Richard and I went to see Paranormal Activity downtown yesterday. My love of scary movies has been changing of late mostly, I think, because the scare-directors of today seem more interested in grossing the audience out than making their imaginations really work.
How many of you can recall watching an old scary movie either with a parent nearby to protect you (in case the monster jumped from the tv and into your living room) or hid behind a couch, a pillow, or some such thing so you wouldn’t have to see the scary things (although you peeked)?
Can you say that the majority of today’s so called scary movies get the same reaction from you?
I hide when I see some of the new scary movies (Saw, Halloween sequels) because the scares don’t cause that delicious thumping adrenaline, but more often than not I am appalled or sickened.
Paranormal Activity is a truly, scary movie. It is a “back to the roots”, edge of your seat, hide your face in your boyfriend’s shoulder scary ride. The proof is in the box office. This is a movie that cost $11,000 to make over a seven day period.
From Cinematical:
Just take a look at that weekend box office. Sure, the critically panned Couples Retreat came in at #1, earning over $32 million on 3000 screens. But scan down the list and look at #4, which was Paranormal Activity. It earned $7.9 million on 160 screens. That’s not a typo. One hundred and sixty screens. If we take the average, Paranormal Activity earned $49,375 per screen, and Couples Retreat took in a paltry $10,666 per screen. That’s five times as many butts in the seats for the horror film than for the unfunny comedy (which means that there must have been a lot of empty seats at the latter). There’s a simple reason for this: Paranormal Activity is a genuinely scary movie.
Admittedly, I didn’t scream or jump at most of the “scary bits”. I did, however, keep Richard close, and watched a good portion with one eye open (lessens the scare impact… yeah). What was really fun was the nearly full theatre of teens and young adults. Their reactions, once they put away the cell phones, are what directors hope for. There was nervous laughter (the kind of laugh when you’re with your friends and you have to laugh or you’ll be a wuss). There were some genuine screams, too, followed by relieved laughter and exclamations of “wow, that was cool!”.
Now, why didn’t I care for it? When Richard and I leave a movie, the first question is “what did you think of it?” I can’t say I cared for the movie myself because it played upon old fears and nightmares I thought long ago gone. To be reminded of those fears is uncomfortable.
That doesn’t mean I didn’t appreciate the movie, because I did. It’s also why I feel good about recommending it.
If you leave the theatre griping about “not enough blood”, and “where were the decapitations”, then you’re an idiot.
