James Absolon explains how this Pope-themed film, despite its risky premise, works
Alex Pollard reviews Hollywood's biopic of the controversial Margaret Thatcher
Another year, another low-budget horror movie dubbed “the scariest film ever”. Last year it was [REC], the Spanish zombie movie which got people talking, became a minor hit and spawned an inevitable American remake. This year, Paranormal Activity garnered similar positive word-of-mouth and critical praise.
The only difference this time is that it's become a major hit, reaching number 1 in the US and making $100 million back on its $15,000 budget. Success like this catches people's interest, and studio bosses will be hurriedly assessing what exactly has made this film so popular in an attempt to replicate it. They'll try to piece together the perfect horror template: take the everyday in-your-own-house spookiness of Poltergeist, add the demonic undertones of The Exorcist, and film it in the hand-held video camera style of The Blair Witch Project.
As you can see, Paranormal Activity isn't particularly innovative in its content or its delivery. We have seen this faux- realistic “found footage” technique many times before. Yet it still works very well indeed. Rather than breaking new ground, it strips the genre down to its bare essentials. For it's the simplest of stories: a couple, recently moved into a new house, begin to feel a strange presence in the night, and set up a video camera to record the events. That's it. Back story and explanation is minimal, and half the film consists of a still shot of a bedroom. But this works in its favour. The night footage allows us the time to analyse every corner of the room, building up the tension, and making the slightest movement feel ominous.
The tension does of course drop between the night terrors, as we watch the couple in the day time and see the situation take its toll on their relationship. Fortunately it avoids the banality of Blair Witch – the protagonists aren't snivelling teenagers for a start, and the script is focused enough on their paranoia to keep the drama interesting. The acting is believable, drawing sympathy for her and mild annoyance towards him as he tries to be the man of the house and solve the problem himself. There's even a successful moment of comedy when the world's least helpful psychic visits the house, although it's not long before the next night's footage has you cowering in your seat again.
So, is it scary? The answer is a resounding yes. Is it the scariest film ever? Probably not. It contains plenty of chills and – towards the climax – some real jolts, but the over-familiarity of the approach prevents you from fully connecting with it and believing that these events are happening. Still, it remains an impressive feat of evocative sound design, subtle visual effects and low-budget tension. You'll never hear your creaking house in the same way again.
You must log in to submit a comment.
