Review: PARANORMAL ACTIVITY 2

It’s a pretty typical Hollywood story: low budget, independent film becomes a surprise success; big name studio buys the rights for dirt cheap; franchise is born. Such is the case for Paranormal Activity, 2009’s small “found footage” horror flick that is powered by two unknown actors and a video camera. Now, a year later, Paramount has given birth to Paranormal Activity 2, assigning a new director and a more bloated budget to the task of producing quiet, resonating terror.

Paranormal Activity 2 is both a prequel and a sequel, its plot working in conjunction with last year’s sleeper hit. This time around, home movies and surveillance footage follow Kristi Rey (Sprague Grayden) and her family as they experience-yep, you guessed it-paranormal activity in their home. So, how does this follow-up coincide with its predecessor? Kristi is both neighbor and sister to Katie (Katie Featherston), the victim of demonic torment in the original film. However, Katie has yet to fall victim to evil because Paranormal Activity 2 begins a few weeks before the first film...and she was never meant to fall victim in the first place.

I’ll admit it: this film unnerved me, but it wasn’t because of its relentless jump scares or its run-of-the-mill central storyline. The way it answers questions I never even thought I wanted answers to (despite the “winking” exposition it uses to get from point A to point B) is what left me chilled as I walked out of the theater. That being said, it was the only thing that left me chilled. The rest of Paranormal Activity 2 plays out far too predictably, with two-dimensional stock characters who only serve to move the plot along and constant spooks that become more annoying than frightening half way through. Paramount hardly lets this quickly produced follow-up remain subtle like Paranormal Activity proved itself to be and because of that, it suffers immensely.

Do the terrors outweigh the yawns? In my opinion, yes. If you are a fan of the first film, at the very least you will probably somewhat appreciate how this one intertwines with it. But be warned: it’s muddled with plenty of throwaway content and, though it goes without saying, it hardly breaks any new ground.

Rating: 2.5/5

Review: CATFISH

The new documentary, Catfish, has caused a near uproar regarding its validity. Is it really a documentary or is it just masquerading as one? Is it really “the best Hitchcock film that Hitchcock never directed” or will it deliver a lackluster outcome? Before you get too tangled up in hesitation, let me ask you this: does the story’s authenticity really even matter if the subject still rings true?

Unknown filmmakers Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman center Catfish on Nev Schulman, a 24-year-old photographer living in New York City, and his blossoming internet friendship with a family from Michigan. The correspondence begins when Abby, an eight-year-old artist, sends Nev a package containing an oil painting of hers based on a recently published photo of his. Nev gets in touch with Abby’s mother, Angela, on Facebook and starts to learn about their family, all the while sending his pictures to Abby for her to paint for him. He becomes friends with Abby’s father and brother as well and even strikes up a courtship with her older sister, Megan. However, Nev discovers inconsistencies in some of the family members’ stories and decides to step back from the situation and do some investigating, which ultimately leads him to Michigan and forces him to face the truth.

The controversy surrounding this film’s authenticity proves to be completely irrelevant because, whether or not it is actually a documentary,Catfish speaks volumes about how we as a culture so often blur the line between internet and reality. In a way, Nev takes a risk by placing himself in the in-between for the sake of mass revelation. The sole purpose of this film is to get its audience to ask questions and seek out answers, which I believe it does masterfully. Everything else that I love about the film-from its use of Google Maps as an aesthetic touch to its concentration on even characters’ most minor reactions-is merely a bonus.

Though I think Catfish has a shot at holding quite a bit of cultural value, if only temporarily, it will no doubt leave some viewers feeling less than satisfied. The marketing campaign behind this film indicates that it will be this year’s Paranormal Activity, however, it does not deliver any horrific scares and the “Hitchcockian twist” it boasts is only a plot development. Unfortunately, the film’s misleading insinuations will ultimately overshadow its true nature and keep it from resonating with disappointed moviegoers.

If you are interested in films that have something valuable to say, I highly recommend Catfish. It may not completely embody the tone it appears to upon first glance, but it still haunts, if only in the unusual sense of the term.

Rating: 4/5

Review: IT'S KIND OF A FUNNY STORY

Ever since the success of 2007’s Juno, Hollywood has been rapidly spitting out mainstream indie films in hopes of attracting the same praise. However, a pattern has appeared: only one film in the genre stands out each year. Last year it was 500 Days of Summer, a film that benefitted from its incessant commercial spots and likable stars. Attempting to follow in suit, will It’s Kind of a Funny Story garner similar praise?

It’s Kind of a Funny Story opens with 16-year-old Craig (Keir Gilchrist) biking to a New York City emergency room at five in the morning after waking up from a dream in which he commits suicide. The overwhelmed teen convinces the on-call doctor to help him out, thinking that a quick fix is available to him. However, he soon finds out that his stay in the third floor psychiatric ward will be a minimum of five days, setting him behind on schoolwork and tying him up in fibs to his friends. Though Craig feels out of place at first, he finds a confidant in Bobby (Zach Galifianakis), a love interest in Noelle (Emma Roberts), and a new appreciation for everything he has.

Every problem that I have with this film stems from its poorly written screenplay, which is essentially a mishmash of stale characters whose problems are given all-too-convenient resolutions. Craig comes off as a cliche, devoid of any unique traits that would at least make him a somewhat sympathetic character. In fact, all of the teenagers featured suffer from the same fate. Their dialog feels unnatural and makes clear to the audience that they are really actors playing teenagers who are trying so hard to be typical teenagers. With the exception of Bobby, who is allowed the chance to develop a distinct personality, the adults in the film are no better off than their younger co-stars. So much time is spent on these bland characters that the film’s central topic, depression, becomes a lighthearted afterthought and, in the end, gets treated like a fleeting speed bump standing in the way of a perfect life. If these elements would have been considered more thoroughly, It’s Kind of a Funny Story would have had a chance at being something fresh, but sadly, they were not.

Though I took issue with most of this 100 minute public service announcement, I cannot dislike it because it is just too nice. The mainstream indie style will have mass appeal, as will Galifianakis’s performance. My advice? See a matinee showing with your mom and little sister, but don’t be fooled: the story isn’t really as funny as you want it to be.

Rating: 2.5/5

Review: THE SOCIAL NETWORK

What do you get when you create a film based on the rise of one of the most popular websites in Internet history? A box office success. And if that film is the brainchild of David Fincher and Aaron Sorkin? A critical success. “The Facebook movie,” as it has been dubbed, has received acclaim from all directions, and for good reason.

The Social Network, as it is formally entitled, chronicles the rise of Facebook and how it affected its founders. Mark Zuckerberg (Jesse Eisenberg), a sophomore at Harvard looking to be accepted into one of the prestigious clubs on campus, makes his mark by masterfully hacking into the school’s computer system and creating a prank website with its content. His actions garner the attention of twin brothers Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss (both played by Armie Hammer), who offer him the task of programing a website they have been working on launching. Mark accepts the offer but deflects the brothers’ attempts at getting together to begin construction, all the while building on their idea and creating “the facebook.” With the financial help of his best friend, Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), Mark starts the phenomenon that earns him both followers and enemies.

This film proves to be nearly flawless in all aspects, the main reason being the collaboration between Fincher and Sorkin. Fincher knows how to capture tone with his camera, paying careful attention to the characters’ facial expressions and interactions with their settings. Sorkin’s snappy dialog never quits. In fact, the screenplay is so well written that it serves as its own outstanding performance, though it never once overshadows the actors’ achievements. Eisenberg delivers an especially memorable performance as Zuckerberg and is in good company alongside Garfield, Hammer, and Justin Timberlake (who plays the conniving founder of Napster, Sean Parker). To complete the package, the film’s score (developed by Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails fame) compliments the overarching theme of deceit with its ominous inflections, thus bringing Fincher’s vision full circle.

Despite being two hours of pure dialog, The Social Network stands as a compelling, relevant testament to this day and age. Its commentary on technology as it relates to social standing and human connection resonates long after the closing credits.

Rating: 5/5