From here.
I normally eat up found footage horror. Even when others whine that it's just another variation on the The Blair Witch Project (putting aside for the moment that The Last Broadcast went there a year before the Witch did) I'm the one who still gets terrified by this stuff, because it seems so much more real. I don't know that this sub-genre breaks the fourth wall exactly, but it presses more firmly against it that any of the others. Therefore, it makes sense that where horror is concerned, it can lead to some frightening results.
The thing is, for disbelief to be fully and successfully suspended, the viewer really needs to be in the cinema, or at least ensconced in a dark room with no other distractions.
The problems I found with The Last Exorcism, despite some very creepy, very tense moments, were that (a) I wasn't in a cinema (not the film's fault, of course) but had I been, dear reader, I probably would have shat my pants, and (b) Even I could see the stain of Blair Witch all over this one - at the very end especially.
Could have done without Eli Roth's pointless "introduction", too. However I did choose it from the DVD menu, so I suppose I best take responsibility for that as well. Silly old me thought it might be something interesting or relevant to guide us into the story, not a big smug face basically stating "Hi. Here's the film". Cheers Roth, never would have made it to the opening credits without you.
All this said, The Last Exorcism stands up, albeit shakily and with a right crick in its neck. If you're partial to faux documentaries, naturalistic (sometimes naturally double-jointed) acting and shaky camera-work, you could do a lot worse than to spend 87min in the company of this one.
The thing is, for disbelief to be fully and successfully suspended, the viewer really needs to be in the cinema, or at least ensconced in a dark room with no other distractions.
The problems I found with The Last Exorcism, despite some very creepy, very tense moments, were that (a) I wasn't in a cinema (not the film's fault, of course) but had I been, dear reader, I probably would have shat my pants, and (b) Even I could see the stain of Blair Witch all over this one - at the very end especially.
Could have done without Eli Roth's pointless "introduction", too. However I did choose it from the DVD menu, so I suppose I best take responsibility for that as well. Silly old me thought it might be something interesting or relevant to guide us into the story, not a big smug face basically stating "Hi. Here's the film". Cheers Roth, never would have made it to the opening credits without you.
All this said, The Last Exorcism stands up, albeit shakily and with a right crick in its neck. If you're partial to faux documentaries, naturalistic (sometimes naturally double-jointed) acting and shaky camera-work, you could do a lot worse than to spend 87min in the company of this one.
Good to see you back! I liked The Last Exorcism more than you did, but I think if I had to sit through Roth's self-congratulatory face beforehand, it would sour me too!
ReplyDeleteBless you!
ReplyDeleteHaha yes! I think I perhaps should have approached the film with a little more respect, too. Really dedicated myself to it for the run time. If I had done that, I think it would have scared me more and therefore I would've liked it more!
Holy shit! A post!
ReplyDeleteI can't say much more than that, as I don't remember anything about the film. I mean, I remember that I've seen it, and that they accidentally forgot to include an ending, but other than that.... *shrugs*
Holy shit, I know! Good to know the urge is still there somewhere!
ReplyDeleteI saw The Last Exorcism at TORONTO AFTER DARK and loved the hell out of it.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts are dumped here if you're interested: http://monsterchiller.blogspot.ca/2010/08/last-exorcism-review-not-film-you.html