Viewing enjoyment affected by very un- "Paranormal Activity"

by Eric Melin on October 12, 2009

in Print Reviews

George saw the movie during Fantastic Fest last month. Read his take here. Mine follows below:

Rarely do movie critics talk about the actual experience of seeing a film in the theater in their actual review. It happens sometimes, but it’s usually presented as an aside (the film broke, the crowd responded this way, the sound was bad, etc.) and not something that’s necessarily essential to the enjoyment of the film.

For this review, there is simply no way around it.

paranormal activity audienceFirst off, the ultra-low-budget suspense flick “Paranormal Activity” has based its entire ad campaign around audience reaction. The trailers and ads show movie theater crowds jumping in their seats and screaming in horror while viewing the picture.

Secondly, Paramount has been rolling it out at midnight shows only in select cities (until this weekend’s wider release), so the viewing hour limits the movie to its intended demographic—college kids up for a late-night scare. It also means that with only one showing a night the shows sell out quicker.

This means the movie’s been playing to packed crowds who are already predisposed to buy into its premise of a young couple haunted by a demon who tape the bizarre happenings in their home on a video camera, especially if they watch any number of the night-vision “reality” shows based on supernatural phenomena on A&E or MTV.

One thing must be mentioned: Since 1999’s similarly themed “The Blair Witch Project,” audiences are smarter about the way their images and movies are presented, so filmgoers going in believing that this is documentary footage left behind by real people are probably few and far between.

paranormal activity 2009All of the above-mentioned points factor into how this movie played for me. To put it simply, it didn’t.

Is that the fault of stars Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat? Not really. The acting is quite naturalistic, considering some of the contrived things they have to do and say to hit the beats of the screenplay while convincing us that the footage is real.

Is it the fault of writer/director Oren Peli? Partially. His adherence to the premise that all video was shot by Micah and Katie is part of the movie’s fly-on-the-wall appeal, but it’s also its biggest stumbling block when it comes to plot. It’s hard to believe the couple wouldn’t leave their home or seek help outside of a psychic who leaves them high and dry, bolting from the front door because of angry demon vibes.

Mostly, it’s the fault of a friend of mine who sat two people down from me.

To put it mildly, the movie is a slow build. In fact, like “Blair Witch,” there’s barely any onscreen “action” at all. The whole less-is-more approach wasn’t working for my friend, who made it known about 20 minutes into the movie that something “better happen soon.” As the movie wore on, it wasn’t simply whispers to his girlfriend or the guy next to him anymore, it was loud exhortations directed at the screen or to everyone else in the theater.

katie featherston paranormal activity 2009When I hate a movie, I’ll admit that my body language can give it away sometimes. I’ll even admit to a groan or loud sigh every now and then. For the most part, though, I try to keep that stuff in check.

When my friend started reaching across the guy between us to tap me on the leg and talk to me, I knew I was sunk. I waved him off and gave him dirty looks, trying to show my displeasure silently (while still concentrating on the film), but he continued to show his disgust with the movie out loud. (And with a great big “rock fist down.”)

Here’s the funny part: For some of the film, I was right there with him. I agree with him that it was hard to get into and slow to get going. There is a certain amount of suspension of disbelief, however, that you must accept in order for the movie to work for you. My friend was “out” of the film early and stayed out. (Another friend was literally out—he left 30 minutes into the movie and decided to have a drink at a nearby bar until the movie was over!)

So the bottom line is—did “Paranormal Activity” work for me? No. That night, it didn’t.

paranormal activity 2009 I tried to concentrate on the movie, but my environment conspired to get the best of me. (Admittedly, I even dozed off for a second or two towards the middle of the movie and was jarred awake by my friend in kind of a “ha ha—gotcha!” moment for him.)

But this brings up an interesting question: If the suspension of disbelief is such a hurdle, how does the movie play in huge, sold-out theaters, where one would expect that more people means more hecklers? I would think there would be a lot of haters, but maybe the rest of the crowd would intimidate them into shutting up.

The theater I saw it in held about 100 people, fairly spread out, and there were waiters bringing food and drink orders and checks. Their mere appearance tended to draw me out of the movie a little more too.

Or—am I simply making excuses for a movie that I never really believed? There was an impressive level of skill on display in shaping the threadbare story around the reality-style limitations it required. But I only noticed these things occasionally and on a formal level, rather than actually getting into the movie on an emotional level.

