'Paranormal Activity'

If you’re out shopping for, say, a small car or an acre of land, then $15 000 is a reasonable amount of money to have in your back pocket. If, on the other hand, you’re planning to make a feature film, $15 000 is very little indeed.

Yet that’s the amount of money that American director Oren Peli reportedly spent on his debut film Paranormal Activity, a chilling tale of suburban demonic possession that has, in recent months, taken over $107 million at the US box office.

Peli was partly able to keep production costs so low by shooting the film almost entirely within the confines of his own home in San Diego. With a principal cast of two, Peli presents his movie as ‘found footage’ shot by a young couple trying to get to the bottom of spooky goings-on in their house at night. This device largely works, with the director using the confined spaces of his home and some unnerving night-vision footage of the couple sleeping to create a tense, claustrophobic atmosphere that’s ripe for all kinds of shocks.

But if shooting an entire film in one location is easy on the pocket of the cash-strapped film-maker, it throws up some unique challenges too. How do you hold the audience’s attention for 90 minutes or more without a change of scenery? How do you make your film cinematic as opposed to theatrical? And how do you move the camera around in what could be a pretty restricted space?

For answers to these questions and more, budding film-makers could do a lot worse than watching Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window (1954), something of a master class in one-location film-making. Rear Window takes place entirely within the New York apartment of LB Jeffries (James Stewart), a professional photographer confined to his home by a broken leg. Passing the time by being a nosy neighbour, Jeffries soon senses something awry in a flat across the way, where a salesman’s invalid wife seems to have suddenly disappeared. Could the salesman have murdered her? The photographer enlists the help of bipedal girlfriend Lisa (Grace Kelly) and tries to find out.

In Rear Window, Hitchcock takes what might seem to be rather restrictive, stagy premise and uses it to create an almost perversely cinematic piece of work. As many people since have pointed out, the rear window of the flat is analogous to a cinema screen and the mixture of fear, desire and voyeuristic titillation that the main character feels mirrors the emotions of a cinema audience. When Lisa is in danger in the apartment opposite, Jeffries can do little more than watch and pray, just like us popcorn-munchers, and the tension is almost unbearable.

James Stewart in 'Rear Window'

Similarly ingenious is the Canadian sci-fi / horror film Cube (1997). Again motivated by budgetary constraints, director Vincenzo Natali hit upon the idea of putting his characters inside, erm, a bloody big cube for 90 minutes. In Scene One they wake up with little idea of how they got there, and they spend the rest of the film trying to figure out how to escape. To do so they must pass through a series of portals in the walls of the cube that lead them from one seemingly identical room to another. But – aha! – here’s the catch: some of these rooms contain booby-traps that proceed to pick off members of the group in increasingly nasty ways. Natali’s script calls for only one set, but manages to be tense, frightening and a little bit philosophical at the same time. 

Also a little bit philosophical, although set in a much more recognisable location, is Abbas Kiarostami’s Ten (2002). Here, extending a device he first used in his 1997 film Taste of Cherry, the Iranian director films ten conversations between a woman driving around the streets of Tehran and the various passengers that she picks up along the way. Kiarostami’s method was simple: two small digital cameras were mounted on the dashboard; he gave the actors some basic instructions, then off they went. The director himself was not in or near the car when the scenes were being shot, which raises some interesting questions about ‘authorship’ in the cinema and about the nature of cinematic performance too.

Mania Akbari in 'Ten'

Of course a single location can be much bigger than a house or a car. In The Blair Witch Project (1999) the location is a wood; in Gus Van Sant’s Gerry (2002) it’s a desert; and in Open Water (2003) much of the action takes places in the middle of the ocean, where the main characters are nibbled and menaced by a school of sharks. Shooting outside in natural light is cheap and offers the film-maker almost limitless options. But, at the same time, it is very hard indeed to write a script for a feature film that doesn’t require its characters to make at least the occasional trip indoors.   

In this regard, Gerry in particular has a lot to teach novice screenwriters and directors. Part-Bela Tarr and part-Samuel Beckett, the film tells the story of two young guys called Gerry (Casey Affleck and Matt Damon) who go for a walk in the desert, get lost and die. Its scenes are funny, simple and absurd – one involves Damon’s character trying to get down from a boulder – but they demonstrate well how limited resources can be a good thing for film-makers, forcing and stimulating creativity.

So the next time you’re out for a walk in the woods or stuck in a Portaloo, why not take a DV camera with you? You never know what you might come up with.

Paranormal Activity is on general release in the UK.

Still from the 'PANIC ATTACK' short by FEDE ALVAREZ

——-
——-

Had a few spare hours today before catching my train to London so thought I’d take the chance to go see Paranormal Activity.

Horror films are always difficult to recommend as what people find scary varies widely but there’s been so much buzz surrounding this one that it was hard not to be curious.

Despite using a home-video concept (and drawing inevitable comparisons to The Blair Witch Project), Paranormal Activity manages to use an incredibly simple idea to great effect, unnerving the audience at a frightening frequency.

I wish it had a different ending but so much of the film works that it’s a small complaint.  And it joins the small list of films that have genuinely scared me.

Nogal zenuwachtig togen we naar Pathé de Munt, waar zo’n tweehonderd mensen in de rij stonden voor Paranormal Activity. Na een hoop gedoe plantten we onszelf nog net op tijd op de bioscoopstoeltjes. Helemaal klaar voor het horrorevent van het jaar!

En ik moet zeggen: het viel niet tegen. Ondanks enkele bedenkele keuzes (het Ouia-bord dat vlam vat), maakt Paranormal Activity zijn reputatie helemaal waar. Met simpele middelen is een van de meest angstaanjagende films van de afgelopen jaren gemaakt.

Voor wie het nog niet weet: de film gaat over een jong stel dat samenwoont. Het meisje wordt lastiggevallen door een demon en haar vriend besluit een camera in de slaapkamer te zetten om te filmen wat er nu eigenlijk gebeurd. Ook overdag filmt hij, met de camera in de hand, alles wat het stel samen doet, tot ergernis van zijn vriendin. De avondfilmpjes, daar gaat het om, want de kijker ziet langzaamaan hoe de demon steeds agressiever wordt.

Het slimme van Paranormal Activity zit hem in het spaarzame gebruik van effecten. In feite valt er vrijwel nooit iets te zien. Dat laat een hoop ruimte over voor eigen interpretatie. Precies wat de film eng maakt, net als soortgenoot The Blair Witch Project. Ook knap is de humor die in de film zit verwerkt. In Open Water, een al bijna even goedkoop gemaakte  horrorfilm over een stel dat tussen de moorddadige haaien terecht komt, moest je je eerst door drie kwartier oersaaie dialogen heenworstelen voordat er schot in het verhaal kwam. Paranormal Activity duurt bijna twee uur, maar van een langzame opbouw is geen sprake. De dagscenes in het grootste deel van de film zijn erg grappig dankzij de wise-ass opmerkingen van het filmende vriendje, de spanning wordt direct opgebouwd met subtiele aanwijzingen van de aanwezigheid van de demon.

Toevallig keken we dezelfde avond ook de horrorfilm The Messengers, nogal een flop, overladen met special effects. Ook hier geestverschijningen, maar allemaal duidelijk zichtbaar gemaakt. Het hielp het slappe verhaaltje voor geen meter. Sterker, hoe meer er te zien was, hoe stompzinniger het allemaal werd. Tekenend. De beste horrorfilms van de afgelopen jaren waren spotgoedkoop gemaakt. Een laag budget daagt een regisseur blijkbaar uit om op de details te letten. The Blair Witch Project en Paranormal Activity zijn misschien de duidelijkste voorbeelden hiervan.

Ringu's Sadako kijkt haar slachtoffer aan

Maar vlak ook Ringu, het Japanse origineel van The Ring niet uit. Met minimale middelen wordt hier een onaangename spanning opgebouwd, die zijn climax kent in het uit de tv kruipen van monstertje Sadako. Een waar ‘om my fucking god!’- moment. Met houtje-touwtje effecten werd hier een van de meest afschuwelijke scenes uit de jaren negentig neergezet. Het moment waarop we Sadako recht in het gezicht kijken (je ziet een vreemd lodderig oog vol woede in de camera staren) wordt in de Amerikaanse remake overgedaan met een CGI-gezicht. Dat is zo overduidelijk dat de scene geen enkele indruk meer maakt. Het toont maar weer eens aan dat geld geen voorwaarde is voor kwaliteit. Ware horror speelt zich af in het hoofd van de toeschouwer, niet zozeer op het scherm.

C’era una signora anziana ferma sul pianerottolo, a metà dei suoi tre piani di salita per arrivare davanti alla porta di casa. Sconvolta dalla fatica, le mani gonfie e rosse, e rigate in orizzontale a metà delle falangi. Due pacchi da sei bottiglie di plastica da due litri di acqua minerale ciascuno ai suoi piedi. Stavo scendendo e ho colto subito l’occasione per ripulirmi un poco della coltre apatica tipica di queste parti, offrendo il mio aiuto per il tragitto restante. Da buona Giovane Marmotta ho sorriso e mi sono avviato con le due pesantissime confezioni. Ho ritenuto però che la signora meritasse anche una delicata ma ficcante ramanzina. Così, giusto per puntualizzare.
‘Signora, è una pazzia avventurarsi in acquisti del genere. Di acqua poi… ne ha quanto ne vuole dal rubinetto.’
‘Parli facile tu, io sono in cura. Non posso bere quell’acqua.’
‘E’ acqua del rubinetto, la cosa più normale che ci sia. Ed è buonissima, lo dicono tutti i controlli. Non la usa per cucinare?’
‘La uso, la uso. Ma mia nuora per il figlio piccolo non si fida. Scalda l’acqua minerale, scalda.’
Sarà colpa del rincitrullimento generale subito dagli italici a causa del marketing d’assalto delle compagnie che fanno i soldi con le acque? Altrimenti è follia pura. Arrivo sulla porta di casa della signora.
‘Comunque, mi dia retta. Usi l’acqua del rubinetto. Al massimo si prenda una di quelle brocche con il filtro per la pulizia del calcare. Non spenda più soldi per questa plastica piena di acqua del rubinetto… sciacquata.’
‘Parli facile tu. E grazie per l’aiuto.’
C’è qualcosa che non funziona. L’acqua adatta allo sport, l’acqua per ringiovanire, quella per stare a dieta, per pisciare meglio… Certo, il mercato può fare quello che vuole e proporre amenità di ogni tipo, liberissimo, ma ci si aspetta che la gente non ci caschi sempre. Sono affascinanti in un certo senso questi prodotti ‘inventati’ che diventano veri bisogni collettivi. Un fascino perverso, da stratega della comunicazione, buono però solo per alimentare i superego del circolo dei pubblicitari e per ingrassare chi è già pieno di soldi da scoppiare. Ma tutto quel PET in giro in effetti ha rotto i coglioni. Così come i chilometri di trasporto necessari per portarlo al negozio sotto casa. Erano meglio allora gli Ape Piaggio stracarichi di cassette di bottoglie di vetro da sei, i riccioloni dall’accento del sud che suonavano i citofoni, i rifornimenti settimanali che qualche benestante si permetteva di fare. Ma a quei tempi si poteva ancora prendere un bicchiere da una credenza, girarsi e aprire il rubinetto per versarci un pò d’acqua senza venire placcati e atterrati prima di riuscirci, come in una partita di rugby, da chi ti sta intorno. Avete mai provato? La settimana scorsa, in visita da conoscenti.
L’uomo alla credenza sono io.
Sto per aprire il rubinetto, quando un urlo improvviso e raggelante squarcia l’ovatta di una serata Johnny Cash e tabacco impreziosito. Tipo ‘Joooooooosh’ di The blair witch project.
‘Cosa stai facendo?!’
‘Bevo.’
‘Acqua del rubinetto?’
Sembra che qualche spacciatore del grottesco si stia divertendo a rendermi la vita difficile nei ultimi tempi. ‘Sì, perchè? …Posso?’
‘Scusa, prendi la bottiglia nel frigo, o quella dietro di te, a temperatura ambiente.’
‘Va bene questa, tranquilli.’
‘Ma non c’ha un sapore strano?’
Di… acqua.’
‘Sì, ma assaggiane dopo un bicchiere di quella in bottiglia. Senti che differenza.’
Poi, visto che da Obama in poi la coscienza della gente sembra in parte rinata, abbiamo convenuto che in effetti tutta quest’acqua in bottiglie di plastica è una cosa sbagliata. Ma che comunque è difficile cambiare le abitudini. Che poi fino a vent’anni fa manco ce l’avevamo, questa abitudine. Il maledetto marketing d’assalto dei pubblicitari… Una situazione di stallo, insomma. Molto italica. Un pò come essere battezzati con la Chiesa Cattolica. Molti non credono, o comunque non sono interessati. Ma è scomodo poi togliersi dalle liste dei possibili ’salvati’. Metti caso poi un domani possa servire? Tipo: ‘Allora, tutti i battezzati e quelli a posto coi documenti cattolici da questa parte, entrate subito dopo la registrazione, gli altri be’… da questa parte, intanto. Poi vediamo cosa si può fare per pescarne una manciata e consegnare agli inferi il resto. Ma perchè vi siete sbattezzati, scusate?’
L’acqua santa in effetti è un tipo di acqua che non rientra nelle categorie sopra elencate, ora che ci penso. Credo si tratti di acqua del rubinetto, con rispetto parlando. Non è da escludere però che la Nestlè o la Danone non stiano provando a rincitrullire anche questa fetta di mercato. Il problema è che non va proprio a mille di questi tempi, la religione cattolica, in termini di iscrizioni. Non c’è molta audience. Ci vuole forse aria nuova, chessò un Obama del clero.
Comunque bevete acqua del rubinetto.
Non ci sarebbero nemmeno più gli spot tipo Brio Blu Rocchetta.
Pensate.

