Shutter Island: A movie AGHDBSJDSHDUSF

/WRIST

This doesn't even belong here. It's not even horror. It's not even skirting on "thriller" either. Maybe worth seeing if you want to see Jackie Earle Hayley be short and awesome or an old guy that looks like a TF2 Medic, but otherwise don't see this shit.

In fact, picket it.

Light it on fire, fuck if I care.

The prediction I made an hour before the movie began based only on the (terribly, horribly misleading) previews was ENTIRELY TRUE. TOTALLY FUCKING TRUE.

If there was a way to slit my wrists and weep blood without killing myself, I'd do it.

Son, I am so very, very disappoint.

The Wolfman [2010] (review)

We've all seen the commercials. It was time for a real horror fan to actually go see it. Now, before you read any further, I'll have you know that I haven't seen the 1941 "Wolfman" film, and so no comparisons will be made, and I don't mean to wound anyone's nerd-ego. Expect an update about that in the future.

Anyway, first I might as well focus on the good. The Wolfman is a film based on the 1941 film by the same title (I haven't seen it, but I assume it was loosely so), directed by Joe Johnston.

The makeup is pretty excellent in this film, I mean, as far as it can be. There's no real way to hide the human eye without (usually bad) CGI or ridiculously uncomfortable contacts, but somehow they even managed to cove up that irritating pink rin inside the upper and lower eyelids. Makeup? CGI? I don't freaking know, but it was pretty epic. The mouth is totally mobile in the wolfman costume (or makeup, as it were) and Benicio Del Toro (who does a wonderful job faking an American accent and still managing to speak 19th century English) even manages to mutter a fairly understandable word or two through it. The man is a pretty amazing wolfman, I must say. He's able to exaggerate every movement and expression way beyond human average, and still not manage to look stupid and f**king campy.

Speaking of, it took me a good half hour to realize that Anthony Hopkins was Anthony Hopkins. I don't know what it was, but I blame the full beard. His acting was stupendous, as usual. As for the director, he came up with ways to rather brilliant pass the time between full moons, which we all know only happen once a month...right? Right? He didn't even have to use the Happy Family 90s Montage™. He also gets props for not using many cliches up into the Worst Cliche In All History. I saw a beautiful mastiff (?) named Samson (owned by the wolfman's father) and immediately feared The Animal Dies Syndrome (the cop-out in horror movies where they're too wussy to kill a person and so take it out on totally innocent animals). In fact, not a single animal (unless humans count) die throughout. Not even the one you're absolutely sure is going to.

I'm not so fond of Emily Blunt in horror, so we'll just let that dog lie (...heh).

Now onto the bitter and painful truth. I came out of the movie with a face Chris Hanson would envy (really, why don't you just take a seat...) and I was sorely, sorely disappointed. Let's start with composition.

I'm not totally sure if their lighting guy was a 12-year-old Namibian boy or something, but there are times when he (or she?) fails pretty spectacularly. At times it looks like the wolfman's nose is a piece of glued-on plastic (which it may very well be, but the point stands) and you can see the matte paint around Benicio's eyes, which makes him look more or less like a teenager at Halloween.They also seem to have magical piercing candle light which I really can't explain, but I can forgive as a whole scene lit by candlelight would be pretty pathetic. Also, the GD movie relies more on boo-scares than anything I've seen in a long time, rather than, yenno, plot or design or composition or tension or acting. Yenno. The unimportant things.

For the plot itself, it's exactly what you expect from modern horror. Now, I know what you're thinking: "THE COMMERCIALS ARE SO BADA**" or maybe "I SAW THE BEHIND-THE-SCENES AND IT WAS F***ING AWESOME". I know, honey, I know. The behind-the-scenes clips after one of my mother's horrible romantic comedies (-shudder-) are what made me decide to finally break down and see the GD movie.

Unfortunately, it is nothing like the trailers.