Will the movie play on TV better because the cheapo camerawork suits the medium better or will it be impossible to stay involved in with interruptions galore at home?

I can only tell you about my experience and it was mixed at best. I guess this is one of those times where I’m glad I have a rating that doesn’t commit too firmly in either direction. Instead, it’s complete neutrality. I’m happy to give “Paranormal Activity” the Swiss fist and I’m happy to ask you about your experience seeing the movie.

Comment away …

Eric is the Editor-in-Chief of Scene-Stealers.com and writes the Screen Stealers column for The Pitch. He’s President of the KCFCC, and drummer for The Dead Girls and Ultimate Fakebook. He is also Air Guitar World Champion Mean Melin. Eric goes to 11. Follow him at:

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Google+ YouTube 

{ 48 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Josh October 12, 2009 at 8:24 am

I’m not sure if that review makes me want to see it more or less now. I feel obligated to see it now that i rallied to get it in KC, resulting in those fucking annoying e-mails from “Eventful”. Sounds like a rental to me, where i can sit in my apartment with all the lights off. Where i can get in the mood, away from any crowd influences.

Reply

2 Josh October 12, 2009 at 8:24 am

I’m not sure if that review makes me want to see it more or less now. I feel obligated to see it now that i rallied to get it in KC, resulting in those fucking annoying e-mails from “Eventful”. Sounds like a rental to me, where i can sit in my apartment with all the lights off. Where i can get in the mood, away from any crowd influences.

Reply

3 Eric Melin October 12, 2009 at 9:17 am

Ha ha ha! Yep, Eventful’s had a pretty big subscription rate in the past couple of weeks, I imagine. Yeah, it’s tough, man. I’m interested to hear what other people thought vs. what their viewing experience was because the more I think about mine, the more I think I’m just making excuses for the movie.

Reply

4 Eric Melin October 12, 2009 at 9:17 am

Ha ha ha! Yep, Eventful’s had a pretty big subscription rate in the past couple of weeks, I imagine. Yeah, it’s tough, man. I’m interested to hear what other people thought vs. what their viewing experience was because the more I think about mine, the more I think I’m just making excuses for the movie.

Reply

5 Elliot October 12, 2009 at 11:07 am

Ugh… those theaters. As glamorous as they are, they really do take you out of the movie. To be honest sir, I applaud your honesty here. Most others would have ignored (or at the very least) downplayed the impact of the setting/outside influences. Kudos. As for the amount of hecklers, it’s hard so say if you got the rule, or the exception. I’m guessing the screening you went to was a critics screening where people could also win passes to go. In that event, I’m guessing you got more heckling than the average audience would. I feel as though people making the active choice to see a film (and spending their own money to do so) would minimize that kind of reactive behavior. But that’s just my take.

Reply

6 Elliot October 12, 2009 at 11:07 am

Ugh… those theaters. As glamorous as they are, they really do take you out of the movie. To be honest sir, I applaud your honesty here. Most others would have ignored (or at the very least) downplayed the impact of the setting/outside influences. Kudos. As for the amount of hecklers, it’s hard so say if you got the rule, or the exception. I’m guessing the screening you went to was a critics screening where people could also win passes to go. In that event, I’m guessing you got more heckling than the average audience would. I feel as though people making the active choice to see a film (and spending their own money to do so) would minimize that kind of reactive behavior. But that’s just my take.

Reply

7 Eric Melin October 12, 2009 at 11:17 am

Nope, it was not a critic’s screening. 7pm opening night in KC – sold out crowd of around a hundred or so, but everybody spread out with big rows between us.
And- This annoying behavior sometimes happens at critic’s screenings too. That, to me, is unforgivable.

Reply

8 Eric Melin October 12, 2009 at 11:17 am

Nope, it was not a critic’s screening. 7pm opening night in KC – sold out crowd of around a hundred or so, but everybody spread out with big rows between us.
And- This annoying behavior sometimes happens at critic’s screenings too. That, to me, is unforgivable.