For the first time in a long while, Halloween was a real event at Shades of Caruso HQ. Sure, we’ve had pumpkins and decorations before, which were fun, and absolutely no Trick-or-Treaters, which was even better, but this year I was hit with the sense that the day was imbued with some kind of unholy significance, far more so than usual. A pumpkin was carved…

…and horror movies were watched. Twitter greatly helped. Scary videos, photos of costumes, and blog articles celebrating Samhain were linked to, creating a real sense of event. Twitter does a few things really well, and being a sort of mini-aggregator of topical observations and relevant information is top of that list. It really tied the night together.

The one thing that let the whole experience down were the movies we decided to watch, which were either thoroughly awful or distractingly inconsistent. The best of them was the insane mega-hit Paranormal Activity, which has become the most profitable movie of all time after grossing $85m on a $15000 budget. It’s a terribly flawed movie, filled with banal dialogue and repetitive arguments, not to mention tortuous plot contrivances that keep the conceit floating. Some of the best moments are punctured by the behaviour of Micah, whose defiantly obnoxious confidence — a plot requisite, sadly — doesn’t sit well with the really quite terrifying events surrounding him. Special mention here to the amusement he greets an EVP recording of his girlfriend’s demon. As someone who has long been utterly terrified of the sound of unearthly events captured on tape (this book fucked me up as a kid), the moment should have been chilling, but having this doofy jerkbag giggling and goading the demon on ruined the moment.

And yet, and yet… Let’s just say that there are several moments in the film that gave me the fear, and one in particular nearly made me give up on the film entirely, it was so scary. Writer-director Oren Peli has hit on a magic formula that is effective and durable enough to survive the distracting necessities of the plot mechanics that hobble the movie, with help from committed performers Katie Featherston (this year’s Scream Queen for sure) and Micah Sloat. Who cares about the contrivance, or the unpleasant behaviour of Micah, or the late-movie YouTube exorcism silliness that complicates the hair-thin plot? None of that matters. When Micah’s camera switches on at night, and the creaking starts, you forget every annoying thing that you had to go through to get there, and you instantly put yourself in their position. You’re going to be asleep later, and you’re going to be unaware of what’s going on. The scares in the movie — manifested with absolute mastery of the craft — are one thing. What makes the movie so terrifying is knowing that you are going to bed later. It’s impossible not to imagine yourself in the same situation, and that’s the scariest thing of all.

Luckily for my sanity, the resolution of the film is more mundane than the build-up, which blunted the effect of the film. For most of the running time we can’t understand the motives of the demon haunting Katie. Terrorising her from childhood is one thing, and the thought that Katie will never be able to escape her psychic torture is more upsetting than the actual resolution, but as this is a movie with a finite running time, we have to have a resolution. I’m not sure what Peli could have done to fix this problem, and the fact that the movie has three different endings suggests he wasn’t sure either. A disappointment, then, but a disappointment that touches greatness at times, and lingers in the mind far longer than you would like.

Though Paranormal Activity invites comparison with 1999’s The Blair Witch Project, it’s still very much of its time. When considered alongside Matt Reeves’ Cloverfield and Jaume Balagueró and Paco Plaza’s magnificent [Rec], this kind of faux-subjective horror — with the line between onscreen participant and viewer blurred — has become one of the most significant innovations in horror cinema of the past twenty years, and has surprisingly been used rarely enough to still feel fresh. Certainly, though the genre seemed to be in a rut during that period, Blair Witch and [Rec] are two of the most effective horror movies around, arguably more so than almost all others, and have revitalised the traditional horror sub-genres (ghost story, zombie movie, monster attack).

That’s not to say the genre has been completely moribund. The other horror movies that have stood out – certainly in my view — are partially most effective for playing off real-world fears that have been ignored by numerous tedious slasher films, remakes of Japanese techno-ghost stories or “torture” movies. In a world where increasing automation and computerised interaction has made us less likely to wander out of our comfort zones, the best horror movies of recent times have worked on our fear of other people, where stressful situations make us turn on each other. While a lot of horror concerns the Fear of the Other, as the groups we ally ourselves with shrink in size we find The Other is not that alien any more. The Descent, The Ruins and The Mist all feature characters trapped in horrific environments, surrounded by unthinkable horror, but ultimately these movies are upsetting because of the way the protagonists react to these threats. In all three the most dangerous thing you can encounter is the person standing next to you, who is probably someone you have known all your life.

The thought that it is not the Other that could provide the horror, but maybe even you yourself if pushed the wrong way — by betrayal in the case of The Descent, politics and religious intolerance in The Mist, and allegorical Idiocracy-style selfishness and ignorance in The Ruins — is where the real horror lies. My other favourite horror movie of the past few years — James Watkins’ gut-wrenching Eden Lake — is as topical as The Ruins or The Mist, with two well-to-do UK city-folk undone by their inability to respect their countrified brethren. Their fate is sealed when they antagonise some children — The Other — but protagonist Jenny’s ultimate doom is provided by people who should be on her side. Hell really is other people. As we increasingly use the Internet to interact, and often realise that being physically present with other people is a mixed blessing, it’s tempting to think that the current popularity of the zombie genre is down to the cathartic pleasure of seeing hordes of “people” mown down. It’s the most misanthropic of horror sub-genres, and increasingly the one where the appeal of it seems to be watching the violence we can perpetrate upon surrogate humans without worrying about morality getting in the way as much as it is the thrill of being menaced by something unpleasant.

During our weekend of horror we also watched some endearing throwbacks to previous horror eras, though sadly they left us even more cold. Ti West’s House of The Devil has been attracting attention and rave reviews for its intentionally retrograde approach. Set in the 80s, West fills his movie with period detail: feathered haircuts, synth soundtrack, clunky Walkman etc. He also spends much time setting up an atmosphere instead of throwing a bunch of youngsters into a rusty basement to have their teeth pulled out. About 75% of the movie shows college student Samantha (played by Saffron Burrows lookalike Jocelyn Donahue) walking around a creepily deserted campus and an even creepier isolated house, as she babysits an old woman for Tom Noonan and Mary Woronov. We’re talking about half an hour of walking around a campus, and then half an hour of walking around a house, with as little plot as a short movie expanded to feature length.

Though I certainly didn’t take against West’s movie, and though it had several pleasurable things to recommend it (casting Noonan and Woronov certainly makes up for a lot of the movie’s flaws), I suspect a lot of the praise heaped on House of the Devil is for what it isn’t, rather than for what it is. It’s not torture porn. It’s not a shitty remake of a slasher classic. It’s not edited into an incomprehensible, staccato mess. It generates atmosphere instead of relying too much on turning the volume up to jolt the viewer. It’s paying its respects to the horror movies adored by a certain sub-set of movie critics. It has charm and is made with reverent love, and never once feels like a cheap cash-in. For those reasons, it is to be applauded.

For the most part there is little dialogue and a couple of shock jump moments (in their defence, they’re earned), but also lots and lots of longueurs. West goes the extra mile in setting up an atmosphere of eerie stillness before things kick off in the final act, but as with a lot of average horror movies from the past, that involves having very little happen very slowly. The 95 minute running time feels a lot longer, and by the time the scares arrive, there’s a good chance you’ll be bored. Is this a result of eroded attention spans? Or has West balanced the film wrong? It doesn’t help that the finale is overplayed to the point of not being that scary after all, shooting past “effectively scary” to settle at the total opposite end of the horror spectrum.

As for West’s influences, sometimes they seem to have inspired him too literally. Like the runty child of Rosemary’s Baby and The Dunwich Horror (with a pinch of The Medusa Touch), it serves up something we’ve seen a million times before which, after the long wait to get there, is just not enough. I’d even argue that it’s got its eras mixed up. While the film goes out of its way to add 80s period details, the pace and subject matter of the movie feel more suited to the 70s, like something Roger Corman and Samuel Z. Arkoff would have made before The Exorcist and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre came along and changed the rules of the genre. 80s horror movies were pacier and often sillier than this, and if you’re going to pay homage to that era, you need to have more going on.

As in Michael Dougherty’s Trick ‘r Treat, which was a proper 80s horror homage right down to its bones. Ostensibly an anthology of tales linked by a couple of common threads, Dougherty pays tribute to numerous horror classics while playfully subverting expectations. Hoary horror conventions that are given a sprucing up include the sexuality of the vampire, the vulnerability of young virgins, townsfolk trying to kill a group of undesirables who then come back from the grave, the pillar of the community who has a terrible secret, the Bad Seed, and the unstoppable killing machine seemingly intent on enforcing some bizarre rules. By the end of the film, the nods to other films were keeping me more entertained than the narrative tricks or the lacklustre scares: The Howling, The Thing, Fright Night, Pumpkinhead, The Evil Dead, Nightmare on Elm Street 1 and 2, Creepshow, Pet Sematery, The Company of Wolves, Halloween (obviously)… There’s almost too many to count. While House of the Devil serves up the familiar and hopes it will still scare us, here Dougherty simply tries to pay respectful homage.

This approach has its pros and cons. On the plus side Dougherty captures the look of 80s cinema with images full of rich golds, reds and oranges, not to mention leaf-strewn suburban streets, Bacchanalian fire-lit orgies of violence, and use of the frame that calls to mind vintage Carpenter and Dante. It’s a gorgeous movie, despite its low-budget, but as with House of the Devil it’s low on scares. The balance of the movie falls too heavily on the lighter side, which wouldn’t really be a problem at any other time of the year, but after seeing something as soil-yourself-scary as Paranormal Activity it couldn’t help but feel like a bit of a letdown. While the intertwined stories and narrative surprises are cleverly unravelled by the end, all four tales (and the two linking arcs) feel underdeveloped, even taking into account the bigger picture. It’s Love Actually Syndrome. Four two-act tales linked together do not replace one tale with three acts. As much fun as Trick ‘R Treat is (and it is a lot of fun), it can leave the viewer unsatisfied. Consider it recommended, however, especially if you grew up loving any of the movies listed above.

All three movies feel like throwbacks in one way or another (if you’re ungenerous and take Paranormal Activity to be a straight rip of Blair Witch), but the fourth movie we watched over the Halloween weekend was very much a modern mainstream horror movie. Jaume Collet-Serra’s demented Orphan was probably more thriller than horror movie, but with the various Catholic orphanages, wintery settings, bloody carnage and concerned nuns — not to mention that it is a Dark Castle Entertainment picture — it felt very much of a piece with everything else we had seen. Except terrible. Vera Farmiga and Peter Sarsgaard (resembling a pudgy, effeminate Keifer Sutherland with a bad case of narcolepsy) adopt a Russian child after Farmiga’s third pregnancy ends in disaster. Haunted by this, a previous alcohol dependence, and an accident that left her second child deaf, Farmiga puts all her hopes of recovering from her past on the new child, who sadly turns out to be a murderous psychopath who tears the family apart with psychological games, a can of lighter fluid, and a big hammer.

The movie starts unpleasant and stupid, and gets more unpleasant and stupid than you can possibly imagine. During its initial theatrical release, an internet meme appeared that claimed the murderous child (Esther, played with astonishing eerie skill by 12-year old Isabelle Fuhrman) was actually a Lithuanian hooker born with dwarfism. This rendered the movie impossible to take seriously, though the actual reveal at the end is just as silly and possibly even tackier, especially when taken with some absurd third-act loose-end-tying of breathtaking clunkiness (I’m thinking of the frozen pond, here).

