Film Filter: Off- The Last Exorcism

Film Filter: Off- Having seen several films regarding exorcisms (as they happen to fit into my favorite, self generated genre of theological thrillers) I have to say this film went in a COMPLETELY different direction than I had expected it to.

Pros- It's a little tougher to dissect this film because of the nature of how it was meant to be perceived.  As a documentary style film, the plot was slightly covered up by the necessity to remain true to a live filming. That being said, I have to commend the entire cast on making the film truly feel like a documentary.  Whoever cast the film did a nice job of selecting actors that were lesser known to assist in the genuine feel of the film.

  I found it refreshing that the film took a very different angle on the idea of exorcisms.  Instead of a devout priest, or even an uncertain one, struggling to rid demons from a body for the greater good of the possessed's soul, this minister had a different approach.  Instead, a minister struggling internally with his beliefs and faith seeks to prove that exorcisms are a mental disorder and can simply be cured with a "mind over matter" approach.  The film then goes through the motions of his hoaxes and showmanship during the fake exorcism, the events that ensue, and his beliefs and opinions ultimately being questioned.

   Throughout the process the viewer will find a very tongue-in-cheek sense of humor from the minister, as he is convinced that exorcisms are fake and ultimately mocks them.  It ends up frequently having a bit more comedic and realistic feel than it does a spiritual one, which is refreshing for a film that is rooted in a concept that is very spiritual.

Cons- Coming with the territory of a documentary style filming is the inability to answer some questions.  This was particularly frustrating towards the end of the film.  As the film is attempting to be in real time, with one of the characters of the film portraying the camera person, we can only view what is going on from their perspective.  Once action picks up and characters are running and/or dying, it becomes difficult to decipher the plot in the midst of the chaos.

   I also thought it was a little ignorant of the priest to assume that the possessed girl, Nell, was relieved of the demons just based off of what she was saying.  I thought it was painfully obvious that she was still under possession, mainly because she was referring to herself in the third person perspective.  A-duh? 

Wrap up- This movie can be summed up in one word: unexpected.  It's really quite interesting, but I would really recommend it to those who have seen several exorcism oriented films, as it will probably make more sense.

HOME

Film Filter: Off- The Last House on the Left

Film Filter Off- This film is a Wes Craven remake of a 1972 version, which I have not seen.  I watched the unrated version, and I would only recommend that to people who don't mind a very disturbing and graphic rape scene.  Ick.  In any case, the movie was actually very well done, and kept me guessing a lot of the time.

Pros- One of the things I thoroughly enjoyed about this movie was its ability to forward all of the information to the audience with no gaps, but in a well timed fashion.  The information wasn't thrown in your face all at once, nor did you have to wait too long for any particular piece of information to surface.  The solid pacing helped me get more into the film.  They also did a very nice job of making connections to things brought up and referenced earlier in the film, like Mari's swimming experience and her necklace from her brother.  This allowed some outside information to be revealed about the characters, but in a relevant way.
   Without giving too much of the movie away, I'd like to mention the tense moment in which the antagonists were unknowingly seeking help from the family of the people they had assaulted.  One of the best parts of this scenario, despite its pseudo-irony, is that once the family finds out who the people are, they play it cool instead of freaking out like most horror movies depict the characters doing.  This also creates much more realistic conflict between them and the assailants.
   Again, without revealing too much information, I would like to add that there is a great death involving a garbage disposal, AND a topless death scene as well.  Sweet.

Cons- The rape scene, first and foremost.  I won't say that it ruined the film, because in a purely story-telling fashion, it made it better by harnessing more disgusting, negative emotions toward the murderers, and more hopeful, positive emotions for the protagonists.  Having that emotional spectrum to work with allowed me to become more emotionally involved in the film which, let's be honest, doesn't happen much in horror films.  All that being said, it was not a pleasant scene to watch.
   The only other negative aspect of this film, which had to happen for the plot to further, was the idiot friend suggesting to meet a stranger in a hotel room to smoke pot.  The only reason it was irritating was because just about every character in the film was calm and rational, except for this dumb friend.  Again, necessary for the story-line, but it was one of the few stereotypical moments of the film.

Wrap up- This film was very well done.  I'm intrigued to see the original, but it's nice to see that a re-make of an older film did not crash and burn and is good on its own merit.

HOME

 

Film Filter: Off- The Secret

Film Filter: Off- For starters, this movie isn't really the typical genre I would review.  It came up as a supernatural thriller and as an indie thriller, but be warned that it is neither frightening, nor terribly suspenseful.