Reply

9 John Coovert October 13, 2009 at 11:12 am

I was rather disappointed by the film when I saw it with a near capacity audience in a non fork and screen theater. Although overall for me the movie did it’s job. When I got home I started creeping myself out and hearing things. I must confess that I had several heavy get on with it already sighs during the film. It also suffers from some of the genre type stuff of, why don’t you just close the door? Why don’t you just leave the house? etc…

Reply

10 John Coovert October 13, 2009 at 11:12 am

I was rather disappointed by the film when I saw it with a near capacity audience in a non fork and screen theater. Although overall for me the movie did it’s job. When I got home I started creeping myself out and hearing things. I must confess that I had several heavy get on with it already sighs during the film. It also suffers from some of the genre type stuff of, why don’t you just close the door? Why don’t you just leave the house? etc…

Reply

11 david October 14, 2009 at 10:18 am

Those were not friends of yours.

Reply

12 david October 14, 2009 at 10:18 am

Those were not friends of yours.

Reply

13 Bdole October 15, 2009 at 7:23 pm

Sorry the that guy messed it up for you, Eric. I actually needed the occasional heckler (we had some loud laughers) to keep me in the theatre because I was so freaking scared! Great, great horror movie.

Reply

14 Bdole October 15, 2009 at 7:23 pm

Sorry the that guy messed it up for you, Eric. I actually needed the occasional heckler (we had some loud laughers) to keep me in the theatre because I was so freaking scared! Great, great horror movie.

Reply

15 Jay October 16, 2009 at 2:16 pm

Although I doubt that a full theatre would have improved my own rating (2 1/2 out of 4 stars) of this film, I must admit that, considering the hype, and headlines like “‘Paranormal Activity Fills Midnight Seats’”, the midnight showing I attended last night had a mere dozen or so audience members. Yes, the theatre is a major chain multiplex and is, usually, quite crowded – even for films that have had long runs, so it was quite surprising that the theatre’s first showing of the film was for a nearly empty house.

With that said, the few people sitting in the theatre were among the most annoying I have ever encountered. Constantly talking to each other and to the characters on the screen, they seemed not so much terrified as simply frustrated at the choices made by the characters and/or the director.

As for me, I thought “The Blair Witch Project” was a comedy and “Cloverfield” was an experiment in tedium; this film is somewhat better than these two combined, but that still amounts to very little. “Paranormal Activity” delivers a few decent chills, but these shots are already included in the sloppy trailer; the near-final “scare” was diluted because I was anticipating it every time the camera was focused on the bedroom, which was 85% of the film.

I would like to know, however, why there seems to be no one else living in the same tract as the couple in the story. Also, this “incident” takes place in 2006, so why do they never consider regression hypnotherapy (or any other kind of therapy, for that matter)? And, when they begin to believe that a demon could be involved, why not consult a religious leader? Forget the demonologist recommended by the psychic – he sounds like a reject from “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”.

Finally, granted that these types of incidents in real life are seldom explained (hence, the term “unexplained phenomena”), this is a MOVIE – not real life (despite the ineffective attempts by Paramount and the marketing machine to make it seem so) – so please give us some small tidbit of explanation as to why a demon would follow this woman from her childhood to adult life; why it would wait so long to finally possess her (was her life up until now free of all negative energy?); why it would wait so long to get rid of her boyfriend when it has plenty of opportunity once inside its host; why it seems to choose young women for possession; why, after all his research, the only thing Micah can come up with is white powder on the floor; why they don’t see a doctor when her “injury” could be infected or should, at least, be treated; why Katie would disappear, while the other victim (Diane), simply died.

For a great classic haunted house film with still-effective shocks and chills (even after multiple viewings) and creepy atmosphere to spare, I would recommend “The Haunting” (1963 version – NOT the remake). Watch it in a dark room!

Reply

16 Jay October 16, 2009 at 2:16 pm

Although I doubt that a full theatre would have improved my own rating (2 1/2 out of 4 stars) of this film, I must admit that, considering the hype, and headlines like “‘Paranormal Activity Fills Midnight Seats’”, the midnight showing I attended last night had a mere dozen or so audience members. Yes, the theatre is a major chain multiplex and is, usually, quite crowded – even for films that have had long runs, so it was quite surprising that the theatre’s first showing of the film was for a nearly empty house.

With that said, the few people sitting in the theatre were among the most annoying I have ever encountered. Constantly talking to each other and to the characters on the screen, they seemed not so much terrified as simply frustrated at the choices made by the characters and/or the director.

As for me, I thought “The Blair Witch Project” was a comedy and “Cloverfield” was an experiment in tedium; this film is somewhat better than these two combined, but that still amounts to very little. “Paranormal Activity” delivers a few decent chills, but these shots are already included in the sloppy trailer; the near-final “scare” was diluted because I was anticipating it every time the camera was focused on the bedroom, which was 85% of the film.