It is to its trailer as Avatar was to its own (or so I've heard).

The prediction you make about a quarter through a movie, spurned on by one of Hopkins' wonderful subtle glances? Yeah, it's true. Even my father (who has the theatrical reasoning of a pangolin) was able to figure it out.

The ending that you're hoping will be new and inventive and wonderful? ...well, let's talk about that a moment. There was a short period nearing the end where I thought, holy crap, this is going to be exactly what I want it to be. The awkward yet reasonable-for-the-19th-century romance can even be forgiven because this ending is going to be real and everyone's going to bitch about how much it sucked because it wasn't mushy bullsh*t.

It is everything that makes a horror guru groan. I mean everything. A tearful goodbye, a tiny bit of blood considering what the entire movie has been, a perfectly-timed death with no spasms or excreta. IT EVEN HAS THE EVER-INVENTIVE AND ORIGINAL OPEN END THAT MAKES TOTAL IDIOTS GO "OMG LYK BUT NAO WAT?!"

I groaned. I wanted to kill a baby and, for the record, there was the obligatory small child with stupid parents at this showing, and the knowledge that she will some day butcher one of them with a knife for the trauma is all that saved her life.

On another note, I have lost faith in my family as a whole. Before the movie my father said that he thought he saw the "blonde sidekick" from Burn Notice in an "awful old horror film". I was confused. "It was called Legion of the Dead or something", he said. Immediately I think, Bruce Campbell? Evil Dead? But, dad! You claim to have loved Evil Dead in your youth! I ask, was there a guy with a chainsaw for a hand? No, but his hand was pretty fucked-up. Did he have a shotgun? Yeah, and he had a car too! It was like he went back in time!

My father didn't know Bruce Campbell was in Army of Darkness.

You are all I have left, my Freaks.

Paranormal Activity (review)

You’ve heard about it from friends, and there’s no avoiding the commercials. Paranormal Activity has become something of a cultural phenomenon in the last few months, but can it live up to the hype? And where the Hell did it come from in the first place?!

Ah, my friends. That’s why I’m here.

To give a brief synopsis, Paranormal Activity is about a couple named Katie and Micah. Katie believes that something has been haunting her since her childhood, and it has followed her into the house. Micah wants to catch it on film. Stylistically, it’s presented as “found footage”. There is always obviously someone behind the camera (save specific nighttime shots where it is resting on a table) and they make no move to make it look otherwise professional.

That’s all well and good, you may say, but I still have no f**king idea where it came from! Ah, that’s where things get interesting. Paranormal Activity was actually a very low-budget California-based independent film written and directed by Oren Peli. It was created in 2007 and was shown at the Screamfest Film Festival in October and the Slamdance Film Fesitval in January of that year. What happened in 2008 gets somewhat lost, but it was shown exclusively in California in early 2009, and come October 2009, it was publically released in select cities. Personally, I heard it mentioned in passing on the youtube “sxephil” show and it piqued my curiosity. Imagine my anger when I learned it wasn’t being released anywhere within an hour of my home. Some months later, though, the barrage of commercials started and I joined forces with the internet to get Paranormal Activity released nearby.

It may have just been a clever marketing ploy, but either way, there it was in a local theater.

Does it live up to the hype?

Yes and no.

The myriad commercials depict theater-goers in night vision screaming, gasping, jumping, and otherwise being entirely terrified at what is claimed to be an early screening of the film. I have no doubt that the footage was taken during an actual screening, but I personally believe that it was taken from either one point mid-plot or during the last few seconds of the film. You are not going to jump out of your skin if you go to see Paranormal Activity. There are only two “boo-scares” I can think of off the top of my head, and otherwise there is nothing to leap out at you. The film does, however, do a wonderful job of building tension with music and acting up to … nothing. It gets the heart pumping, for sure, and even I would occasionally curl up in my seat preemptively (shut up, it’s not my fault). You have to give them props for such awesome effects on such a low budget, as well. Go watch it, you’ll see what I mean.