It certainly seems odd… nay, depressing that something this catastrophic and tasteless can be made with a cast of talented actors such as Farmiga, Sarsgaard (in a career-worst performance filled with drowsy histrionics), Margo Martindale and poor CCH Pounder. What’s worse is that a far superior movie with a similar plot was released in 2007 to massive indifference. George Ratliff’s Joshua starred Hott Sam Rockwell and Farmiga as — again — parents dealing with the psychological manipulations of a devious child, and again hamstrung by their inability to deal with this threat due to the perceived vulnerability of their nemesis (echoes of Watkins’ Eden Lake there). Ratliff created an atmospheric and disturbing tale with almost no tricksiness, relying instead on talented actors portraying people at the end of their tether. Collet-Serra — who, let us not forget, is part of the Pointless Remake Brigade thanks to his astonishingly tedious Paris Hilton vehicle House of Wax — has no interest in creating something as challenging as this, despite his excellent cast, relying instead on cheap shock tricks, over-direction, gothic lighting and unsubtle musical cues. Luckily, it’s hilariously wrong, and littered with bizarre tonal and directorial mistakes. It’s not quite a failure along the lines of, say, Shyamalan’s The Happening, but it’s damn close.

When critics praise House of the Devil for being a breath of fresh air, it is garish, tawdry nonsense like Orphan that they’re comparing it to. After seeing it the other movies of the weekend seemed much better by comparison. It was particularly amusing to note that the frenetically edited Orphan generated not even a fraction of the tension created by Paranormal Activity which contains hardly any cuts at all, in defiance of Hitchcock’s theories on editing. Sadly none of these Halloween movies thrilled me as much as the movies I linked to a horror renaissance in this post (scroll down). Pastiche can be fun, but unless it has something else there, it can be little more than an empty exercise in playing off nostalgic feelings, and suggests a lack of imagination in the filmmaker. A working knowledge of the various developmental stages of a genre, allied with a vivid imagination, can give us something as respectfully constructed as Juan Antonio Bayona’s The Orphanage – which is a classic ghost story in the mold of The Haunting and The Innocents that pays homage to its forebears and then becomes its own thing — or something that bursts conventions like Tomas Alfredson’s Let The Right One In. This year, pastiche had its pleasures, but didn’t take the next step. The closest we got was seeing Sam Raimi return to what he does best with Drag Me To Hell. It was pure joy, yet another wonderful amalgam of disturbing comedy and silly horror from the man who gave us Evil Dead II. Of course, when you’re making a pastiche of a sub-sub-genre of horror that you yourself invented, it’s going to be hard to fuck it up.

So is there cause for concern? I’d argue no. This year the only completely satisfying straight horror movie I’ve experienced is Lars Von Trier’s harrowing Antichrist, which is one of the most astonishing sensory assaults in recent memory. Doused in unpleasant atmosphere and featuring imagery that will probably haunt me for years to come, even if Von Trier’s intent was not to make a great horror movie — he’s more interested in parsing his recent depression, and exploring recurrent themes like violent misogyny and humanity’s destructive urges — he managed to create something that disturbs more than anything else released this year. That’s not just because of the now-notorious genital mutilation scene. That one moment — which is utterly horrifying but not exploitative — would not be anywhere near as effective if it were not for Von Trier’s command of mood up to that point.

While it certainly doesn’t look or feel like anything in the mainstream of the genre, there’s the hope that other filmmakers will see what Von Trier has done with the conventions of the genre, mixing fairy tale imagery, nightmarish atmospherics a la David Lynch, sustained suspense, extreme body horror, and an oppressive, Hideo-Nakata-esque dread to create something new, something chilling and unforgettable. Maybe Von Trier, who operates outside the sometimes claustrophobic and relentlessly self-referential confines of the world of horror cinema, will accidentally influence other horror filmmakers and bring about another evolution in the genre. It’s that or someone very very smart comes up with a new approach, just like Carpenter once did with Halloween. One can only hope.

Note: This blogpost was not written in an attempt to exorcise the memory of Paranormal Activity from my branes so I can get a decent night’s sleep. Anyone suggesting this is the case is dead wrong. ::whimpers::

Did I mention I saw Paranormal Activity on Halloween?  A friend and went and were pleasantly surprised by this spooky movie.  I mean, it wasn’t the scariest of all time or anything, but it was sufficiently creepy and realistic enough to cause your heart to race.  In fact, that is the heart of the movie, its realism.  See this couple is experiencing strange noises and events in their home.  In an effort to figure out what it is, they begin filming themselves at home.  (of course this leads to the inevitable sex tape innuendo)  While macho man Micah wants to confront whatever force is hanging around, likable Katie just wants it to go away.

What is truly scary are the parts when you don’t see the action, but hear it and are looking at a fixed image from the stationary camera.  Although there have been many comparisons to the Blair Witch Project, including shoestring budget, exploding box office numbers, unknown actors, seemingly real storyline, the one thing I’m glad is different is the shaky filming.  While there is some, most the the time the camera angle is from a stationary camera…yay, now shaking.  So if The Blair Witch Project made you sick you should be alright with this one—and I think its scarier.

You know, the past few years, I haven’t really gotten into Halloween. I didn’t dress up last year. Living in Kansas City, my friends were so spread out and of varying ages that there wasn’t any really cohesive plan. But here, it’s been the week of Halloween. And what fun! Adam and I bought loads of candy and some kickass Skull cups to take to parties. Last night was Whiskey/Pepsi, tonight I think we’ve got a 12-pack of Heineken- bottles, always bottles.

Tuesday, we carved pumpkins, and even though I’m sure mine was the worst, it was fun. It was a silhouette of Gotham City, with the Bat-signal looming over it. Tricky stuff, cutting out the spaces around the Bat-symbol. It’s already mostly rotted, but oh well. We’re a filmmaking bunch, so we had pumpkins from “Nosferatu” and “JAWS” and 2 from “The Nightmare Before Christmas.”

I’m pretty proud of my costume. I’m Owen Wilson’s character, Francis, from “The Darjeeling Limited.” Adam is Tallahassee from “Zombieland.” Awesome. I’d tried to be Shaun from “Shaun of the Dead” but couldn’t locate a cricket bat – literally no one out here sells them. C’mon, L.A. get with it! Nonetheless, the costume has been a hit thus far, and I’m looking forward to tonight. Last night, Josh literally created his costume just to piss me off – he went as Noah Baumbach. 3 people at the party got it, but boy was he spot-on. Brown pants. Black suit-coat. Scarf. Sunglasses. And, most importantly, most pretentiously… black fingerless gloves. Check out the making-of featurette for “Margot at the Wedding” and join in the resistance against this uber-douche. Or, the picture to the right. I’ll have to put up a comparison once I find some pictures from last night. It’s uncanny. And probably the most frightening thing I saw all night.

And of course, what Halloween would be complete without scary movies? Last Saturday, we had a Horror Trilogy – with “Halloween” and “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” (originals, of course) and “The Blair Witch Project.” I think “Texas Chainsaw…” was the scariest, but “Blair Witch” was the best (read a good review of it here, from my friend Josh who hadn’t seen it before now). Can you believe it’s been 10 years since that movie came out? And now here we have “Paranormal Activity,” which is very similar in spirit and budget and pure filmmaking gumption. I saw it this week, and just like “Blair Witch…” it’s scary not because of blood and guts and cheap thrills. Both movies are unsettling, they seep into you. They’re about people fighting desperately to regain control of their lives from unseen forces. Both made on the cheap, both some of the most effortless, natural improvisation captured on film, both “horror,” both very much about their setting and small, creepy things happening. And, in some ways, both about filmmaking itself and the desire to watch what happens.

10 years ago I was 16. I remember trying to sneak into “The Blair Witch Project” and having to settle instead for “The Runaway Bride” (I was on a date, I’ll let you decide which movie was whose choice). My friend Clint and I used to host Halloween parties every year, so we ended up watching it in his basement on a huge screen. I watched it like 3 times that night, I couldn’t get enough. My parents had no idea what I was watching I’m sure, which is for the best. My church youth group was of the opinion that Halloween is of the devil and activities such as dressing up and saying the words “Trick-or-Treat” are surely just the first step towards eventually demon-possession. Ah memories.

So on this Halloween Night, sure to be filled with ghosts and goblins, friends and frights, alliteration and apparitions, remember these few simple rules. And enjoy.

1. Costume+Party = Necessity. C’mon, just do it, it’s loads of fun.

2. Ghost/Demon summoning = Not recommended, but could be interesting. Please heavily document and notarize as needed.

3. Drink+Dance = anything that can be a dance move will be a dance move. In the age of digital cameras and Facebook, proceed with caution.

4. This is not the night to experiment with others’ prescription drugs… ah hell, a little never hurt (?), and what’s the worst that could happen? (See #2)

The Exorcist trailer - Saw this in a college class and then had to walk home across campus in dense fog. Didn’t sleep a wink that night, nor did most of my friends. Yes, it was a Jesuit college.

Halloween trailer - I saw this screened at a NACA convention in a small classroom with about twenty people. At a critical point in the movie – when you could hear a pin drop - the guy next to me goosed the girl in front of him and she rocketed skyward with a bloodcurdling scream, which made most of us soil ourselves. Then a walk back across a foggy campus where the film distributor hired a Michael Meyers lookalike to drop from a tree. (I’m still washing that pair of shorts.)

The Blair Witch Project trailer - The very last scene makes no sense if you didn’t pay close attention in the beginning. If you did pay attention, it will scare the shit out of you. Kudos to the creators who took a shoestring budget and made one of the best viral movies ever, with special thanks for making that scary ending so subtle. Hope the creators of Paranormal Activity are slipping these guys a few bucks. 

House on Haunted Hill trailer - Where I grew up in NYC there was an afternoon matinee called Million Dollar Movie that aired from around 4:30 until 6:00. Occasionally they would show the same film Monday through Friday. I remember watching this film every day for five straight days and still jumping ten feet in the air every time scene with the “floating woman” came by…god, that still creeps me out! Starring Vincent Price at his smarmiest and featuring the always willing to chew scenery Elisha Cook, Jr. They have remade this movie several times but nothing touches the original.

Session 9 trailer - Contemporary horror movies are mostly gorefests. This was a thinking person’s movie, where the horror was deeper than any axe blade could cut. I thought David Caruso might even have resurrected his film career with this one, but I guess I was wrong. Subtle and pensive but very, very creepy.

The Shining trailer - Ever watched someone go insane right before your eyes? (Married people, step back.) Jack Nicholson channeling palpable dread… tempered only by the fact that I wanted to kill Shelley Duvall myself. Redrum!

Psycho trailer - Alfred Hitchcock’s movie trailers are better than some people’s movies. The screeching score was as much a part of the fright as the visuals. A landmark classic.

Rosemary’s Baby trailer - The scariest films are sometimes the ones with the most plausible characters (apart from the whole Satanic thing, of course). What brilliance to cast condo dwellers as the evil ones? Conspiratorial horror. I never looked at Ruth Gordon the same way again (even in Harold and Maude I wondered if she would snap Bud Cort’s neck and eat him).

Night of the Living Dead trailer - Yep, no big names, cheesey by modern standards, but at the time one of the creepiest movies ever made. You don’t spawn that many sequels and imitators by sucking!

Phantasm trailer - Speaking of cheeseball, some of the sets and (lack of) costumes will make some think it’s a lame movie, but when The Tall Man enters the screen, all bets are off. The last scene of this movie is one of the scariest moments on film. And has there ever been a better horror movie name than Angus Scrimm? Ice cream trucks, ponytails and the sphere.

Mental Floss

Happy Halloween, everyone! If you’re wondering why I’m saying this today, it’s because every day is Halloween. Or should be. Just think about it: the potential for the world to become a neverending buffet of candy corn, dollar-store cobwebs and glow-in-the-dark skeleton earrings.

Of course, this would increase the possibility that more people would show up to work in clown costumes on idle Tuesday mornings. Hmm. Better give this some more thought.

No more talk of clowns, though. Let’s talk about Bill over at Bill’s Movie Emporium. Connoisseur of scare that he is, he dreamed up something called the Splatter Time Fun Fest Awards (love the title, Bill), and that got me inspired. Well, maybe that’s overstating things a bit, since I’m not sure creating a list of great Halloween movies the day before Halloween is inspired. But I’ve been known to make some noise about being a fan of the cliche, so I will press on with my own collection of movies that ruined me for entering darkened houses, babysitting a child sporting a blonde braids-n-bangs combo, or going camping:

1. “Halloween”

A miniscule budget, no-name actors, almost no blood or gore and a killer who never utters so much as one syllable? Only a genius frightmaster like John Carpenter could take all the reasons why a horror movie should not work and transform them into clear-cut advantages. He mines the bleakest parts of our collective consciousness to bring humanity’s biggest fear — that evil is everywhere, and it’s unstoppable — to heart-stopping life. Brilliant. 

2. “Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer”

Henry (Michael Rooker, who’s blank-eyed perfection) has a pretty practical theory about killing. “It’s always the same and it’s always different,” he tells his buddy Otis. And here he reveals the dark, twisted purpose of John McNaughton’s “Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer”: to remind us that pure, inexplicable evil wears a human face, and one we never seem to notice until it’s too late to scream for help.

3. “M”

When horror movie chatter turns to accomplished serial killer films (see above), Fritz Lang’s distressing “M” is nowhere to be found. Pity that, because it’s a grim, dank, chilly and thoroughly unnerving exploration of a killer stalking Berlin’s children. Peter Lorre makes Hans Beckert (who closely resembles German serial murderer/pedophile Peter Kürten) the kind of soulless villain who’d haunt Hannibal Lecter’s dreams.

4. “Nosferatu”

With vampire books and movies and TV shows overwhelming our senses, it’s all too easy to forget about F.W. Murnau’s “Nosferatu,” the film that turned these blood-lapping mythological creatures into pop-culture staples. Without benefit of technicolor, special effects or even sound, Max Schreck’s otherworldly Count Dracula creeps into our dreams and stays there, waiting for the chance to lunge. 

5. “The Evil Dead”

Before the ultra-campy “Army of Darkness,” with Bruce Campbell cloning himself and playing, well, Bruce Campbell, there was “The Evil Dead,” headed for cult classic status with its no-budget effects. But the original rates highly as a horror staple because of its opening credits — the finest and creepiest ever filmed — and the no-holds-barred performance of Campbell, who makes his terror palpable. And don’t forget that tarty tree branch.

6. “Carrie”

“Carrie,” based on Stephen King’s first published novel, is at its heart a pre-”Surviving Ophelia” look at the crushing effects of bullying and how, in the right setting, constant torment can produce murderous rage in the meekest people. Herein lie the chills in “Carrie”: There’s violence aplenty, all of it rained down on fairly deserving and cruel parties, but we’d never see it coming from a girl like Carrie (Sissy Spacek). How profoundly disturbing.

7. “Dawn of the Dead”

Horror movies that scare us are in hefty supply, but the ones that squeeze in pointed commentary about mass consumerism and America’s shopping mall mentality are not. George Romero’s “Dawn of the Dead” is proof positive that scares don’t have to be mindless and blood-soaked; they can spring from the realization that we’ve scaled the roof to escape our problems (or zombies), and now there’s nowhere to go but down. 

8. “The Bad Seed”

Kids — it’s all sweetness and innocence, all fun and games until one of them sets a janitor on fire. At least, that’s the image of youth we get in “The Bad Seed,” with Patty McCormack using her blonde braids and sweet smile to disarm her prey. But she’s hiding a whole mess of devilment behind those patent-leather shoes, and the movie’s hiding an ominous warning: Don’t think you know what lurks in a person’s heart.

9. “The Shining”

That Jack Nicholson, always with the Cheshire Cat-that-gulped-the-canary grin. He plays bad better than most anyone, but he’s at his baddest (and creepiest) in “The Shining,” a ghoulish thriller that blows the “happy families stay together” concept to smithereens. Jack’s googly-eyed overacting works OK here, but what really shivers the timbers is the inspired camera work and a foreboding, oppressive score that pierces your brain. 

10. “The Blair Witch Project”

“The Blair Witch Project” is not a movie that inspires lukewarm reactions. No, this documentary-style thriller, with its queasy footage, unknown actors and largely ad-libbed script, is a love-it-or-hate it kind of movie. Still, there’s no denying this film’s directors accomplish a startling feat: They never show us the villain. And the not knowing what’s threading sticks and piling rocks out there in the dark? That’s the part that’s purely petrifying.

Honorable mentions: “Identity,” “The Omen,” “The Stepfather” (1987 version), “Poltergeist,” “28 Days Later…”

Press release issued by news4media.ie:

Stanley Kubrick’s classic 1980 movie The Shining has been named the scariest horror film ever, topping a list of 100 scary movies by top film website Totalscifionline.com.

Rosemary’s Baby, by controversial director Roman Polanski came in second place, while British cult classic The Wicker Man, famous for Britt Ekland’s naked dancing, was third.

The Shining stars Jack Nicholson and is based on a story by famous horror writer Stephen King. It tells the story of a frustrated writer who tries to murder his family in the isolated hotel where they are snowed in for the winter.

Though it received mixed reviews on its release in 1980 (and picked up nominations at the ‘alternative Oscars’ the Razzies for Worst Director and Worst Actress), its reputation has grown over the years, as subsequent generations in search of Halloween thrills have been terrified by its dark psychological themes and unforgettable imagery.

“Nearly 30 years after its initial release, The Shining remains an unparalled study in isolation, madness and paranoia,” says Matt McAllister, editor of Totalscifionline.com. “The expansive sets, surreal visuals, and an intense performance from Jack Nicholson add up to a film guaranteed to give viewers a sleepless night.”

Classic imagery and dialogue from The Shining which have entered popular culture include the spooky twin girls in the hotel corridor, the word “redrum” (murder backwards), the repeated phrase “All work and no play make Jack a dull boy,” and Jack Nicholson announcing, “Here’s Johnny!” as he smashes through a door with an axe. In recent years, the film’s classic status has seen it lovingly parodied on shows such as The Simpsons and Family Guy.

Totalscifionline.com Scariest Horror Movies – The Top Ten

1) The Shining (1980)
2) Rosemary’s Baby (1968)
3) The Wicker Man (1973)
4) Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
5) Psycho (1960)
6) Alien (1979)
7) Night of the Living Dead (1968)
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974)
9) Halloween (1978)
10) Jaws (1977)

To see the full list of 100 scary movies you must see, visit:

http://totalscifionline.com/features/4160-the-100-greatest-horror-movies

Personally, I think The Ring is the scariest. I was on the edge of my seat watching it the cinema. About a week later, I went to the cinema again to watch it, and was equally as scared.

Also, for some reason, I was shitting during The Blair Witch Project. I had heard so much about the movie and it was getting so much publicity as being so scary…i think i was fooled by the hype. For the duration of the film, I was literally chewing the ends of my fingers off, waiting for something to happen….but of course, nothing did happen. Until the end, that is. Then holy God, I jumped out of skin. That shaky camera routine is great for suspense and building of atmosphere. Rubbish film in an overall sense, but it worked on me. I was nervous for the cast all the way through…

Do you agree with the Top 10 above? What was the scariest movie you’ve ever seen?

Titolo originale: Paranormal Activity

Regia: Oren Peli

Cast:  Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat, Mark Fredrichs, Amber Armstrong, Randy McDowell, Ashley Palmer, Tim Piper.

Distribuzione: Paramount Pictures, USA, 2007

Guarda il trailer

Katie (Katie Featherston) e Micah (Micah Sloat), sono una giovane coppia come tante. Quando alcuni strani ed inquietanti  fenomeni iniziano ad aver luogo nella loro casa, decidono di piazzare delle telecamere nelle varie stanze per cercare di fare chiarezza sulla loro natura. Scopriranno una verità agghiacciante…

Questa pellicola rappresenta un vero caso negli States. Costata solo 17.000 dollari, scritta e girata dal regista Oren Peli a casa sua con attori semisconosciuti, solo durante il primo weekend di programmazione ha incassato ben 40 milioni di dollari, nonostante sia stato programmato in un numero di sale molto limitato e anche in questa settimana ha mantenuto il primo posto nella classifica dei film più visti nei cinema americani.

La ricetta è semplicissima e ricalca in molti aspetti The Blair Witch Project, pellicola di grandissimo successo del 1999. Si prende una storia spaventosa di presenze demoniache e paranormali e la si spaccia come vera, adducendo a prova un filmato originale che mostra tale presunta agghiacciante verità. Il successo è assicurato, grazie anche al passaparola tra i giovani e alla festività di Halloween che ben si sposa con questo genere di pellicole.

In questo mockumentary vediamo una giovane coppia alle prese con alcuni strani fenomeni che si svolgono nella loro casa. Katie sostiene che si tratti di una presenza demoniaca che la perseguita sin da bambina, Micah invece ironizza e propone alla ragazza di filmare ciò che avviene nella casa per cercare di capire di cosa si tratti. Ben presto l’ironia e l’incredulità di Micah si trasformeranno in terrore puro, che si impossesserà anche dello spettatore. Si dice che lo stesso Steven Spielberg abbia interrotto la visione del film a metà perché troppo spaventato e l’abbia terminata solo in un secondo momento, consigliando poi al regista di modificare il finale, consiglio accolto e seguito da Peli.

Senza dubbio il tam tam mediatico relativo a The Blair Witch Project era stato più forte e si era giocato molto sulla fantomatica veridicità della storia e del filmato, mentre in questo caso la non veridicità del filmato e della storia è stata già ampiamente sdoganata. Tuttavia bisogna ammettere che questa pellicola è davvero inquietante e spaventosa, come non se ne vedevano da un po’, anche grazie  al fatto che gli attori siano praticamente sconosciuti e abbiano la faccia dei classici ragazzi della porta accanto.
In Italia purtroppo bisognerà aspettare i primi mesi del 2010 per vederlo.

In definitiva una pellicola assolutamente da non perdere, per provare reali momenti di paura.

Conclusione: Da vedere.

Voto: 8

Don’t go to sleep!

The movie centers on a young couple, Katie and Micah, who are haunted by a supernatural presence in their home. The movie is presented through the camera set up by the couple to capture the paranormal activity.

Now with any mockumentary horror film, right from the get go you know there’s going to be contrasts to The Blair Witch Project, and I can ultimately see why. The atmosphere is creepy, no script with very unknown actors, films the same way, and no soundtrack what so ever. However, I found this even freakier than Blair Witch, which really is one of my favorite horror films of all-time.

The film starts out really all nice and happy, and although there’s little thumps here and there it’s really nothing serious. But then when things start to pick up, it starts getting shit crazyyy!!!

First of all, the real reason why Paranormal works is because the special effects look so real. I have no clue how they did some of these scenes but almost every scene feels and just looks so legit, that it actually feels like your watching a documentary happen, right in front of your eyes.

Secondly, the acting in this film is top-notched probably cause all the film is just ad-libbing but the two stars Micah and Katie are actually a very believable couple, and when they are freaked they look and sound freaked out it’s not this usual scream fest to get a cheap scare. Also believe it or not in this hugely suspenseful scary movie, there is some comedy from Micah and his little one-liners that are more clever than most think.

Lastly, the real reason to see this film would definably have to be is seeing it in the theaters. This is what real cinema is all about. I was packed with my sister in a sold-out crowd in an IMAX theater, and as soon as the lights went out you know it was going down. I was really freaked out but the whole crowd was even more freaked out with me so I didn’t really feel alone. But if you do go and see this film, hurry up and look for it to the closest theater near you cause I can assure you it’s the full crowd experience which is just amazing.

Though I really did like this film it did have it’s problems. I really liked Micah in this film but I though the decisions in this film were so dumb that it really just made me yell “THE HOUSE IS CRAZYYYY GETT OUTTT!!!”. He starts insulting and leading on the demon throughout the whole film and while your sitting there watching your wondering if this guy want’s to die. Also, there are many points in this film where I would just be out of that house right away no matter what.

I think the other thing that Blair Witch really had going for itself that we all kind of thought that the whole film was actually real. When I went into this film I know it wasn’t real so that kind of brought down the realistic factor for me, but ultimately that’s probably not even much of a bad thing.

The whole film basically just leads up all the way to the end of the film, and when the ending happens your flipping out the whole time. I flipped, my sister flipped, every one in that theater must have flipped, cause when the ending is all said and done with you will be so effected by this movie.

Consensus: With a low-budget look and realistic effects, Paranormal Activity is one of those mockumentaries that will make you feel like everything you are seeing is real, and all the scares you get are absolutely worth it.

9/10=Full Priceee!!

This generation’s Blair Witch Project, Paranormal Activity is growing from a cult phenomenon to a mainstream smash. After decimating Jigsaw over the weekend, racking in $22 million, moviegoers can’t seem to get enough of the film, and the insanity behind all this…it’s only playing in limited release. Anyways, those who’ve experienced it might find pleasure in seeing the film’s alternate ending. Those who haven’t seen it, take your eyes away from the screen.