remind me why the last decade or so has been SOAKED with subpar attempts at capturing "horror" onto film. It's dullards, and morons like the TC that lead to Saw being serialised; Jason X being made; and both Hostel movies. You take an idea, and shit on it until it's covered in gory fecal matter; accentuated by some drunk twat--with his baseball cap on sideways--yelling "BOOHA! in your face every five goddamn seconds.

I'll be quite frank, I only went into seeing Paranormal Activity with one review: Spoony's. It was highly recommended, and I was definitely not disappointed. You see, I rank among the rare specimen of horror viewers who DON'T believe that horror is all about blood being thrown everywhere, and cabinets jammed into my face with a cacophonous BANG!

PA serves as a refreshing reminder that there still exists people who wish to design an INTELLIGENT, powerful, truly frightening experience. It's a movie that forces you to actually THINK about what's going on, and what might happen. It doesn't spoon-feed you the plot, nor does it hold your hand throughout the scares. It's a movie about isolation, fear, and the unknown. It doesn't talk down to its audience; rather, it expects that you're enough of an adult to understand the events, and to use your goddamn head.

While re-reading your "review" I noticed you obviously don't know film-making, as there was only ONE camera during the entire movie. Everything was shot on the camera being featured. So your quip of: "the occasional impossible angle or obvious second camera" is fallacious, and ignorant. Go read up on the movie. It's stated that only one camera was used, and there was NO FILM CREW AT ALL. Micah (the male lead) did most of the camera work, occasionally giving it over to Katie (female lead); or leaving it stationary.

That's the first clue that you're a raving dumbass. There's more, but I'd like to gloss over your inadequacies to focus more on PA, and the horror genre in general.

Most people (I said MOST) who will dislike PA will dislike it because of that reason. It doesn't play kiddie games. It's a true ADULT movie, in every sense of the term (sans showing sex, of course).

The only segments I knew were going to happen were the final frames of the movie; sans the camera bit before the "jump scare". Beyond that, I had NO idea what was going to happen; and each "night" sequence was scarier than the last. Hell, I saw this movie mid-day, and I STILL couldn't sleep that night.

But you, TC, are a prick. Not only did you display an annoying amount of ignorance towards the horror genre in general, but you posted blatant movie spoilers without tacking on a spoiler tag for those who might want to see the movie. Fuck you. Just because you feel you're doing us all a service by giving away the ending, or even bits from the movie itself, doesn't mean you should jump on a forum, and do so. That's rude, obnoxious, self-centered, and just fucking wrong.

I can accept that your opinion on horror cinema may be different than mine; but do not try to state your OPINION as FACT. Horror is NOT entirely comprised of goreno and BOOHA! scares. It's a genre that has survived MORE on the psychological types of movies. Movies that forced audiences to own up to their inner-most fears. Movies that have left LASTING psychological impressions on audiences.

Silence Of The Lambs
Halloween
Texas Chainsaw Massacre
Last House On The Left
Psycho
John Carpenter's The Thing
Jaws

While they all feature violence, the movies I've listed serve another, DEEPER purpose altogether:

Silence Of The Lambs focused on the horrors of reality. Both Lecter and Bill were modeled after real-life serial killers; and the story itself is grounded in reality. The movie centered more on the psychology of a killer, rather than on the killer's kills.

Halloween and Texas Chainsaw Massacre both delved into the unseen in horror. Each relied more on the things you either didn't see, or didn't want to see. Seeing Michael slowly appear from the shadows, was truly haunting. Texas Chainsaw Massacre was cold, cruel, and calculating. It was violent, but held itself back to allow the violence OFF-SCREEN to play a more prominent role. When there was violence, it was quick, brutal, and not dragged out for 30 goddamn minutes.