Pros- This movie was not at all what I thought it would be like, which is a good thing.  When the story line depicts a man's wife inhabiting the body of his daughter, I immediately thought of the awkward sexual tension that would result.  Don't get me wrong, that happened at times, but in a tactful way and was not the focus of the film.
   I thought that the relationships between the characters in this film appeared genuine and realistic.  The dynamic between the husband and wife was both loving and sincere, which set a good tone for the story and gave the audience pieces of information to use later in the plot.  I also thought the daughter's role of the angst-ridden teenager was perfectly played, and elaborated upon as well.  Even though on the surface she's making poor decisions, the director does a good job of letting us figure out why those choices are made, and that she's actually not who she seems to be in a superficial sense.  The acting ability of the young actress to play an adult woman trapped in a teenage girl's body was very believable, and I thought she did a phenomenal job playing both roles.
   It was also interesting to see the interactions between the three main characters, and to see how all three of them are trapped in some fashion- one physically, one mentally, and one emotionally.

Cons- Other than not being scary, which is not an exclusively negative attribute, this film didn't have many cons.  Due to its unique nature, it was highly unpredictable.  This forced me to constantly be vigilant as to what was going on, so I wouldn't miss a critical moment.  Each experience that Hannah went through as her daughter lent itself to a new lesson to learn about her life, so the plot didn't drag at all.

Wrap up- If you're into indie/supernatural thrillers that aren't edge of your seat scary, this would be a good movie for you.  It was interesting, with good acting on all the leads' parts.

HOME

Film Filter: Off- My Soul to Take

Film Filter: Off-  This film was actually not as awful as one might think.  It sort of reeks of Wes Craven's 1990's cliche horror style in part, but it delves a little bit deeper plot-wise than some of his former films.

Pros- First of all, this story line takes quite a few twists and turns, which I enjoy.  It tends to deliver a vague concept or piece of information initially, but does a good job on following through and answering any and all questions.  I also thought it was pretty unique to have a crazy person as the lead character, but not necessarily as the direct suspect either.  I went through a healthy dilemma with myself before I ever really decided if I wanted to pity him or accuse him of the murders. 
   Another thing that this film does well is the background story on the legend of Ripper Day.  A lot of the prerequisite knowledge happens in the intro, but what we don't get from that portion of the film is eloquently and flamboyantly told in a traditional story-telling manner commemorating the death of the town's former serial killer.  It is appropriate within the context of the film, but also gives us a healthy amount of knowledge.
   Another point of interest is that there is an extremely diverse group of characters as the Riverton Seven, particularly the spiritual girl, Penelope.  I found this trait to be exclusively interesting, because not many horror films of the serial killer variety have a character who is deep rooted in religion.  It didn't end up saving her in the end, but it was still intriguing.

Cons- As a typical 90's slasher film would have it, the deaths and how they occur in this film are both cheesy and abrupt.  There seems to be no finesse or strategic planning in the murders, rather,  they appear to come out of nowhere.  I attribute a lot of this to the fact that they have seven characters they need to kill off to make the story work, but they had to fit in time for plot, dialogue, and story twists as well.  No excuse, but I can empathize.  Although this is only one flaw, it happens to occur pretty frequently as death is a common theme in most horror movies.  The corny and sporadic nature of the deaths in the film don't completely destroy it, but it definitely leaves a lasting impression of the unfavorable variety.

Wrap up- Overall, this movie was way better than I thought it was going to be.  Granted, that's not saying much as I had terrible expectations for it, but it was a pleasant surprise.

HOME

Film Filter: Off- The Rite

Film Filter: Off- When I went to Blockbuster to rent this movie, the clerk told me it was really good, which I suppose was mistake number one: expectations.  I was also thrilled that this movie fit into the little niche of a genre I dubbed as "theological thrillers", so I was even MORE pumped to watch it.

Pros- This movie does have a lot going for it.  A lot of the cinematography is well done, with diverse screen shots and interesting scenery.  I also enjoyed that, not unlike most church related films, there is a fair amount of symbolism.  I wasn't quite sure about the symbolic nature of cats, so upon further research I found out that they symbolized the Underworld, and the supernatural.  It was obviously very fitting, then, that felines roamed the exterior of the house where most of the film took place.  There is also a reference to the crucifixion, when those about to become possessed regurgitate three nails.  Lastly, the movie starts out with some information pertaining to St. Michael and how he drove the evil spirits out of heaven when Lucifer was cast out.  It is no coincidence, then, that our disbelieving protagonist should be named: Michael.  Michael also translates to: one who is like God  in Hebrew.
   Phew!  On to acting...I think the young male lead does a nice job of being a skeptic, almost too good a job.  In the same breath, I had heard through the grapevine that Anthony Hopkins was not terribly fond of his role in the film and although I can see why, he carried it out nicely.

Cons- This movie, in my humble opinion, had a few tragic flaws that made it inconsistent.  All biases aside, I think it's a good film, but I have to be honest that how I feel about those few inconsistencies lost it some points. 
   First of all, when Michael is giving last rites to a dying woman, he performs prayer in Latin with some of THE WORST Latin diction I have heard.  Perhaps it was planned to show his immaturity in the religion, as he was so young, but it irked the crap out of me.
  Regarding plot, I felt that it was a little bit odd that Michael kept challenging everything about possession.  I can understand that the movie was trying to portray him as the devil's advocate, but some of it got to be so illogical that it blew my mind.  First of all, Michael is a man of the cloth.  Despite his wishes to not become a priest, he had to have had some strong convictions in order to have made it as far as he did, so the fact that he can merely dismiss all of it because he changed his mind is a little odd to me.  It's not like he was hearing about the exorcisms second or third hand either, he was witnessing them with his own eyes. I'd think seeing would be believing enough, even for someone NOT of the church, let alone to one who has taken on a calling that requires an innate amount of faith.
   The next bit of beef I have with the plot is that Hopkins' character, Lucas, gets possessed.  I found it a bit odd that a priest would become possessed...especially since so many films reference demons and spirits being attracted to those either weak in physical or spiritual nature.  I had been counterattacked with the argument that it was God's plan to allow the possession to happen, so that Michael could understand his true calling.  Although a plausible concept, I strongly doubt that God would go through such great lengths, and dangerous ones at that, to allow someone to understand their calling.  I mean, if Michael is going to sit in the corner and make up excuses for everything he sees rather than believing it, I'm not sure anything is going to persuade him otherwise.

Wrap up- This movie is interesting, for sure.  I was a little bummed because I was expecting more action in the actual exorcisms, and not so much dialogue and faith-building.  As long as you're prepared to not be spooked (because it's not scary) or riveted on the edge of your seat (because there's no action) you should enjoy it.

HOME

Film Filter: Off-The Haunting in Connecticut

Film Filter: Off- This movie is a tough one to fit into any kind of niche.  It's not bad, but it's not great, although there are parts about it that I really liked.  Hmmm...

Pros- I always have to give props to any movie that is based/inspired by true events.  I also enjoyed the fact that they attempted to make the family as realistic as possible.  Alcoholic father, stressed out mother, older son dying from cancer...they didn't attempt to make a picture perfect family OR a deranged one.  Just a seemingly normal family.  I also thought the film did a good job portraying the hardships and stresses involving having a child living with cancer.  They showed the family uprooting themselves, the sickness of the son, and the trials and tribulations the family goes through both financially and emotionally.  They managed to insert some history about iron, in that it would contain spirits, and correlated it to the use of iron bars in prison cells. 


Cons- It's a ghost story, in many ways, and they really didn't take advantage of any scary pop-up moments.  That, combined with the sob story of the son with cancer and the dad battling alcoholism, made it start to feel more like a depressing Lifetime movie than it actually did a horror flick.  It's an odd situation, because I can't pinpoint a whole lot that was overtly bad about the film...but it left an odd taste when all was said and done.  It was just a very "safe" film and didn't cross any thresholds or push the envelope in any way.


Wrap up-  This movie is not bad, just kind of depressing and at times, boring.

HOME

Film Filter: Off- The Crazies

Film Filter: Off- So this film was not as bad as I had thought it would be.  It was a unique concept that was executed (no pun intended!) pretty well.  On a side note, I am REALLY starting to like Timothy Olyphant...

Pros- The film was well cast, which always helps.  One of the tricks I use to determine the suckiness of a movie, particularly of the horror variety, is to see if I can identify any one of the cast members in a film I have previously seen.  If the answer is no, it's usually going to be a flop, although there are sometimes exceptions.  I also found it interesting that, instead of having a large core of characters that die off, they start with a small group that winds up finding more survivors as they traverse.  Yes, eventually some of them die off, but it diversifies the amount and type of characters that interact in the film.  I also enjoyed that Olyphant's character is adamant about going back to save his wife, while others are content with self-preservation.  He makes a comment similar to, "Don't ask me why I am going back for my wife and I won't ask you why you aren't going back for yours"  Deep, man.  Really deep.  But seriously, I liked the strong willed, fearless character that he portrays, and he does a great job with it.  Lastly, I find it refreshing that when the Crazies die...they really die.  There's nothing worse than an antagonist that is unkillable (Jeepers Creepers, anyone?).  It gets old pretty fast.

Cons- The plot dragged occasionally, and there were some questions that were left dangling for quite some time before being answered.  That's not a bad thing, really, but I am nosy and want to know everything that's going on.  I also thought that the cinematography was rather dark.  I know that most horror films lean toward this trend, but since most of this film takes place at night, it gets to be overbearing and some scenes are difficult to see for that reason.  I also thought that Olyphant was a borderline SuperCop in that he was able to discern things in a very short period of time that I don't think most people would figure out.  If they spent more time figuring out why things were happening toward the beginning, and less time running around trying to avoid death, the plot would have been a little more fluid.

Wrap up-  This movie was pretty good, and definitely unique.  The plot drags aren't extremely noticeable, and the cast does a good job of keeping the story interesting for the most part.

HOME