Trollhunter (2010)

Trollhunter

Rating: 3 stars out of 5.

Notice: No spoilers beyond basic expository information.

Overview: In a genre often accused of repeating itself, Trollhunter provides an awesome and much-welcome counterpoint. It's more clever than it is frightful, but it's an exciting ride.

Trollhunter is easily one of the most critically-applauded found footage films of recent years. And the praise is relatively well deserved, Trollhunter takes a genre with a strong temptation to remain formulaic, and ventures beyond in both subject matter and style. Hunting giant trolls is a subject perfectly suited to Norway's mythological heritage, and it's rare that a found footage film (particularly one with good production values), succeeds in being funny.

It starts with a group of kids following a mysterious bear poacher, but they soon learn there's more to his story. Over the course of the film, this veteran Trollhunter shows the kids the ropes of his secret trade. He details the natural characteristics of trolls (species variation, intelligence level, diet, habitation), strategies for taking them down, and the governmet conspiracy to keep them under wraps. This gives the film an admirable mythos and sense of reality. But since the film is funny at least as often as it is serious, the attention to mythical detail seems a tad wasted. Even so, in-universe consistency is always appreciated. Even a goofy movie becomes less impressive when they lack a coherent base.

I can't say I love Trollhunter quite as much as many seem to, as comedic and tongue-in-cheek films aren't so much my fancy. Cheesy, trashy, zero-budget films, hell yes, but there's a fine line between that and films which are traditionally funny like Trollhunter. All in all Trollhunter has excellent production values, great creatures and a solid plot. It's an admirable addition to the found footage genre from the great nation of Norway, and one that I'm sure will still be viewed years from now.

Horror Roundup Volume One: October Comes Early

I just can't wait for October to get here so I can start creeping myself out with scary movies. I probably shouldn't be dipping into the horror bin this early, but since I work nights, I'll only have about 8 days in October to watch movies in pitch darkness. So here are the first three movies I watched this horror season.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011)
----

The best way to describe this movie is: old school cool. Don't Be Afraid of the Dark has basically everything I want out of a horror film. Atmospheric and moody, with a creepy setting and sinister paranormal forces that aren't overdone or ridiculous. Plus it boasts Guillermo Del Toro with Katie Holmes, two of my favorite names in film/tv (albeit for... ENTIRELY different reasons.)

It has sort of an unassuming feel to it. It doesn't feel like a big bad blockbuster, and that's part of its charm. After all, it's a remake of a made-for-TV movie. And despite the astounding quality of its execution, it still almost feels like a TV movie. It reminds me of AfterDark's HorrorFest, which I loved dearly. Just a yearly batch of humble horror films not trying to be the next big franchise, just trying to be good and scary. The only difference is, Don't Be Afraid of The Dark is even better than the best HorrorFest movies. EVEN Lake Mungo, which is a spectacular found footage film.


Carrie (2002)
----

This was a very competently executed film, aside from the obnoxiously obvious cuts for commercial breaks. Instead of cutting for breaks in-between scenes, they would cut right in the middle of a scene, forcing us to acknowledge that this was a TV movie. Other than that, I found the characterization was very believable, and the familiar plot was handled well. They did seem to dwell on the "mystery" aspect too much for a plot that even those of us not familiar with the original are destined to be knowledgable of through countless references in TV and film. Carrie is a cultural staple, after all. They kept building it up like "ooh what's going to happen at prom," part of me was hoping they would change the ending so that all the build up is worthwhile.

The most peculiar thing about this film is that it was intended as a pilot for a TV series, staring Carrie. I find that peculiar because, as much as I adored Carrie throughout most of the film, I don't see how anyone can still root for her after the murderous rampage at the school. Mind you, I love revenge fantasies. In a fictional setting where good and evil are unambiguous, it's great to see evil people pay for their misdeeds. That's why I love Super Hero movies. But massacreing an entire school is a sensitive subject. I know real world and fantasy should be kept separate, but the only difference between what Carrie did and what the perputrators of Columbine did, is that the Columbine murderers had to use guns instead of magic powers. She didn't just kill the bad kids who bullied her (not that bullying is a justified reason for murder in the least), she also killed good kids, and innocent bystanders, and faculty who had stood up for her.


Romasanta: Werewolf Hunt
----

Directed by famed [REC] creator, Paco Plaza. This movie has a variety of names. On Netflix it's called simply "Werewolf Hunter." On IMDB it's "Romasanta: Werewolf Hunt." On Amazon it's called "Werewolf Hunter - Legend of Romasanta."

Romasanta is the name of the real life serial killer in England who admitted to his murders but claimed he was not guilty because he was a werewolf and couldn't control himself. Based on the blurb, I thought this would be very much like The Exorcism of Emily Rose: where this man is put on trial and the argument is whether or not he is truly a werewolf. But instead this movie is about a cunning serial killer and his meticulous kills.

