A bedroom door slams shut by itself. Bed sheets are seemingly pulled off by an invisible force. Light switches mysteriously flick on and off in an empty spare room.
An unseen and aggressive entity terrorizes a young couple in “Paranormal Activity”. (Photo provided by www.nypost.com)
Under the circumstances, the house would appear to be haunted.
But this particular haunted house is the setting of the latest, cinematic ghost story “Paranormal Activity.”
Boasting a shoe-string $15,000 budget, this art house, terror-filled mockumentary was shot in less than a week, in the director’s own house.
The miniscule budget turns out to be an integral part of the filmgoer’s experience. With a bigger budget, director Oren Peli would not have been able to create the illusion of reality, which is crucial to the overall essence of the film.
In fact, with the exclusion of opening and closing credits, along with the grainy, camcorder quality footage, Peli is clearly aiming for one goal: He wants the audience to think the film they are watching is real.
Every scene in the movie was shot by a handheld camera operated by one of the two main characters, an engaged couple named Micah and Katie, who are presented as prototypical So Cal (Southern California) yuppies. Katie, a student, is way much more sympathetic character than day trader Micah. When the ghostly excrement hits the fan, Micah becomes the stereotypical alpha male, provoking the spirit to “show itself.” This is a terrible move, considering the spiritual expert who visited the couple specifically advises against trying to contact the entity.
But some tough guys never learn. The pacing of the film is formulaic. It doesn’t take long to figure out that daytime is good and nighttime is bad. When the couple is up and about, communicating with each other and drinking coffee, we are meant to feel secure. As soon as their heads hit the pillow, the lights go out, and those video counter numbers show up in the right-hand corner of the screen, we feel anything but secure.
Now, I don’t want to give too much away, but Peli, the director, does a great job inventing a plausible scenario as to why this couple is putting a camera in their room, searching for ghosts. Although, he doesn’t spend a lot of time developing the main characters, the back story he creates, concerning Katie’s paranormal history, is unique and engaging.
He also creates reasons why they just can’t leave the premises and say, “Turn off the camera and pack your bags, honey. We’re going to the Motel 6.”
While watching, I couldn’t help but recall another low-budget, horror phenomenon that came out in 1999. This film also benefited from a monstrous amount of build-up and hype, and like the “Paranormal Activity” audience, young or naïve moviegoers might be fooled into thinking they’re viewing a glorified snuff film. In other words, Paranormal Activity is the bedroom version of “The Blair Witch Project.”
Both films were made on a next-to-nothing budget, by novice directors and starred unknown actors.
Both films lacked glitzy, computer generated imagery (CGI) and relied on old school, physical special effects.
Both films featured documentary style footage, shot by the protagonists, that leaves the viewer saying, “Was that real?”
Both films deal with supernatural adversaries. There are no monsters, no serial, masked murderers and no families of inbred, mutant killers, in fact, both films feature nearly unseen foes.
But the most important similarity is that both films are prime examples of viewer hype equaling unforeseen popularity. Horror fans know the little-movie-that-could story of the “Blair Witch Project”: small, indie movie, paltry $100,000 budget, limited release, great promotions, growing cult following, picked up by major studio (Miramax) for national distribution, $140 million domestic box office gross and millions more in video sales and merchandise.
In many ways, Paranormal Activity has been a superior success story. After extremely successful screenings in Hollywood and a limited release in various college towns, the movie expanded to 20 cities, but was only shown on Friday and Saturday at midnight. The Internet buzz and reviews were extremely favorable and public support grew.
Thanks to an ingenious campaign involving the Web site eventful.com and every single show being sold out in the 20 cities that showed it, the movie moved to nationwide release on Oct. 9. On its opening weekend, the movie made an unbelievable $7.1 million domestically on only 160 screens.
I should warn you about one minor detail: The first few minutes have extremely shaky camera work, which will make you feel like getting up and walking out. Some people, with queasy stomachs, might even feel sick. Don’t leave, because the first few minutes are literally the worst it gets. For the rest of the film the camera work is steadier, so stick with it.
One more piece of advice: If you want to see this movie, don’t wait until the DVD. See this film in the theater. The booming, theater speakers, coupled with the natural soundtrack of screaming teenage girls, make this point non-negotiable.
Still, the overall quality of the film is extremely hard to pinpoint. There is an incredible number of moving parts to factor in while rating “Paranormal Activity.” That’s why I decided to give it three separate scores, based on three categories.
The first category is ambition, for which it gets a 10 out of 10. The marketing campaign, the small budget, and minimalist special effects are indicative of a very creative and ambitious film maker.
The second is entertainment value, for which it gets a 9 out of 10. The atmosphere within the audience was phenomenal. The scared teens, the loud speaker system and the gasps from the moviegoers that thought it was real created a feeling of being in an amusement park-style haunted house. Also, the more crowded the theater is, the better.
The third is the overall movie, which gets a 7 out of 10. Underneath the propaganda machine and the “Is it real?” rumors, lies just an average horror film.
Bottom line, Paranormal Activity isn’t that scary.
Unless you’ve had a ghost in your house.
Contact Shawn Kotzen at
communitarian@mail.dccc.edu
