|
|
 
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Insidious
|
|
|
Frank Angel
Film God
Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999
|
posted 05-15-2011 01:15 AM
Tom, you are way too giving with your stars on this one. And I am thinking you are also MUCH too easily scared. Every cliche ever put in a scary movie is distilled into this thing. It's a POLTERGIEST wannabe and total ripoff but done with 1/20th of the effectiveness.
Poor Patrick Wilson -- a very accomplished actor otherwise -- he and his costar, Rose Byrne who I haven't encountered previously, do their best but are no match for the absurd script and stilted dialog, not to mention the "what was he thinking" piss poor direction of James Wan.
Half the film spends it's time tring to be a haunted house story which you've seen a thousand times (and done a thousand times better at that), and then for no good reason Wan decides he'll try to make it a story about a haunted comatose child instead. And continuing to rip off POLTERGIEST, instead of the kindly psychic saying "Go to the light, go to the light," this kindly psychic keeps repeating "Come to my voice, come to my voice."
90% of the "scares" consist of the camera slowly following a character thru badly lit hallways, staircase, closets with quiet music under the scene until a big BANG of loud music. BOO!! Oooh, that's scary!
Tom, I will agree with you on one thing, that yes, the ending was just an abomination (and one we've seen a hundred times before) but I disagree with you in that I say the rest of the entire movie was JUST AS BAD...no, WORSE because at least the ending only lasted for a minute.
I am spending the rest of my weekend devising ways to punish my nephews for dragging me to this dog. If you went out for snacks, you would still hear this thing barking all the way to the concessions.
0/5 -- it really deserves negative stars.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stu Jamieson
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 524
From: Buccan, Qld, Australia
Registered: Jan 2008
|
posted 05-21-2011 07:58 PM
Watching Insidious is like witnessing a thesis on the progression of horror cinema through to the present day. It starts as a classic minimalist ghost story, moves through the horror/comedy phase of the 80s and 90s and winds up in the ineffectual show-everything style of the modern horror flick.
It's uncertain if it was the intention of director, James Wan, to illustrate the evolution of cinematic horror but it nevertheless serves to drive home the point that the minimalist horror of old is so much scarier than the insipid tripe which is dished up to the multiplexes today (contemporary European and Asian genre films notwithstanding).
The terrorific beauty of the classic horror show is encapsulated in the films opening credit sequence: a spontaneously swinging lampshade here, a half-formed shadow there, and a vaguely goulish reflection of a spectre there. These fractured, skewed, B&W photographic images speak to the effectiveness of our imaginations to instinctively fill in the visual blanks in the most frightening means we can conjure. Pair this with the obligatory shrieking violins and various sudden, loud thumps and scrapes in the soundtrack and you have the vital ingredients for a fabulous frightfest. James Wan understands this and the first act of Insidous demonstrates that it is at least on par with the best of its ilk. But the films struggles begin with the commencement of the second act where the introduction of comedy threatens to derail the project.
Comedy and horror make strange bedfellows but they go off like a firecracker in the sack when paired correctly - witness the pinnacle of comedy horror, Sam Raimi's Evil Dead II. And there are numerous other examples: Poltergeist, Ghostbusters, The Frighteners, House etc. In Insidious, however, the mood of the comic second act is so far removed from the first that it jars.
The films central premise regarding astral travel jars also in its believability but Wan quite cleverly provides an on-screen proxy for us skeptical audiences in one of his protagonists, Josh (Patrick Wilson). And although Wan's method of seduction is a little clunky, as Josh is surely convinced unto astral theory, so too are we.
The weakness of the films middle could be easily overlooked, however, in the presence of a strong third act but alas the final stretch sounds the death knell.
That Wan clearly demonstrates his understanding of elegant horror in the first act makes the disappointment of the films finale all the more bitter. Indeed it looks like the last third of the movie were directed by an entirely different film maker such is its inferiority to what has come before. For not only do we now see the monster face-to-face in all its all-to-human visage (our minds had already concocted a beast far fouler than this) but the sound editing feels half a beat off; like we're given time to process the "scary" visual and judge it benign before we're struck by the obligatory aural spike in the soundtrack. As a result, the moment falls flat and we're left thinking, "oh, that must have been a scary bit."
To think of what this film could have been adds to the disappointment as there's so many little details to like. The muted faded-photograph cinematography contributes effectively to the depressive mood of the film, as does Rose Byrne's first class performance as the tortured mother stretched to the brink of madness. To follow on in the style of the films opener seems so obvious as to invite question on why this wasn't done. It's as if Wan lost his nerve or even lost interest. Perhaps he was merely trying to achieve too much.
6.5 out of 10.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic