| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
damalc 
"last watched: Sausage Party"
|
 Posted - 10/21/2009 : 17:08:21
|
"Paranormal Activity"
galactically disappointing. reviewers have called this one of the scariest movies ever. episodes of "Eerie, Indiana" were scarier than this. know what's scary? the idea that a filmmaker thought he could make an entertaining movie in which the main characters are in bed asleep for 1/3 of the film.
not a bad movie, but this one doesn't nearly deliver on the hype.
and the 1st person, hand-held cam thing is really getting old. |
|
|
silly 
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 10/21/2009 : 20:10:21
|
A friend of mine said "Wait for the video, and watch a couple episodes of Ghost Hunters in the meantime."
I saw hundreds (maybe thousands) of college kids lined up to see this at midnite the other night, so the hype worked, at least initially. |
 |
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 10/21/2009 : 22:14:14
|
| There's a difference between watching a heavily-hyped horror movie at midnight with a dark auditorium full of people [when, let's face it, the next thing you have to try and do is go to sleep in your bed; how many late-nite showers were *not* taken by PSYCHO viewers?], and watching it at home, at noon, on your DVD player. Par is cleverly trying to tell you that you will have the former experience in the latter atmosphere. Impossible. But my hat is off to these DIY horror-film auteurs, and my advice to anyone who wants to see PARANORMAL ACTIVITY is to stop reading this thread right now, and don't go to our review page until you have seen it. And remember: "What was that over my shoulder?" is *always* more effective than, "It's just a guy in a suit." |
|
|
|
BiggerBoat 
"Pass me the harpoon"
|
Posted - 10/21/2009 : 22:37:55
|
I've come to believe that to truly enjoy any modern horror film you have to stay away from the trailer, the clips, the reviews and interviews with the stars. You have to see it 'cold' without any reference points, otherwise it just won't scare you - and that's the whole point of a horror film.
The trailer for PA is great, and I've actually shown it to people who have come over to my house because I think it's that good, but it gives away too much of the film. I'll go in already knowing way too much about what's going to happen and because of that foresight, I won't be scared. And I like being scared. To even see a poster for a film with a short review saying something like 'Terrifying!' would skew my emotions, because if I think I might be terrified, I would probably steel myself against that emotion and dull the effect.
|
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 10/21/2009 : 22:49:00
|
| You are so right, BB. I remember BLAIR WITCH's Heather Donahue appearing on a late-nite talk show and recounting how many people encountered her in the market, or wherever, and said, "You're still alive!" in astonishment. In CLOVERFIELD, we at least thought we were in on the joke. Now comes another DIY one. Your advice is spot on: if you want to share the midnight audiences' frisson, then learn as little as you can before you screen this one. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 10/22/2009 : 01:44:17
|
Good, not great. Doesn't really build up to its climax like The Blair Witch Project, but I consider it a tiny bit better than Cloverfield, in that Cloverfield couldn't really diegetically justify the use of the camera. I was especially bothered by a scene where the camera holder kept the camera facing forward and pointed at the action while he desperately tried to keep balance over a rickety bridge. The camera works in The Blair Witch Project and Paranormal Activity because nothing happens in those movies, and I don't mean that as a veiled criticism. Paranormal Activity looks and feels like it was actually filmed by the characters without any planned shots, and without any obvious nods to formula or genre in its structure. The film's major strength is that, like Blair Witch and Quarantine/[REC] before it, it basically explains nothing to you about what's going on.
I do have some major criticisms. The very final seconds are unjustifiable -- a sharp gutting of the film's carefully cultivated realism -- and it bothers me that when they have what is basically documented proof of fucked up shit happening in their house, they don't take the footage to show to basically anyone. I mean, they talk to one psychic, but they live in California, man, there are a billion people they can go to with this. |
Edited by - MisterBadIdea on 10/22/2009 01:47:24 |
|
|
|
rabid kazook
"Pushing the antelope"
|
Posted - 11/04/2009 : 13:56:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
but I consider it a tiny bit better than Cloverfield, in that Cloverfield couldn't really diegetically justify the use of the camera.
The excuses in PA to keep on or hold camera were so much more awful. I cringed/rolled eyes so many times.
Ten years after BWP, 35 years after TCM and people are still buying to real "extraordinary" footage opening in cinemas worldwide? Why?
The couple to me personally was also very annoying.
 |
Edited by - rabid kazook on 11/04/2009 13:58:51 |
|
|
|
Montgomery 
"F**k!"
|
Posted - 11/10/2009 : 22:41:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
The couple to me personally was also very annoying.
Very, very, very annoying. Spending almost two hours with a couple I would not want to spend any time with in real life is not entertainment to me.
And the movie, overall, blew!!!!
Not scary. DUMB!!!
Don't waste your money.
Or time.
EM :) |
|
|
|
BaftaBaby
"Always entranced by cinema."
|
Posted - 12/04/2009 : 23:02:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Montgomery
quote:
Originally posted by rabid kazook
The couple to me personally was also very annoying.
Very, very, very annoying. Spending almost two hours with a couple I would not want to spend any time with in real life is not entertainment to me.
And the movie, overall, blew!!!!
Not scary. DUMB!!!
Don't waste your money.
Or time.
EM :)
I agree bigtime - with both of you.
IF these people needed to spend their $21 bucks or however much it cost to film ... they could have made a far more engaging short film. It's not that any single mini-sequence is bad, it's just that the middle sequences are too many repetitions of each other. I mean how many times do we get the pov of someone going downstairs.
Apparently there's already a sequel commissioned. Oh whoopee-do!
I saw this back to back with Planet 59. Me and some mums and kiddies. I think one little kid giggled at Rover. But a gaggle of giggling girls cackled throughout PA. Go figure! 
|
Edited by - BaftaBaby on 12/04/2009 23:03:01 |
|
|
|
demonic
"Cinemaniac"
|
Posted - 12/11/2009 : 02:11:36
|
Agree all round. Dull. I hate the acting style of these films - they can never find decent actors who can deal with improvisation properly? Making it seem real is one thing, doing it with some skill is another. Although I got some agreeable chills at a couple of moments the whole interminable set-up wasn't worth sitting through for the end result. Basically we listen to an hour and a half of stupidity for the camera to be knocked over. Blair Witch cranked the tension so much more effectively for a better pay off.
Oh, did anyone else laugh when you saw the powdery footprints? What was that meant to be - a demon chicken?  |
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 12/31/2009 : 04:56:23
|
| Now I've seen it on DVD. I was constricted b/c I watched it in my own house, with nobody else. But which was the correct ending? One of them scared the piss out of me! [I must say, it woulda been better in a theater full of people...] |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Paranormal Activity