Last House On The Left (being one of my least favourite movies ever) was horrifying because of the taboo subject material. It centered around two teenage girls being kidnapped, beaten, raped, and killed. All of this taking place within 10 miles of the one girl's own home. What made it scary is what made Silence Of The Lambs scary: the reality of the situation. Stories like this DO happen, and a lot more frequently than a hockey-masked killer stalking a campground. It also addressed vengeance, and did it damn well.

Psycho was considered the first "slasher" film ever. Being that, however, it was a film that played up tension, leading up to each of the few kills it presented. It focused moreso on Norman Bates's relationship with his mother, and the ending alone was shocking; never done before (at the time); and gratuitous. Even then, the violence was deeply reserved (considering what modern horror violence is like), and played mostly on psychological horror than physical horror. Psycho was infamous for causing people to be scared of taking a damn SHOWER. None of these modern movies today have done that!

I could go on and on, and make a longer list; but I think I've beaten the point to within an inch of its life.

Just because you didn't like it, doesn't give you the rights to go pissing on it by spoiling it for those who WOULD.

 

[Axikal]

Seriously, why would you make Hitchcockian references, properly use handheld camera techniques, and make people stare at the screen trying to figure out where the scary thing is, only to shove it down their throats at the very last possible second?

I heard a great explanation that helped quell my annoyance at the ending; much like your annoyance to it: Essentially, the ending was meant to be ironic, and cruel. Throughout the film, Micah was demanding the entity show itself, or give him something on film. Well, think about what it did to him, and its behaviour at the very end. Essentially, it wasn't winking at the audience, but at Micah. As if to say: "You wanted something? Here you go, asshole."

 

[GloatingSwine]

I don't know who they're hanging out with. At the point when the movie was released i was in college and i knew MANY film students that were EXACTLY like those people.

See, I was at University when it came out as well. And If I'd known people like the ones in the film, I'd have avoided them as much as possible.

That was another problem with it, I've always found that a decent horror movie relies on the viewer wanting the protagonists to survive, even when they aren't going to.

The characters in BWP were plainly too dumb to live, wandering off into an unknown forest, throwing away their map and compass in the middle of a screamy fit at each other, and generally acting like they wanted to be eaten by a grue.

That does not maintain a healthy desire for their survival. I wanted to kill the bastards myself after spending eighty minutes with them.

 

[KSarty]

To disregard his opinion due to the assumption that he prefers gory horror is ridiculous. Even if he does prefer gory movies, he is still just giving his opinion on this movie. Regardless, I am not a horror movie fan at all and I have zero interest in this film. The gory horror movies always come across as cheap to me and these supernatural thriller type movies just don't grab my attention. I just don't understand the fascination in any genre of horror movie. In this particular instance I guess it doesn't help that I don't believe in ghosts.

 

[Cilliandrew]

I don't know who they're hanging out with. At the point when the movie was released i was in college and i knew MANY film students that were EXACTLY like those people.

See, I was at University when it came out as well. And If I'd known people like the ones in the film, I'd have avoided them as much as possible.

That was another problem with it, I've always found that a decent horror movie relies on the viewer wanting the protagonists to survive, even when they aren't going to.

The characters in BWP were plainly too dumb to live, wandering off into an unknown forest, throwing away their map and compass in the middle of a screamy fit at each other, and generally acting like they wanted to be eaten by a grue.

That does not maintain a healthy desire for their survival. I wanted to kill the bastards myself after spending eighty minutes with them.

Eh, a degree of empathy is definitely required. I guess, again, it goes back to being able to put yourself into the shows of the protagonists. To me, the breakdown that they experienced was completely believable. These people were not supermen or trained professionals, they were a couple of college students who, depending on your interpretation, may have been pulled into a supernatural experience beyond their ability to fathom.

They were out there for days, they couldn't escape the woods and they snapped, throwing away the map because (at least how i saw things) it didn't matter anyways because they were not escaping those woods.