I would like to know, however, why there seems to be no one else living in the same tract as the couple in the story. Also, this “incident” takes place in 2006, so why do they never consider regression hypnotherapy (or any other kind of therapy, for that matter)? And, when they begin to believe that a demon could be involved, why not consult a religious leader? Forget the demonologist recommended by the psychic – he sounds like a reject from “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”.

Finally, granted that these types of incidents in real life are seldom explained (hence, the term “unexplained phenomena”), this is a MOVIE – not real life (despite the ineffective attempts by Paramount and the marketing machine to make it seem so) – so please give us some small tidbit of explanation as to why a demon would follow this woman from her childhood to adult life; why it would wait so long to finally possess her (was her life up until now free of all negative energy?); why it would wait so long to get rid of her boyfriend when it has plenty of opportunity once inside its host; why it seems to choose young women for possession; why, after all his research, the only thing Micah can come up with is white powder on the floor; why they don’t see a doctor when her “injury” could be infected or should, at least, be treated; why Katie would disappear, while the other victim (Diane), simply died.

For a great classic haunted house film with still-effective shocks and chills (even after multiple viewings) and creepy atmosphere to spare, I would recommend “The Haunting” (1963 version – NOT the remake). Watch it in a dark room!

Reply

17 Eric Melin October 16, 2009 at 3:15 pm

Great points, Jay. I think some background on the story of Katie and the demon would have made the film 10 times richer. It was lacking in some of the simplest screenplay elements.

And-what is it with people that they have to talk out loud at this movie? I know it’s a horror film filled with characters who make bad choices, but you’re not in your living room, you’re in a theater!

Reply

18 Eric Melin October 16, 2009 at 3:15 pm

Great points, Jay. I think some background on the story of Katie and the demon would have made the film 10 times richer. It was lacking in some of the simplest screenplay elements.

And-what is it with people that they have to talk out loud at this movie? I know it’s a horror film filled with characters who make bad choices, but you’re not in your living room, you’re in a theater!

Reply

19 Rob Layton October 16, 2009 at 10:39 pm

Why would you end a review with “comment away?” It discredits you. And you’re not really being fair to the film when you factor in all these elements that the filmmakers have no control over in your review. You can’t choose to watch a horror movie in a theater with waiters walking around in the middle of it. You reviewed the environment and your friend more than you did the film.

You made a great point about having to suspend your belief, though. No matter how much they tried to justify wanting to keep the camera on, there are always moments you find questionable. It was this point, alone, that make me gravitate to your review over all the others on Rotten Tomatoes.

Reply

20 Rob Layton October 16, 2009 at 10:39 pm

Why would you end a review with “comment away?” It discredits you. And you’re not really being fair to the film when you factor in all these elements that the filmmakers have no control over in your review. You can’t choose to watch a horror movie in a theater with waiters walking around in the middle of it. You reviewed the environment and your friend more than you did the film.

You made a great point about having to suspend your belief, though. No matter how much they tried to justify wanting to keep the camera on, there are always moments you find questionable. It was this point, alone, that make me gravitate to your review over all the others on Rotten Tomatoes.

Reply

21 Eric Melin October 17, 2009 at 12:40 am

Rob-
Glad the “suspension of disbelief” comment drew you to this review. Ironically, that notion is at the very heart of why my viewing experience was such a big part of the review. If it weren’t for this giant hurdle, perhaps the movie would have worked for me. Instead, the movie’s biggest problem was exacerbated by the environment.
Above all on this website, I value intelligent, thoughtful discussion of movies, so “comment away” is a perfect way to end a review that I felt was so tainted as a result of my viewing experience. I’d like to hear if other filmgoers (who are equally curious about this idea) came away with a different feeling and under what conditions they viewed the film. It’s not the normal way I review films, but it was the only way to honestly review this one. I appreciate your comments!

Reply

22 Eric Melin October 17, 2009 at 12:40 am

Rob-
Glad the “suspension of disbelief” comment drew you to this review. Ironically, that notion is at the very heart of why my viewing experience was such a big part of the review. If it weren’t for this giant hurdle, perhaps the movie would have worked for me. Instead, the movie’s biggest problem was exacerbated by the environment.
Above all on this website, I value intelligent, thoughtful discussion of movies, so “comment away” is a perfect way to end a review that I felt was so tainted as a result of my viewing experience. I’d like to hear if other filmgoers (who are equally curious about this idea) came away with a different feeling and under what conditions they viewed the film. It’s not the normal way I review films, but it was the only way to honestly review this one. I appreciate your comments!

Reply

23 J. Tsai October 17, 2009 at 2:42 am

Saw the film tonight, and largely agree with your review, Eric — the most unrealistic parts of the movie were not the demonic and haunting allusions, but rather the inability of the couple to seek different avenues of assistance or escape. As with all the “point-of-view” camera movies, the audience must be willing to accept a degree of implausibility with regard to the need for the protagonists to film EVERYTHING, but this film still failed to explain it satisfactorily.

I also concur with your points on the backstory for Katie and the haunt; the viewers are teased with many details early on regarding her past and a similar event that occurred. At first, these seemingly disconnected details hint at a complex, rich history that will be explained. Unfortunately, well before the climax of the movie, it becomes obvious to the viewer that they are simply disjointed elements thrown in for the “creepy” mood and do not factor into any kind of reasonable closure — it was at this point that I truly disengaged as a viewer.

The lack of effective foreshadowing was probably this film’s greatest shortcoming for me. Once the pace gets going, every “action sequence” in the film suffers from the curse of an immediate payoff. Each time a new wrinkle is introduced, such as all of Micah’s defenses and monitoring practices in the house, it is immediately exercised by the film. As an example: the appearance of the ultimate spooky cliche, the Ouija board, isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, but the fact that it becomes the immediate focus of haunted activity right when it is brought in and is then essentially discarded for the remainder of the film hurt the overall pacing of the movie, which is loaded with other similar events.

Reply

24 J. Tsai October 17, 2009 at 2:42 am

Saw the film tonight, and largely agree with your review, Eric — the most unrealistic parts of the movie were not the demonic and haunting allusions, but rather the inability of the couple to seek different avenues of assistance or escape. As with all the “point-of-view” camera movies, the audience must be willing to accept a degree of implausibility with regard to the need for the protagonists to film EVERYTHING, but this film still failed to explain it satisfactorily.

I also concur with your points on the backstory for Katie and the haunt; the viewers are teased with many details early on regarding her past and a similar event that occurred. At first, these seemingly disconnected details hint at a complex, rich history that will be explained. Unfortunately, well before the climax of the movie, it becomes obvious to the viewer that they are simply disjointed elements thrown in for the “creepy” mood and do not factor into any kind of reasonable closure — it was at this point that I truly disengaged as a viewer.

The lack of effective foreshadowing was probably this film’s greatest shortcoming for me. Once the pace gets going, every “action sequence” in the film suffers from the curse of an immediate payoff. Each time a new wrinkle is introduced, such as all of Micah’s defenses and monitoring practices in the house, it is immediately exercised by the film. As an example: the appearance of the ultimate spooky cliche, the Ouija board, isn’t a bad thing in and of itself, but the fact that it becomes the immediate focus of haunted activity right when it is brought in and is then essentially discarded for the remainder of the film hurt the overall pacing of the movie, which is loaded with other similar events.

Reply

25 dan October 17, 2009 at 3:25 pm

talk, sleep, BOOM, AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Repeat.

I was disappointed with the movie when I saw it but the more I think about it the more I hate it. I too had a friend that was obviously dissatisfied but I think that made me want to like it more. Anyway its gone downhill from there, I can’t stop thinking about how it never really did anything but mildly flirt with my interest. I kept feeling like it was going to be a very different, exciting, scary horror movie and it really just didn’t add up to that in my mind. I did hate the ending, which I found out Spielberg did and i would like to see the original to see if it would satisfy my hopes more. Do we know anything about it?

Reply

26 dan October 17, 2009 at 3:25 pm

talk, sleep, BOOM, AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Repeat.

I was disappointed with the movie when I saw it but the more I think about it the more I hate it. I too had a friend that was obviously dissatisfied but I think that made me want to like it more. Anyway its gone downhill from there, I can’t stop thinking about how it never really did anything but mildly flirt with my interest. I kept feeling like it was going to be a very different, exciting, scary horror movie and it really just didn’t add up to that in my mind. I did hate the ending, which I found out Spielberg did and i would like to see the original to see if it would satisfy my hopes more. Do we know anything about it?