As a horror movie goes, Paranormal Activity is very plot-based with very little gore or violence. Fans of the genre (yay!) are more likely to enjoy it than fans of things like … Hostel (boo!). There are no spectacular sprays of viscera or unrealistically-set deaths (well, more on that in a moment), but the acting alone may make it worth seeing. I can’t even begin to describe the wave of pleasure that rolled over me when I realized, holy crap.

These indie film actors are better than 99% of the crap out there.

It was amazing. I believed every moment of it (...again, more on that in a moment) and hot damn was it a breath of fresh air considering the “new young talent” in Hollywood. A friend mentioned to me that she thought it was just a bunch of clichés and nobody noticed (the b**ch), and I do have to agree somewhat in that the events of the haunting are like every haunting you have ever heard about ever. That makes sense, though, doesn’t it? Why make sh*t up that never happens and take away from the relative reality of it all?

Alright, so you may be asking why the Hell I suddenly leaped into Parenthesis Land.

Apparently a lot of people weren’t aware of Paranormal Activity before the commercials. As far as I know, you yourself may not have. With normal people, this is okay. With total idiots, it is not.

Yes, Paranormal Activity is presented as non-fiction, but you know what else calls itself non-fiction during the film? Kill Bill. I was sitting at the barber’s, letting my dye set, when all of a sudden I heard another hairdresser talking.

“Oh, everyone thinks it’s really real, like, up until the end!”

Really? Seriously? You think they’re publically releasing found footage from a real-life haunting, possession, and then the deaths of two young adults (not a spoiler, trust me)? So the police are going to let Hollywood show, on film, a true case that could possibly blow apart humanity as a whole and become the single most important piece of paranormal evidence in the world?

Why was it named Paranormal Activity, then? Why did it have a producer and director?

People are stupid. Very, very stupid.

This brings me to my next point, though, which is the ending of the film. I will admit, it kind of shatters the illusion of realism that is otherwise present throughout the entire film. I won’t relate it here lest someone hasn’t seen it and they send someone to my house to kill me (Snape kills Dumbledore). I will tell you, however, that it is terribly cliché and the goriest part of the movie (not to mention one of the only boo-scares). I have to wonder if Hollywood demanded the director change the ending to fit in with “modern horror” (boo!), or if it was a choice of the director himself. If it’s the latter, I am very disappointed in you, Oren.

That aside, the theatrical ending is not the same as…well. Either of the two other endings. One can be viewed on the DVD (“original ending” – you can watch the other ending alone after the movie is finished), and that would be the second-most gory and the second-most realistic. Again, I won’t relate that here and ruin the surprise.

I will, however, tell you all about the ending that never, ever happened. After the Big Screaming Scene ™, Katie returns to the bedroom, bloody and wielding a knife, to rock in the fetal position for 3 hours. Micah’s alarm rings. Katie rocks some more. Katie’s friend Amber calls, and I presume she leaves a message so we all can know. Katie is still rocking. At 9, Amber arrives and finds Micah’s body. A half hour later, the police arrive and tell Katie to drop the knife she’s still clutching, not to mention approaching them with. The Haunting (you never really get a name for it) slams a door, a cop is startled, and poor Katie gets shot (ouch). While the credits roll, you get audio of the cops finding the footage. They maintain the realism even as they’re listing the cast, and that’s pretty awesome.

That was, apparently, the second version ending that we never got to see and likely will never see. If anyone knows where I can find it, I’d be much obliged.

Now, it appears that the original cut of the film is seven minutes longer than the theatrical cut (DAMN YOU, HOLLYWOOD), and I can understand the cuts to some extent. We don’t really need to see Katie finding her keys or the broken picture frame, although it probably would have made more sense than the “oh look” they used. Apparently, though, they cut out some good old-fashioned projectile blood-vomiting (fail) and also a good hunk of footage of one character, Diane.