Not a complete departure from typical werewolf lore but definitely with some unique nuances. Not the most engrossing of the movies I watched, but definitely something that can appeal to both werewolf fans and fans of psycho killer movies. And I liked the ending that they gave it.

Ghostwatch (1992)

Ghostwatch

Rating: 3 out of 5 stars.

Notice: No significant spoilers.

Overview: An unmitigated triumph of innovation and design, this is one of found footage's most influential films. But the content will seem dry by today's standards.

The phrase "ahead of its time" encapsulates this obscure 1992 TV movie, aired once on Halloween and then banned from ever airing again in its native UK. Although it caused quite a few water cooler conversations in the homeland, it has never been made officially available in the US, and was only recently releasd on DVD in the UK.

It's not strictly "found footage," more of a faux-cinema verite. Ghostwatch is a facetious BBC documentary investigation, pruporting to include live feed from a haunted house on Halloween night. Interviews with the family and exposition from reporters accompany scenes of ghoulish activity, such as objects moving of their own volition and stange loud noises. Reputable BBC personalities cooperated with this clever hoax to give it an extra-dose of realism. Unsurprising considering found footage was a deceit still unknown to the public at large, many were convinced by this production, and the film has even been accused of influencing one child's suicide!

In addition to pioneering the ghostly premise for countless found footage films (as ghosts easily represent the most common antagonist in found footage) and pre-empting the genre's most successful franchise (Paranormal Activity), Ghoswatch can also be linked to any number of faux-documentary films such as Fourth Kind and the TV version of Incident In Lake County. Most intriguing of all, perhaps, is it's obvious parallel to the now-omnipresent trend of faked ghost-hunting TV programs, like 'Ghost Adventures,' 'Paranormal State,' 'Ghost Hunters,' and MTV's 'Fear.'

But aside from its influence, how high quality of a film is it, really? Well, it gets a 10 out of 5 in originality amd craft. but probably only a 2 or a 3 in watchability. It's a very dry program. It's very REALISTICALLY dry, like a documentary genuinely would be. Which makes it an incredibly well-made piece, but not necessarily a fantastic movie. Admittedly, the deadpan seriousness with which the subject is broached can be considered to make this program more unsettling than the over-the-top jumping and screaming you see in modern shows. So those of you with a more refined, old school sensibility may find the program exciting and terrifying. My taste errs closer to where the genre has evolved to, than where it came from. Sure, I can watch someone walk down a dark hallway on shakycam for 40 minutes and adore every freaking second of it. But a BBC documentary from the early 90s? Not my idea of an exciting watch. But it's definitely worth a view for any fan of found footage, ghost stories, or groundbreaking horror films. For those of us without access to a DVD version, it's readily available on Youtube.

Back in Season

The spookiest of months is quickly approaching and I am ready to hunker down with some frightful features. This season I hope to explore some of the exciting new found footage releases, such as:

• V/H/S
• Chronicle
• War of the Worlds: The True Story
• Evidence
• Unaware
• Project X
• The Devil Inside
• Paranormal Activity 4

And make a significant dent in the long list of important found footage films I have seen (often several times) but not finished writing reviews for as of yet, including but not limited to:

• The Blair Witch Project
• Alien Abduction: Incident In Lake County
• Trollhunter
• Paranormal Activity
• Paranormal Activity 2
• Paranormal Activity 3
• Lake Mungo
• [Rec] 2

I may even review some non-found footage horror films (Chernobyl Diaries was just an exception due to Peli's involvement). But only found footage reviews will be listed in the review list on the right panel.

Well, enjoy Fall and don't let the ghoulies get ya! But be sure to bring a camera along.... y'know, just in case they do.

The New Oren Peli, "Chernobyl Diaries"

This is NOT a found footage film, but seeing as it relates to Oren Peli, I'm going to review it regardless.

Mr. Oren Peli has had a highly uneven career thus far. He proved himself to be a brilliant visionary with 2007's Paranormal Activity, a subtle and effective horror movie that nearly reinvented the found footage genre; the first blockbuster in that genre since The Blair Witch Project shocked the world. However.... most, if not all, of what he's done outside of the Paranormal Activity franchise (i.e. doing pretty much everything for the first film, and helping to write the second) has been mediocre at best. The found footage TV series The River (created with fellow Paranormal Activity 2 writer Michael R. Perry) was an unfortunate, resounding failure. His genre follow-up to Paranormal Activity, the mysterious Area 51, has been sent through the developmental hell gauntlet for three years and may or may not ever see the light of day. It remains to be seen if Area 51 is simply so awful the studio thinks even the success of Paranormal Activity can't carry it, or it's another case of a masterpiece cluelessly shelved by fickle executives (or my random third theory, that they don't want it to compete against or detract from Paranormal Activity and are holding it back until the franchise dwindles).

As someone who will forever respect and admire Mr. Peli, I am proud to report that Chernobyl Diaries, which Peli wrote, is a fantastic and well-made horror film. It's not amazing or visionary, it's certainly not without flaws, but it is was an excellent watch and is an impressive, effective film.

I wonder if Russia has any disturbing Chernobyl-themed horror films, because in the US our tragic nuclear past has been well-probed for horror. Chernobyl Diaries could easily pass as a particularly inventive remake of The Hills Have Eyes. Both film revolve around tourists trapped inside a car amidst a desolate locale where they are accosted by radioactive cannibals. But where the films differ vastly is in setting. In Chernobyl Diaries, a barren, empty desert is exchanged for an abandoned industrial city. The starkly contrasting setting gives way to a viciously different atmosphere. I haven't seen the original Hills Have Eyes, but Chernobyl Diaries categorically outclasses the 2006 remake. It's scarier, more interesting, and better-shot.

The setting was truly gorgeous and harrowingly spooky. The filming was lusciously dark and claustrophobic, reminiscent of REC with pitch black corridors, plus the disheartening unease of an abandoned city in the dead of night. The plotline is merely so-so, and fairly predictable. But the cinematography makes up for it. If you're anything like me, you will find the scenery chilling to the bone, with deep, complex underground passageways that just go deeper and deeper and deeper. Naturally I would have preferred a bit of a more subtle approach, but coming from me that goes without saying. If you had given this amazing setting to the low-key experts who made The Wicksboro Incident, and they made an equally subtle found footage film out if it, it would probably be the creepiest thing ever made.

New Trailer: The River

A new found footage TV show?? With involvement from the great OREN PELI? And the venerable Steven Spielberg?? You can damn well bet that Found Footage Aficionado is excited!



According to the reputable Uncle Creepy over at Dread Central, the respective masterminds of Paranormal Activity 1 and 2 (Oren Peli and Micheal Perry), drafted the series together, which indicates it has a high possibility of being extremely fucking awesome.

The premise is a bit close to Cannibal Holocaust for my comfort, but I suspect there will be no unconscionable human atrocities (or cannibals) in this TV show. (Can you imagine a basic US network station showing Cannibal Holocaust? I think the Earth would implode). As entirely unlikely and preposterous as it would be, I'm crossing my fingers that our protagonists will run into Mokele M'bembe on their trip!

Eyes in the Dark (2010)

Eyes in the Dark

Rating: 1 star out of 5.


Notice: This entry contains no spoilers.

Overview: Fun, spooky, and well executed. But definitely not for anyone awaiting a serious masterpiece, it's just a fun film with plastic monsters.

Under the umbrella of paranormal occurrences, there are three main categories. Ghost activity and alien encounters each incur a variety of found footage adaptations. Cryptozoology, by and large, does not (40-some 20 minute incarnations in Lost Tapes aside). And while Eyes in the Dark is far from the perfect found footage cryptid masterpiece I hope to someday find (what Paranormal Activity is to the ghost persuasion), it's refreshing to see a take on this subject.

A group of college kids go out into a remote woodsy area to party, it's the set-up you've seen a million times. But who doesn't love scantily clad young people running for their lives? And you've probably seen it mostly in slasher and monster movies, although it occasionally has a presence in found footage as well (Evil Things springs to mind).

Nothing about the plot is original, but the execution may be. The ole' ancient unearthed moster slash & dash rampage is only occasionally committed to found footage. I love a good monster flick and this one is done somewhat well. The obligatory meandering early segments are fun to watch, and the monster scenes are attacked with gusto by the filmmakers. Some aspects might seem cheesy to most, but it actually freaked me out quite a bit.

Like Strawberry Estates, they attempt to accomplish some scenes they simply can't manage on their budget, instead of opting for modesty like Wicksboro Incident. Don't get me wrong, I adore cheesy effects. In absolute seriousness, I'll take a decent rubber suit over most CGI -- Carnosaur's rubber dinos look more menacing than anything Spielberg has at his disposal. But even I have my limits. When you can't afford even the rubber suit, and you have to settle for a plastic novelty on a stick, that's when it's time to employ the 'less is more' approach to filmmaking. Keeping the monsters off-screen for the whole movie would have turned this goofy movie into a scary one.

It's a genuine shame that so many low-budget filmmakers fail to grasp elementary subtlety. Because you really, truly can make a five star, A+ found footage film without even a Paranormal Activity sized budget. But it takes a careful eye and a devout adherence to nuance. Hopefully as films like Paranormal Activity continue to garner millions of dollars, under the radar filmmakers will take a closer look at how much you can do when you leave the action to our imagination and keep things as simple as possible.

In the end, there's a reason Paranormal Activity and The Blair Witch Project give people nightmares, while Eyes in the Dark and Strawberry Estates flitter in obscurity. There's more to found footage than a shaky camera and meandering improvised dialogue. But I'm not sure Eyes in the Dark was ever intended to be a masterpiece. It succeeds considerably at being what it is: a fun, spooky movie about some kids on the edge of the woods. The found footage aspects lends decent scares to where there otherwise would have been none, and it admirably translates the found footage archetype into the 'just for fun thrasher' subcategory.