Historically-speaking,
I have not been the biggest fan of the Paranormal Activity franchise.
I
disliked the first film for its lack of subtlety and nuance. Paranormal Activity’s (2007) final reveal
of a demonic close-up was a capitulation to lowest common denominator-style
filmmaking, and an undercutting of the very “found footage” paradigm the film
exploited.
I
warmed a little (just a little…) to the second entry. Some moments in the drama worked moderately
well, whereas some effects -- exposed in too-revealing long shot -- actually played
as funny.
I
was surprised and impressed with the third film in the franchise, however,
which I found, by-and-large, scary. There’s a highly-effective sequence in Paranormal
Activity 3 wherein a man (with video-camera) and a young girl seek
shelter in a bathroom as an angry spirit attempts to break in. The scene
escalates and escalates, and is as impressive as any “big” horror movie moment
produced in the last few years.
So
color me ambivalent about the franchise as whole.
But
recently I had a reader here on the blog help me contextualize the PA movies
in terms of horror movie history. When I
reviewed the found-footage genre for high-points in a recent Ask JKM post,
Trent wrote the following in a comment:
“I still think that you have to recommend 'Paranormal
Activity' as a top tier found footage film. If ‘The Blair Witch Project'
is to the found-footage craze of the 2000's as 'Halloween' was to the
slasher film craze of 1980s, (which I think is fair) then 'Paranormal Activity' is
analogous to 'Friday the 13th.”
I suspect Trent’s point is spot-on regarding the
comparison (if not the quality of Paranormal Activity). Halloween and The Blair Witch Project
are the gold standards of their respective genre formats, and demonstrate a
zenith in terms of artistry and effect. The Friday the 13th
films and The Paranormal Activity movies are much more mainstream and commercially
calculated.
Likewise, these series share in common the fact
that they seem to vacillate wildly in terms of quality from entry to
entry. Furthermore, the next chapter
seems to come out every year, without fail.
To continue the comparison, Paranormal Activity 3 may
be the Friday the 13th (1980), or Friday the 13th Part
II (1981) of the PA saga… a relatively “good” or
strong outing.
But unfortunately, this comparison also means
that the recent Paranormal Activity 4 (2012) is the Jason Takes Manhattan of the
PA
franchise, meaning, simply, that it is pretty dreadful.
In fact, Paranormal Activity 4 is so bad that
it reinforces many of the common misperceptions about the found footage format:
that the acting is bad; that the films are dull and pointless; and that the
movies don’t make a lot of sense from a narrative or thematic standpoint.
When Robbie comes to stay in Alex’s house for a
few weeks (while his mom is ostensibly in the hospital), weird disturbances
occur at night, and Alex begins to suspect that someone or something wants her
dead. With Ben’s help, she sets up
cameras all over the house, and monitors the footage, at least for a time, from
her computer.
The first thing one might notice about Paranormal
Activity 4 is that this is the only franchise entry not to focus on
adults, but teenagers instead. Unlike
the Friday
the 13th films, however, the characters who are supposed to
be teenagers are actually played by
teenagers, rather than by twenty-somethings.
And for all the film’s abundant flaws, the actress who plays Alex,
Kathryn Newton is pretty strong. At the
very least, she’s better than the material she is asked to carry.
But the important point is an underlying one. The
franchise’s shift to teenage concerns suggests recognition on the part of the
producers that the franchise is now aging. Therefore attracting certain demographic
groups has become crucial.
Secondly, this is the first Paranormal Activity film
that is girded with specific tributes or homages to the horror genre, which
again suggests that the franchise’s appeal is narrowing, and that filmmakers
are hoping to target some demographics more directly.
I don’t know how many general audiences will
recognize the re-staging of a famous and scary sequence from Peter Medak’s The
Changeling (1980), or another moment that echoes Tobe Hooper’s Poltergeist (1982), for example. There’s even a moment here that deliberately
recalls Kubrick’s The Shining (1980). I recognized these allusions, but they don’t
add up to anything meaningful in terms of Paranormal Activity 4’s narrative or
themes.
My biggest concern with the film is that it
features almost no scares. Even the jump
scares are mild. And because this film
is longer in duration (nearly 100 minutes) than the other Paranormal Activity films,
the almost total absence of frightening material is noteworthy and troublesome. This film is a long, hard slog -- Paranormal Inactivity -- and with the
possible exception of a visual gimmick regarding Kinect, there are precious few
innovations in format.
In addition, Paranormal Activity 4’s finale
violates a cardinal rule of the found footage sub-genre: we don’t know what kind
of device Alex is recording on during her fateful, night-vision journey into
the neighbor’s dark and sinister house.
She doesn’t seem to be using her laptop, and there’s little indication
she picked up Ben’s video camera.
Instead, the entire final scene plays like a coda tacked on in
post-production, after audience focus groups found the third act uninspiring or
disappointing. One minute, Alexa is in
her own house, being attacked by an invisible demon, and in the next, she’s
crossing the street, using an unknown device, and probing into the dark house
alone. Almost all the supernatural “action”
of the film, at least in terms of effects, occurs in this brief denouement.
Further, Paranormal Activity 4 falls prey to
a problem that has become increasingly common in the found-footage genre. Specifically, cameras record overt,
undeniable, dangerous supernatural activity, but the dramatis personae mysteriously don’t review that important footage. Here, Alex is levitated above her bed one
night. Several days later, she still hasn’t reviewed the footage and
witnessed what occurred.
If she did watch that footage, it would be
evidence for her doubting Thomas parents, of course. And yes, there’s a lame excuse in the movie
that Alex can’t access the footage because she’s forgotten the password that
enables viewing. But if you really
believed a malevolent entity was after you, would you wait days and days before
attempting even a basic password recovery?
Most password encoded programs have a prompt that reads: forgot password? Click here.
Secondly, Ben also has access to the
footage. That footage includes his hot,
would-be girlfriend going to bed every night in her skimpy jammies and shorts. So wouldn’t he at least check in for
lascivious purposes?
Basically, the entire last act of Paranormal
Activity 4 is predicated on the ridiculous notion that Alex is filming
tons of footage (so we in the audience can see it), but not watching a lick of
it (so she can remain in danger). It’s
contrived in the extreme.
Of all the Paranormal Activity movies, I would
count this one as the worst, and also the most disappointing given the
surprising quality of the third film.
There’s not even one good scare moment in this sequel, or one legitimately
great visual composition, or scene set up. It’s all a slow, meandering trip to
nowhere, with a tacked-on ending that exists only to grease the wheels for the
inevitable sequel next year.
Perhaps that no-doubt-upcoming effort will be more Jason
Lives! or The Final Chapter than a A New Beginning. One can hope.





And yet (sad to say) of the four, this film received the most visceral reaction yet from its (mostly teenaged) audience, at least in the theaters I've seen them at. But I question how long that fickle enthusiasm will last. As the box office for the sequels slowly dwindles, the films are skewing younger because their audience is becoming progressively younger, the older crowds who attended the first film or so having become tired of the cheap, unadventurous thrills. Creatively, pandering in a deliberate manner to such a young audience (loud, boisterous, mocking) is a losing proposition in the long term, as they'll inevitably abandon the property for whatever next looks new and shiny (perhaps a partial explanation for TCM3D's huge success, after the flop of the previous entry? Six years allows a whole new generation of teens to grow up). As a dedicated and sometimes forgiving horror fan, PA4 was my first experience with the series in which it was clear that an audience member like me wasn't even in the back of the filmmakers' minds.
ReplyDeleteA New Beginning might be the way to go. Most of the trouble with PA4 can be sourced back to its unwillingness to abandon the established formula and history, resulting in a film that desperately obfuscates its own basic story in order to leave more for next time. But, especially if the composition of your core audience is changing, why not try something new? Perhaps we won't see this happen until the box office for future entries start coming up far shorter than expectations.
P.S. I've made the same connection between the FF and slasher genres that you and the commenter have, but have found their major difference (the ten year gap before the artistry of BWP was commercialized into the F13-like chewing gum that is the PA series) the most intriguing. I believe the reason for this lies almost entirely in the advent of cheap HD camcorders, the absence of which in 1999 made the notion of a mass-appeal FF film a hard sell.
Hi Jeffrey,
DeleteI think your observation about pandering to teenagers is spot-on. The move is blatant, and poorly conceived, because that audience will shift to the next Hunger Games/Twilight/I am Number Four effort anyway, so why re-parse PA in that mode? It's a shame, and counter-productive.
I agree with you that PA4 suffers from a lack of invention. Nothing exciting or fresh happened. It was just PA...with teenagers, and there's not a lot of appeal in that for wider audiences.
Great comment!
best,
John
Interesting. I feel these films got less and less interesting as they went along. They all had their moments, but I still think the first one holds up fairly well. Yeah, the final shot at the end was a bit much, but I gotta admit, I jumped. :) I don't know if you've seen the original ending on the DVD, where Katie walks up to the camera and cuts her throat. That ending seemed a bit more in line with the film.
ReplyDeleteI've only seen the third film once and enjoyed two thirds of the film. The final third just didn't quite click for me.
What's funny is that my wife and I watched the three PA films over the course of three nights in October - and then followed it with "Blair Witch Project". Wow, the gap in quality was obvious. "Blair Witch" still holds up wonderfully well. Still one of my favorite horror flicks from the 1990s.
Hi Roman,
DeleteThe original ending of PA seemed more in line with the rest of the film, and had the advantage of not spoon-feeding the audience "the answer" about the paranormal activity.
I wholeheartedly agree with you about Blair Witch vs. PA. The BWP is a great horror film, and the PA ones are okay time-wasters. Art vs. entertainment, perhaps.
best,
John
There is no bigger compliment than to be named in a review of yours....Thanks.
ReplyDeleteI have been a defender of this franchise and in turn, this genre for quite some time. But PA4 was a sea change for me. This film was bad, real bad. First, in America, people do not just bring totally strange children in to stay with them for a few days. When you think about the possible liability that this causes for any family, short of Hurricane Katrina, this does not happen. And if this does not happen, the movie does happen. This narrative destroyed my suspension of disbelief for me for the rest of the film.
I could not get by that fact that the house looked palatial. The ceilings looked as tall as the ones in Kubrick's Overlook Hotel, meanwhile the house across the street looked totally middle class.
The genre is at a crossroads, I juxtapose it with mid 80's slashers. Over-saturation plus mediocrity = death nell for this genre. I look forward with much anticipation to Eduardo Sanchez's (Blair Witch Project/Lovely Molly) return to the genre with 'Blair Witch 3', but it's still just a sequel. I actually think that the inevitable PA5 will be a hybrid, more of a 'Lovely Molly' style that features both found footage and traditional filming techniques.
Hi Trent,
DeleteI appreciated your comment so much, vis-a-vis the historical context here. I think how you describe it really makes tremendous sense.
I also agree with you about the ridiculous premise here. My wife and I looked at each other and said..."they're just going to take the neighbor's kid? But those neighbors just moved in..." It's nutty.
I also agree with you that the format is at a cross-roads. The slasher format ultimately revived because of the introduction of "Rubber Reality" templates (courtesy of Wes Craven and Freddy Krueger). It was a sea change in the knife-kill films, transforming them into something slightly different. We'll see what forces "mutate" the found footage film, but I agree with you that the REC3/Lovely Molly "partial" found-footage example is out there to be emulated, and could be the wave of the future.
Great comment!
best,
John