-
-
I don't agree with Darklord on Paranormal Activity (I hardly ever do)...but his case was solid...I can see his point of view...and yes...this time I actually read his entire essay...lol.
BTW...I'm also a former film major...and let me tell ya...what a worthless degree...lol.
Good thing I switched to another worthless major...liberal arts...lol...
sigpicComment
-
that's Funny Hector you always have me laughing!I don't agree with Darklord on Paranormal Activity (I hardly ever do)...but his case was solid...I can see his point of view...and yes...this time I actually read his entire essay...lol.
BTW...I'm also a former film major...and let me tell ya...what a worthless degree...lol.
Good thing I switched to another worthless major...liberal arts...lol...
Comment
-
Without going too much into detail, I liked the movie, but didn't find it incredibly scary. It was more creepy.Comment
-
Just saw it and all I can say is............. it was a big let down. I didn't find anything scary or creepy about it. Contrived and boring yes. The acting was uninspired and unnatural. Say what you will about the Blair Witch, but the actress that played Heather knew how to play terrified convincingly. The chick in this film has the same scream and reaction, whether she just saw a spider or whether she just got dragged out of bed by a demon.
mikejLast edited by megozilla13; Nov 2, '09, 11:04 PM.
WANTED: Removable Mask ROBIN on Kresge style cardComment
-
It was not as bad as I thought it was going to be. Mediocre at best (though I saw the 2007 dir's version which someone dled and had a showing of and no that was not me). I was reading the differences between the theatrical and dirs and so far i prefer the dirs version.
Some of the scenes in this (at least this dirs edition), especially if ghost things like this make you feel unnerved, can give you the chills if you let it
Overhyped?? Yes, but terrible, far from it. I have seen much, much worse (like van helsing for example)"What motivated him to throw a puppy at the Hells Angels is currently unclear,"
Starroid Raiders Dagon wrote "No Dime Store Monster left behind"Comment
-
I wasn't "ranting". You see, to some degree this is what I am referring to: There are people who (not only) do NOT have the attention span to read a post that is longer than 3 or 4 lines, but who also cynically feel the need to POINT OUT how they don't have that patience... instead of just silently moving on.
We've become an abrreviated (dumbed-down) culture where people who are thorough, and take the time to explain their opinions or viewpoints are considered "long-winded".
In that same regard, I was saying that Paranornal Activity is a proverbial long-winded post that some people do not have the patience for.
And that's fine. I do not say that as an attack, nor and indictment. I disliked The Blair Witch Project for the exact same reason.
.Last edited by darklord1967; Nov 3, '09, 12:12 PM.I... am an action figure customizerComment
-
Do I think it was one of the most frightening films ever made? For me... yes it was. It was a film that un-nerved me, and creeped me out, and stayed with me long after I left the theater.
Then again, I saw it on opening night (one month ago) in a packed auditorium full of VERY VOCAL and terrified New Yorkers.
And that's the point.
If you had taken the time to read my review of the film (my first post) or even my subsequent posts regarding this film, you will see that I was VERY CLEAR in pointing out that this film really RELIES on audience participation for its subtle scares to really work (Re: screaming, yelling, etc.) I made the "rollercoaster" analogy to illustrate (Re: Screaming with lots of folks is more fun than screaming by yourself).
I expressed the opinion that a film like this (by itself) LOSES MUCH OF ITS EFFECTIVENESS if viewed at home (either on a DVD, or cable TV), because the audience component will be gone... the darkened theater component will be gone.. etc.
In fact, take away ANY ONE of those components, and you have a considerably less effective film (Re: a theatrical viewing, during the day, with a virtually empty auditorium would likely be pretty dull)
.Last edited by darklord1967; Nov 3, '09, 9:51 AM.I... am an action figure customizerComment
-
Incredible. You, mattelmike, by your OWN admission did not even read my post yet you agree with an opposing viewpoint on it?? That's just... wow!!
Equally incredible is the fact that the opposing viewpoint (as expressed by you, draconianguard), attributes opinions / comparisons to my writings that I NEVER EXPRESSED!
LET ME BE CLEAR:
I NEVER compared first-time director Oren Peli (of Paranormal Activity) to John Capenter of Halloween (or even Bill Friedkin of The Exorcist). NEVER.
Please read my writings carefully if you are going to comment on them.
Furthermore, I DID NOT compare the film Paranormal Activity to neither The Exorcist nor to Halloween. Those productions were much more polished and well-crafted. I'd be a fool not to acknowledge that.
It was (and remains) my contention that a modern audience (with its limited attention span) probably would have a difficult time (in general) with long expositions, and long waits for horrific "pay offs". These seem to be the main issues that the detractors of Paranormal Activity have with that film. In a nutshell, they found it long, dull, and (consequently) disappointing.
My mentioning of Friedkin and Carpenter's two horror classics was meant (NOT as a comparison to Paranormal Activity, but) as a commentary on how a MODERN AUDIENCE would likely react to a slower-paced horror film (like even those two classics) if released today.
By the way, I base that statement on the changes that the studio (Warner Bros.) felt that it had to make to The Exorcist when they released it for a modern audience in 2000.
I base my statement on the more "modern" take that Rob Zombie felt he had to give to the basic storyline of Halloween when he did his re-make (re: much more blood-letting, and bludgeoning much earlier).
.Last edited by darklord1967; Nov 3, '09, 12:38 PM.I... am an action figure customizerComment
-
>I saw it on opening night (one month ago) in a packed auditorium full of VERY VOCAL and terrified New Yorkers.
HAW! That WOULD make a dif! (AND be a lot of fun I suspect!) Horror is tricky, 'cos it's a personal thing. Stuff that'd scare one person might not phase another. Especially something like this, which requires a lot of participation from the viewer. I know folks who were terrified of the Blair Witch, (I have a funny story....) but I thought it was really.... blah. (Eeeek. My tent is flapping. Aaaah.)
>the audience component will be gone
Although the isolation might make up for it. It'll be interesting to see if anyone finds it scarier when viewed alone at home.
Don C.Comment
-
Oh, the changes were pretty extensive... enough so that the studio released the film with an additional tag line: The Exorcist: The version you've never seen.
Some of the noteable additions:
1) Instead of the opening shot being set in Iraq (setting up the desert archeological dig that Father Merrin is involved with), there is now an opening (creepy night time) exterior shot of the house in Georgetown that actress Chris McNeil has rented and is living in (along with her 12 year old daughter Regan).
2) There is some additional footage in the opening scenes in Iraq.
3) Early in the film, 12 year old Regan is diagnosed with "hyper-kinetic" disorder. There is an entire medical examination sequence that has been added to the film. She is irritable with her examiners, hums to herself, and acts generally strangely.
4) During the hypnosis scene (right before Regan grabs and squeezes the hypnotist's groin), the girl's features have been altered momentarily with CGI to be more demonic.
5) On the night that Chris' friend, Film Director Burke Dennings is killed right outside her house, she comes home to an empty house, and for a moment the lights flicker. When they come back on, there is a very brief flash of the face of a demon on the wall beside her.
6) When she goes upstairs to check on Regan, she closes the windows of her bedroom, and covers the little girl with blankets. A digital image of the statue of the demon Pazuzu is now digitally added to the bedroom wall as Chris leaves the room. Pretty creepy.
7) Later in that same scene (after a distraught Chris McNeil has been informed that Dennings was killed right outside), Regan "spiderwalks" down the stairs and regurgitates blood from her gaping mouth.
8) After Father Karras first meets a demonically possessed Regan, there is a scene that's been added where he studies an audio recording of the girl (done a couple of years before at a birthday party). He cannot reconcile the sweet child's voice on the tape with the brutal animal-like snarl of the girl he met in person.
There is additional footage and dialogue to Father Merrin's arrival at the house for the exorcism.
There is also additional dialogue between Father Merrin and Father Karras (during their brief rest from the exorcism), where they speculate as to the reasoning why the demon has chosen this girl to torment.
Lieutenant Kinderman also plays a greater role in the film's closing scenes when he meets Father Dyer and strikes up a friendship.I... am an action figure customizerComment
-
I feel quite the opposite.
I get a lot more scared watching a horror movie by myself...especially at night with the lights turned off.
I NEVER get scared...not one bit...when there's tons of people around me...the creepiness is gone completely. That's why I prefer watching horror flicks at home...they are more effective...at least for me.
Take a graveyard for example. Having a bunch of people, drinking beer and stuff, at a graveyard...equals fun. Do that all by yourself...not so much fun.sigpicComment
-
Hmmmm... fair enough.
But in the minds of a horror movie-going audience, there is a very fine line between "fun" and being scared. In fact, the two are quite often interchangeable during a horror film.
Even as you pointed out in your example, Hector, "fun" typically is heightened when it is a communal experience.I... am an action figure customizerComment
Tweet
Comment