 

[KSarty]

snip

This whole post annoys me. The majority of your post is basically saying that this movie is for "true" horror movie buffs. Setting aside the elitism, giving the movie a category like that does not exclude the opinions of people who are not "true" horror movie buffs. The OP wrote a review so of course it is his opinion, he never tried to pass it off as fact. He went to see the movie and didn't like it so he does have the right to go pissing on it. He also did warn about the spoilers in case you were so enraged over the fact that he didn't like this movie that you didn't read that sentence in his post.

 

[GloatingSwine]

They were out there for days, they couldn't escape the woods and they snapped, throwing away the map because (at least how i saw things) it didn't matter anyways because they were not escaping those woods.

On the other hand, I saw it as them being a pack of fucking idiots who couldn't get out of the woods because they did stupid things like throwing away their map. As I said, too dumb to live.

 

[Cilliandrew]

They were out there for days, they couldn't escape the woods and they snapped, throwing away the map because (at least how i saw things) it didn't matter anyways because they were not escaping those woods.

On the other hand, I saw it as them being a pack of fucking idiots who couldn't get out of the woods because they did stupid things like throwing away their map. As I said, too dumb to live.

Of course you're welcome to that interpretation.

Though i would argue you completely missed the boat on what was going on in the movie.

But that's the beauty about an ambiguous film like BWP.. It's open to interpretation and asks the viewer to think a bit. Discussion and debate are never a bad thing!

 

[Piecewise]

Uh,no? I know what good suspense is and this wasn't it. I didn't expect blood or gore but what I did expect was that the suspense would eventually lead somewhere besides a horror cliche ending. As someone who prides himself on seeing all sorts of horror movies, from the hilariously terrible (death bed, Executive Koala, the howling) to the classic camp (evil dead 1,2 and army of darkness) to plain classic (pretty much anything by Hitchcock) to the modern, I can say I have a rather massive background of both suspense, psychological and slasher horror experience.

I know what a good psychological horror movie is. I've seen good psychological horror. This movie does try, it has the needed parts, but it undermines itself in several different ways. First it becomes too predictable with when it's scares will occur. Second, it's scares tend to be rather reliant on us believing the tape is real, which it obvious is not. And third, the characters, especially the male character, is too stupid to identify with. In a slasher film he's the one who would be killed off first as some nameless fucktard who decided to investigate the basement.

It has the parts to make it great, but it's pacing, the characters and probably just the stupidly overhyped nature of it makes it disappointing.

 

[Piecewise]

You're all stimulus-addicted children who have no idea what you're talking about.

This is extremely true. None of your have any appreciation for good pacing and suspense. You have been addicted to the notion that horror movies are fast paced gore sprees. I am saddened that this revival of Hitchcockian horror was poorly received by some.

The fact that you compare this to Hitchcock saddens me. You know the major difference between this movie and pretty much any of his? His movies used real things, people or animals, as his devices of terror. Take The Birds of example;He uses an every day animal, one which you probably see hundreds of a day if you look, and he turns it into an uncanny murderous force. He takes something mundane and makes it our enemy and he never reveals why it's happening. That is the essence of good horror: the fear that comes from the unknown, the twisting of familiar and comforting things into our worst fears.

PA tries to do this by making it take place in a home, but the whole "demonic possession" thing rather undermines it. Why? Because, while the birds are always there, while the nameless murderer could always be lurking on the threshold, the idea of demonic possession falls right into fantasy land.

If anything I think the Original Saw (not it's awful sequels) was much closer to Hitchcock then this movie. It took place in a situation that could really happen and forced us to consider what we would do to survive. Most of it took place in one room, with just two guys shackled to the floor. It was all about the interplay between them and the faceless malevolence which had placed them there.

That or perhaps something like the Poughkeepsie tapes if you want something in the whole "documentary" style.

 

[Cliff_m85]

Paranormal Activity is the scariest movie I've ever seen! Drag Me To Hell was really good too.
But if you didn't like it plz give me a list of whats scarier?

Are you kidding me?

Drag me to Hell was way too filled with cliches. Me and my father sat through the whole movie nodding and saying to each other what would happen next. We were right 100% of the time. Even nudging each other and saying "FORESHADOWING". It was bland and insipid, the only interesting thing being the dancing possessed. You want something scarier? The directors original horror film "Evil Dead" with "Evil Dead 2" still being superior as a horror film to DMtH.

I'm pissed at Paranormal Activity because of a stupid ***** I know who thinks it's a documentary. Yes, idiocy. So every day I have to hear her babble about demons and possessions and how I should pray.

 

[kotorfan04]

You should have her watch the movie with you and then point out that last frame of the film where it says THIS IS ALL FICTICIOUS. If that doesn't change her mind she is too stupid to live.

Also at Piecewise I am confused when you mentioned that this movie is undermined because all the scares rely on us believing (On some level) that the tape is real. Isnt that true for every horror movie? If no suspension of disbelief occurs then the whole thing is a comedy. "Oh look non existant people being killed by non existant (Slasher/Demon/Bird) Hmm, those are some nice gore effects. I laugh at most horror movie cause they are crap, but this one actually startled me to a degree, it brought back all those times when I was trying to sleep and I thought I saw something in the corner of my eye, every time I thought I heard someone walking around outside my door and when I went to check it nothing was there, every time I woke up from sleeping and found I had completely trashed the covers and they had apparently been sorted into piles while I slept. It was certainly a better movie than the Saw films, much more suspenseful, and oh yeah I was actually scared. The Saw movies had a clairvoyant serial killer murdering retards, or at the very least incredibly one dimensional killers.

At least in PA the characters had some depth, sure Micah was a huge jerk but when shit got real he tried to comfort Katie and even get the hell out of there. Saw movies had dangling carrots connecting a series of laugh out loud hilarious murders. (Pro tip when trying to create suspense DON'T speed up the camera) Anyways I know the views expressed in your review were your opinions, but I disagreed with your analysis and decided to post my own, looking forward to your rebuttal.

 

[Piecewise]

You should have her watch the movie with you and then point out that last frame of the film where it says THIS IS ALL FICTICIOUS. If that doesn't change her mind she is too stupid to live.

Also at Piecewise I am confused when you mentioned that this movie is undermined because all the scares rely on us believing (On some level) that the tape is real. Isnt that true for every horror movie? If no suspension of disbelief occurs then the whole thing is a comedy. "Oh look non existant people being killed by non existant (Slasher/Demon/Bird) Hmm, those are some nice gore effects. I laugh at most horror movie cause they are crap, but this one actually startled me to a degree, it brought back all those times when I was trying to sleep and I thought I saw something in the corner of my eye, every time I thought I heard someone walking around outside my door and when I went to check it nothing was there, every time I woke up from sleeping and found I had completely trashed the covers and they had apparently been sorted into piles while I slept. It was certainly a better movie than the Saw films, much more suspenseful, and oh yeah I was actually scared. The Saw movies had a clairvoyant serial killer murdering retards, or at the very least incredibly one dimensional killers.

At least in PA the characters had some depth, sure Micah was a huge jerk but when shit got real he tried to comfort Katie and even get the hell out of there. Saw movies had dangling carrots connecting a series of laugh out loud hilarious murders. (Pro tip when trying to create suspense DON'T speed up the camera) Anyways I know the views expressed in your review were your opinions, but I disagreed with your analysis and decided to post my own, looking forward to your rebuttal.

I don't think all horror relies on us believing that the film itself is of real events. Lets look at saw again, for example, (the original one remember, not any of the sequels). Now the things that were scary about saw were that it forced us to basically confront our mortality and to what lengths we would go to survive. It was also set in the real world so it gave us a feeling of "this could happen" without actually trying to say that it DID happen.

PA is a documentary style and really does try to say "This DID happen" rather then simply presenting the story as a fiction. In that regard I don't think it succeeded; In fact I actually think it would have been a bit better if they had abandoned the documentary feel and had just followed the couple as the invisible voyeur. I still think the Poughkeepsie tapes do a much better job. Maybe even a style like Distric 9, with interviews sprinked within the movie.

Then again, maybe I've just seen so many horror movies that I already instinctively knew what was coming. I knew almost from the beginning that the girl would be possessed and that the guy would die. I knew the scares would escalate and that the guy would probably become increasingly stupid and combative. The fact that the psychic guy ran away was actually funny and surprising to me, but that was about it.

Really, the ending still bothers me. It's just so cliche with the whole "RAWR ME EAT CAMERA" thing.

 

[kotorfan04]

snip

Alright I have watched a lot of horror movies and to me a lot of the scares come from suspense, the waiting building slow dread, knowing that something unspeakably horrible is going to happen and feeling the tension build. Then finally doom befalls them, Psycho did it well, the Exorcist did it well, and in my opinion PA did it well. We watched as the demon became more and more active, and everything went to hell pretty much. The scenes of Katie sleep standing I found particularly effective especially the last time where she just stode over Micah's bed. It played on my fears of something being in my house, something that essentially toys with you for lulz. The demon in my opinion represents the world's most intelligent troll, it messes with you, it baits you, and then really fucks with your head, and the ending to me seemed to reflect that.

To advance what I shall refer to as the "Antwiler explanation" the demon attacked the camera in the end because well Micah was a bit of a dumbass, after 3 weeks of taunting and mocking the demon, trying to catch it on camer and garner proof the demon finally gave him what he wanted all along. Irrefutable evidence of Paranormal Activity. So yes it might have been a bit cliche, but I think it was an effective cliche.

Now as for the Saw movie (including Saw 1) It had little to no suspense and was incredibly cliche. The calm guy was obviously going to freak out and attack the other guy at the end, but luckily the other guy wouldn't die because you know protagonist can't be killer, and throughout the movie the protagonists would have us flash back to the other murders. The worst part is that any suspense was ruined by the spaz cam they used to shoot the murders in. If I had to summarise Saw 1 in one sentence it would be: A series of HILARIOUS murders interconnected by a flimsy narrative, with a random twist at the end.

 

[Piecewise]

snip

Alright I have watched a lot of horror movies and to me a lot of the scares come from suspense, the waiting building slow dread, knowing that something unspeakably horrible is going to happen and feeling the tension build. Then finally doom befalls them, Psycho did it well, the Exorcist did it well, and in my opinion PA did it well. We watched as the demon became more and more active, and everything went to hell pretty much. The scenes of Katie sleep standing I found particularly effective especially the last time where she just stode over Micah's bed. It played on my fears of something being in my house, something that essentially toys with you for lulz. The demon in my opinion represents the world's most intelligent troll, it messes with you, it baits you, and then really fucks with your head, and the ending to me seemed to reflect that.

To advance what I shall refer to as the "Antwiler explanation" the demon attacked the camera in the end because well Micah was a bit of a dumbass, after 3 weeks of taunting and mocking the demon, trying to catch it on camer and garner proof the demon finally gave him what he wanted all along. Irrefutable evidence of Paranormal Activity. So yes it might have been a bit cliche, but I think it was an effective cliche.

Now as for the Saw movie (including Saw 1) It had little to no suspense and was incredibly cliche. The calm guy was obviously going to freak out and attack the other guy at the end, but luckily the other guy wouldn't die because you know protagonist can't be killer, and throughout the movie the protagonists would have us flash back to the other murders. The worst part is that any suspense was ruined by the spaz cam they used to shoot the murders in. If I had to summarise Saw 1 in one sentence it would be: A series of HILARIOUS murders interconnected by a flimsy narrative, with a random twist at the end.

I guess its a difference of opinion. I know my wife was scared of Evil Dead. I found the Exorcist to be rather funny, and quite a nice effects romp but no where near scary. I suppose I'm just not scared by "paranormal" things because I simply don't believe they exist.

 

[shwnbob]

Haven't seen it yet but that review seemed accurate nice job!