Diane is a woman who Micah is informed about (because he is a total d*ck) and then looks up on the internet. It seems her childhood was very much like Katie’s and she was haunted as well. Katie reasonably asks “what happened to her?” Well, Katie, we have no f**king idea. Unless you paused the video at just the right moment, there is absolutely no way to know anything that went on with poor Diane. One mixed clip is shown in response to Katie’s question, but it’s blurred and vague and with no context cannot really be made sense-of, even on the big screen. To learn the story, you have to be curious enough to pause in a quick shot across the computer screen.

Of course, I deliver.

Look at the screenshot if Diane first. The second screenshot is that of the webpage on Micah’s computer, and I’ve circled where I was able to get the information from.

Transcribed:

It began in June 1966. Diane [???] looking forward to starting a [???]

By all account she had a v[???] next. Shortly after she mov(ed) [???]

occurrences started happen(ing) [???] of dark shadows moving acr(oss) [???]

Her roommates witnessed a few of the[???]

stress. Soon enough, it was getting impossib(le) [???]

turning on - even when unplugged, faucets tur [???]

[???](h)er parents arranged for a local priest to pay a visit and provide guidance. The priest immediately [???]ised the possibility of a demonic possession, and suggested they contact an exorcist sanctioned by the Catholic Church. After the exorcist arrived, Diane’s condition quickly deteriorated. Diane has(sic) completely withdrawn into herself and was no(t) [???] (co)mmunicating with anyone. She exhibited all the classic symptoms of a demonic possession. She refused to leave her bed for [???] days, and seemed to be sensitive to light – always preferring the darkness. Her only mode of communication was spewin(g) (ob)scenities at anyone that would speak to her.

When her parents noticed that she is(sic) scratching herself and attempting to poke her eyes, they tried to keep her restrained. That only worked for a short time. Her condition kept getting worse, and she started gnawing on her own arm in an attempt to free herself of the restraints. By the time it was noticed, much of the flesh on her upper arm was gone. Despite the extraordinary amount of pain she must have experienced, she never indicated that she was feeling any discomfort as she almost completely amputated her arm.

She never seemed to respond to the exorcism attempts, and on February 16, 1967 when she was left unattended for a short while, she completely severed her arm with her teeth. She bled to death before she could receive proper medical treatment, and was smiling victoriously, as if the demon that was possessing her was showing to the world that it won the battle.

[???]er Anthony Taylor was present at the exorcism and shot hours of footage of the failed exorcism. In April 2006, when he was[???]

So what can we glean from this? Diane was a promising young woman who was either starting college or in her first apartment (aren’t they all?) and suddenly shit started to go wrong. Her parents call a priest who tells them to call an exorcist, and they do. Diane is now spewing obscenities, staying in bed in the dark, and trying to gnaw her arm off and poke her own eyes.

And then she bit her arm off.

You heard me. Diane chewed her own arm off.

Go look at that picture again.

No, really, go look.

…

Hell yes, that’s her arm laying severed beside her!

It all makes sense now, doesn’t it?

Where’s Anthony Taylor’s footage?! I want to see Diane! I have to admit I also feel bad for the actors and actresses who took part in the exorcism scene and then aren’t even credited because they don’t appear in the final movie.

Anyway, the bottom line is that Paranormal Activity is one of my favorite “modern” horror movies in a long, long time.

No Nightlights

Welcome one and all to the very first posting on your friendly neighborhood FEARblog. I am the Creep, and I will be your host throughout your stay here.

FEARblog was created to highlight everything spooky from news to movies to eBay auctions and stories. We will delve into reality as well as fiction and deliver it to the common Freak in an accessible way. As of yet there is no set timing for posts (daily, weekly, monthly, etc.) but one may arise with the blog's growing popularity.

Is there something you would like to see here? Feel free to contact us at any time! Those who submit subjects always get an honorable mention.