Reply

27 Shawna October 18, 2009 at 9:01 am

That Movie Was Awesome… Scared As Hell 2 Go See It Again. . Me & All My FriendZ Loved It

Reply

28 Shawna October 18, 2009 at 9:01 am

That Movie Was Awesome… Scared As Hell 2 Go See It Again. . Me & All My FriendZ Loved It

Reply

29 Eric Melin October 18, 2009 at 11:34 am

Dan and J-
More great points. Hard to say whether a different ending would have changed my perception of a movie that had such story hiccups, but I DID find an account of at least two other endings; one with a shocking suicide and the other involving police. We’ll probably see them all on the DVD. Here’s the link: http://daveguzman.blogspot.com/2009/08/endings-of-paranormal-activity.html

Reply

30 Eric Melin October 18, 2009 at 11:34 am

Dan and J-
More great points. Hard to say whether a different ending would have changed my perception of a movie that had such story hiccups, but I DID find an account of at least two other endings; one with a shocking suicide and the other involving police. We’ll probably see them all on the DVD. Here’s the link: http://daveguzman.blogspot.com/2009/08/endings-of-paranormal-activity.html

Reply

31 Patrick Roufa October 18, 2009 at 12:39 pm

I had the opposite experience with the audience. While the theater was full of high school and college students in large groups (which usually means a ton of disruptive talking and yelling), i found that every one was actually sitting in silent anticipation, feeding off of each other’s anxiety. What i loved was simply the “realism” of it all, in the sense that this is a visual representation of people’s “true” haunting experiences without the tacky hollywood sensationalizing (aside from the end that is, which rumor has it was tacked on by Speilberg actually, which makes sense given that it doesn’t fit the rest of the film). But yeah, i loved it, its a nice change of pace from everyone trying to remake foreign horror and failing miserably, at least for me.

Reply

32 Patrick Roufa October 18, 2009 at 12:39 pm

I had the opposite experience with the audience. While the theater was full of high school and college students in large groups (which usually means a ton of disruptive talking and yelling), i found that every one was actually sitting in silent anticipation, feeding off of each other’s anxiety. What i loved was simply the “realism” of it all, in the sense that this is a visual representation of people’s “true” haunting experiences without the tacky hollywood sensationalizing (aside from the end that is, which rumor has it was tacked on by Speilberg actually, which makes sense given that it doesn’t fit the rest of the film). But yeah, i loved it, its a nice change of pace from everyone trying to remake foreign horror and failing miserably, at least for me.

Reply

33 Amanda October 18, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Well, i personally found it scary because my grandmother does witch craft, and not that white magic bs either. I have friends who didn’t like it but i think if you don’t believe in demons then what would u have to fear.

Reply

34 Amanda October 18, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Well, i personally found it scary because my grandmother does witch craft, and not that white magic bs either. I have friends who didn’t like it but i think if you don’t believe in demons then what would u have to fear.

Reply

35 melissa October 23, 2009 at 12:10 am

My boyfriend and I went to see it and he’s not a believer of the paranormal but I am and he was actually a little scared. We didn’t know too much about what the movie was about going into it so it did seem to go a little slow, but it was definitely worth the wait. I will definitely have a hard time sleeping tonight!

Reply

36 melissa October 23, 2009 at 12:10 am

My boyfriend and I went to see it and he’s not a believer of the paranormal but I am and he was actually a little scared. We didn’t know too much about what the movie was about going into it so it did seem to go a little slow, but it was definitely worth the wait. I will definitely have a hard time sleeping tonight!

Reply

37 Justin October 24, 2009 at 4:54 am

I just watched it and I think that it is an interesting movie on many accounts and various ways. We have a realistic movie, which is scary and eerie. And they have events and scary shit happen that are “real” as the camera is always on. I find this so interesting if it is truly a true story or not? It does seem a tad sensationalized, and how the fuck is there two endings???? I read all about that. Do a simple google search.

I do believe there are demons and things do happen that are crazy and unexplained. If people must watch a movie to prove this, then we are truly our very own sense of reality. We need be more careful of what is around us. The way it plays out seems so scheduled and coordinated and so many cliche phrases are used by Micah like “What the fuck are you doing?!” and even more so “Everything will be ok” I knew he would bring in the quija board though…..That was obvious too!

If these events were real it is still scary. But it does seem rather fake in many of the ways in which they speak and what not….. Too bad they filmed the experience instead of getting real actual help from a psychic AND a demonologist AND a priest AND a researcher AND much more friends to help. Gee, that makes it seem quite fake. They definitely had plenty of money, with the pool and the car and the huge house, etc. etc.

I will continue to research further on Micah and Katie and if this really happened and if this is true footage….

The popularity of this show simply states that we are living in changing cultures where people are willing to look at this without considering it “evil” or too scary.

Please comment away on my comments.

Reply

38 Justin October 24, 2009 at 4:54 am

I just watched it and I think that it is an interesting movie on many accounts and various ways. We have a realistic movie, which is scary and eerie. And they have events and scary shit happen that are “real” as the camera is always on. I find this so interesting if it is truly a true story or not? It does seem a tad sensationalized, and how the fuck is there two endings???? I read all about that. Do a simple google search.

I do believe there are demons and things do happen that are crazy and unexplained. If people must watch a movie to prove this, then we are truly our very own sense of reality. We need be more careful of what is around us. The way it plays out seems so scheduled and coordinated and so many cliche phrases are used by Micah like “What the fuck are you doing?!” and even more so “Everything will be ok” I knew he would bring in the quija board though…..That was obvious too!

If these events were real it is still scary. But it does seem rather fake in many of the ways in which they speak and what not….. Too bad they filmed the experience instead of getting real actual help from a psychic AND a demonologist AND a priest AND a researcher AND much more friends to help. Gee, that makes it seem quite fake. They definitely had plenty of money, with the pool and the car and the huge house, etc. etc.

I will continue to research further on Micah and Katie and if this really happened and if this is true footage….

The popularity of this show simply states that we are living in changing cultures where people are willing to look at this without considering it “evil” or too scary.

Please comment away on my comments.

Reply

39 David October 24, 2009 at 2:09 pm

Terrible terrible movie. I want my money back. It’s not just the camera work or the low budget. Terrible acting and terrible writing. When the psychic says, “leaving the house won’t help. the demon will follow you” you can plainly see the wheels turning in the writer’s head trying to come up with some lame excuse to keep them there. when bad stuff happens, they stay in the bedroom where the bad stuff just happened to comfort each other in front of the camera. go sleep in the airport or something. damn.

Reply

40 David October 24, 2009 at 2:09 pm

Terrible terrible movie. I want my money back. It’s not just the camera work or the low budget. Terrible acting and terrible writing. When the psychic says, “leaving the house won’t help. the demon will follow you” you can plainly see the wheels turning in the writer’s head trying to come up with some lame excuse to keep them there. when bad stuff happens, they stay in the bedroom where the bad stuff just happened to comfort each other in front of the camera. go sleep in the airport or something. damn.

Reply

41 Laura October 25, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Ok..I really want to see this movie, but I can’t find it in my area. If anyone is in the Buffalo/Rochester area, and they know where they show the movie, can you tell me please?
I really want to see this movie.

Reply

42 Laura October 25, 2009 at 7:56 pm

Ok..I really want to see this movie, but I can’t find it in my area. If anyone is in the Buffalo/Rochester area, and they know where they show the movie, can you tell me please?
I really want to see this movie.

Reply

43 Pablo October 26, 2009 at 4:46 pm

I was like your friend. I thought the film to be very boring and the plot was a very slow build. I also said to my girlfriend. If I saw footsteps of something that came in the room, I don’t care if the thing followed us, I’d not sleep in that room again. I don’t understand why they made the main character so stupid. After the board lit on fire, I’d probably have taken off as well.

Reply

44 Pablo October 26, 2009 at 4:46 pm

I was like your friend. I thought the film to be very boring and the plot was a very slow build. I also said to my girlfriend. If I saw footsteps of something that came in the room, I don’t care if the thing followed us, I’d not sleep in that room again. I don’t understand why they made the main character so stupid. After the board lit on fire, I’d probably have taken off as well.

Reply

45 tjn October 29, 2009 at 12:29 am

This movie was (1) not scary at all, and (2) a complete waste of time. Can the demon give me my money back?

Reply

46 tjn October 29, 2009 at 12:29 am

This movie was (1) not scary at all, and (2) a complete waste of time. Can the demon give me my money back?

Reply

47 Jordan November 6, 2009 at 11:26 pm

omg watching the trailer scared the crap outta me … not gonna watch it

Reply

48 Jordan November 6, 2009 at 11:26 pm

omg watching the trailer scared the crap outta me … not gonna watch it

Reply

Leave a Comment

 

Previous post:

Next post: