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.

First 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.

All 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.

When 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.

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 …

Tags: angry, audience, crowd, hated, is paranormal activity real, loud, movie, noisy, paranormal activity, paranormal activity movie review, paranormal activity review, REAL, review, sold out, theater

“Paranormal Activity” movie review

Find out why Eric’s actual theater-going experience ruined the movie for him here.

I try really hard to go into movies without prejudice. But with the advertising tactics being employed to push “Paranormal Activity,” I’ve found it very difficult to not be extremely skeptical.

Take a look at the posters. They’re going for an amateur/home-made/printed at Kinko’s look I find almost infuriating. Of course, the trailers that contain more scenes of people reacting to the movie than actual scenes from the movie is a pretty brilliant way to sell it. The midnight screenings in college towns and the whole “demand it in your area” campaign is also clever, if also slightly annoying.

I get it. They’re trying to capture that “Blair Witch” magic. But this Herculean task is difficult particularly because of the backlash “The Blair Witch Project” inspired. The movie that launched a thousand shaky-cams disappointed those who thought the footage might be real, or didn’t care about the characters, or were expecting more scares or gore.

But while Paramount has been careful to not explicitly state that the footage that comprises the movie is real, they’re being coy in a way that will leave many people to assume it is. Nowhere is this more clear than in the introductory text, which is something to the affect of “Paramount Studios would like to thank the families of Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat, and the San Diego Police Department.”

I don’t think the movie needs it, but I can appreciate that it ratchets up the suspense by narrowing down the places it can go. But its inevitable that some people are going to take that it at face value and assume its real. Make no mistake, this isn’t real. These are actors.

Fortunately, they’re good actors. I don’t know if any of the dialogue is improvised, but the way they talk to each other will feel very familiar to anyone who has ever been in a long term relationship that is facing a crisis. Both characters are charming and amiable in the same way that makes reality television appealing. Even when both have their stubborn moments, this movie never falls into the trap of making either character an illogical stereotype. They’re not movie star attractive, and actually look and talk like an average couple. This is a big part of a definite sense of realism that really grounds the proceedings.

Of course, realistic can be good, but also boring. Thankfully, the tight editing and smart pacing keeps that from happening. The plot is simple: A couple in a long term relationship have recently moved in together. As they start to notice strange noises and other unexplained phenomena, the girl reveals she’s been seemingly followed by those phenomena since she was a young girl. Confident that there’s a rational explanation, the boyfriend buys an expensive camera that can also record in the dark. He figures that after a few days of nothing strange captured on video they can both put it to rest.

Of course things don’t quite turn out that way, and a visit from a psychic leaves him more skeptical and her more afraid of what they’re dealing with. It seems the more attention they grant the phenomena and the more they fight over what to do, the more empowered and active it seems to become. What is it exactly that’s toying with them? And is there anything they can do? Are there lives in danger? These questions all make for an engaging and suspenseful movie, filled with some of the most affecting jump scare moments I’ve ever experienced.

There are also a lot of filmmaking lessons to be learned by how this movie builds its suspense and payoffs. First off, the movie’s assembled as if from found footage, and only things of interest pertaining to the haunting is shown. This makes for some skipping around in time and fast forwarding through long, static shots. As most of the strange things that happen occur at night while they’re asleep, the static camera angle it returns to is a cue to the audience that something bad is about to happen. This just ends up putting you on edge so that you’re still caught off guard once something does happen.

In addition, nearly all of the camera work is brilliantly executed. Sure, there’s some dreaded shaky-cam moments as one character or the other begin to play with the camera, but on my first viewing I didn’t notice any “cheats.” No moment stuck out that seemed unlikely it could have naturally occurred the way it did by incorporating the camera.

The special effects themselves also deserve credit for being fairly seamless and really selling the proceedings. In fact, nearly all aspects of this movie are stronger than expected. This really is the little scary movie that could, and I have no doubt it will find a huge audience that will appreciate it. Ultimately, “Paranormal Activity” is disturbingly good and good at disturbing.

Tags: activity, katie featherston, movie, paranormal, paranormal activity movie review, paranormal activity review, REAL, review, scenes