Support NeoGAF

[Drizzlehell]

Two children wake up in the middle of the night to find their father is missing, and all the windows and doors in their home have vanished.

Before going into this, it's worth keeping in mind that it is an experimental movie. It does not follow the conventional structure of a plot nor does it prioritize the typical elements such as acting or intricate plot. Rather, it employs abstract filmmaking techniques to evoke an intense and almost tangible aura of terror - one akin to the fear of a child imagining malevolent creatures lurking under the bed. Opinions on this film tend to be sharply divided and while some claim it to be the most frightening experience of their lives, others seem to have expected something along the lines of Paranormal Activity. I can definitely say that I'm pitching my tent in the former camp.

In short, it is important to approach this with the right expectations. I believe that if you are a fan of horror games such as Silent Hill 2 or P.T., then this film will be of interest to you.

Also, if you want to test your mettle before viewing the film, here is a brief clip (less than a minute long) that showcases one of the two surprise moments in the movie. To set the scene: the toy phone in the clip was featured earlier in the film when a child made a 911 call, thinking that he's using a real phone, only to discover that he was holding the toy and voice on the other end was that of an unknown entity that's presumably responsible for the supernatural occurrences throughout the film.
And the clip is:

 

[AV]

I'll always (try and find the time to) give something incredibly polarising a shot. Can't say the brief clip did anything for me but it's obviously lacking the context of the rest of the movie.

I was recently mostly let down by The Outwaters after stupidly hoping the "people fainting in theatres" marketing shtick wasn't nonsense for a change, this looks like it could be more of the same, but again, I'll try and give it a go.

I was in the camp who thought Twin Peaks S3E8 was outstanding so I'm not averse to the experimental. This has me curious, cheers.

 

[Drizzlehell]

I'll always (try and find the time to) give something incredibly polarising a shot. Can't say the brief clip did anything for me but it's obviously lacking the context of the rest of the movie.

I was recently mostly let down by The Outwaters after stupidly hoping the "people fainting in theatres" marketing shtick wasn't nonsense for a change, this looks like it could be more of the same, but again, I'll try and give it a go.

I was in the camp who thought Twin Peaks S3E8 was outstanding so I'm not averse to the experimental. This has me curious, cheers.

Yeah, I never trust any marketing that says people were rolled out of the theater by paramedics or whatever because that's just silly. Also, The Outwaters was a bit more generic found footage film in my opinion, mostly relying on gore for shock value. This film follows a much more dream-like logic and is much more abstract.

 

[Umbasaborne]

I loved this movie. I get why some cant stand it, but it chilled me to my core and left me thinking about it for weeks. The idea of this entity just endlessly fucking with these kids in some awful void…its like when you wake up as a kid to get water, and your house is pitch black, and you think you see faces and shadows

 

[Days like these...]

I wached it. It did nothing for me and I love artsy fartsy horror.

 

[Winter John]

As a big David Lynch fan I got real excited when the reviews said this was like Lynch’s version of Poltergeist. After watching it I gotta say what it’s actually like is if some college kid watched Poltergeist and Inland Empire then decided to try and copy them.

 

[Revolutionary]

The true horror in this "film" is that it makes me feel like an impatient zoomer, constantly wondering when we're going to move on to the next shot... and then the next shot is staring at a goddamn wall for 5 minutes.

I've seen the short film it's based on (Heck) and it's actually somewhat effective as a 20-something minute short, but as a feature film it's borderline unwatchable.

 

[Husky]

As a big David Lynch fan I got real excited when the reviews said this was like Lynch’s version of Poltergeist. After watching it I gotta say what it’s actually like is if some college kid watched Poltergeist and Inland Empire then decided to try and copy them.

Yeah, I've been puzzled by the use of the term "experimental" for this movie. I didn't see its choices as risky, I saw them as spineless, like large swaths of the movie were just periods where it wouldn't try anymore. It felt a lot like an excessively derivative imitation of those YouTube analog horror videos. I mean, I guess fears are subjective, and it seems there's a audience who finds those spooky (like if anything can be a fetish, maybe anything can be a phobia too?). I always came out of those analog horror videos thinking they were just dumb, so of course I'd come out of a feature length analog horror movie thinking the same thing.
The sound design was so dumb I actually laughed at a few points, and I hate laughing at earnest attempts in filmmaking. Lots of the best movies I've ever seen are very polarizing, but looks like this time I stand on the other side.

 

[Drizzlehell]

Yeah, I've been puzzled by the use of the term "experimental" for this movie. I didn't see its choices as risky, I saw them as spineless, like large swaths of the movie were just periods where it wouldn't try anymore. It felt a lot like an excessively derivative imitation of those YouTube analog horror videos. I mean, I guess fears are subjective, and it seems there's a audience who finds those spooky (like if anything can be a fetish, maybe anything can be a phobia too?). I always came out of those analog horror videos thinking they were just dumb, so of course I'd come out of a feature length analog horror movie thinking the same thing.
The sound design was so dumb I actually laughed at a few points, and I hate laughing at earnest attempts in filmmaking. Lots of the best movies I've ever seen are very polarizing, but looks like this time I stand on the other side.

That's a really closed-minded approach tbh. It's okay if you don't find it scary because every person will have their own triggers and phobias but just dismissing it as dumb or lazy just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what makes it so effective for some people.

It's all about creating a sense of dread through suggestive imagery and sound, and letting your imagination fill in the blanks. Subtlety in horror is always far more effective for me because no amount of gore or scary monsters going "boo!" will ever be more effective than the images that I can conjure up in my mind, because that's something that comes straight from my subconscious that I personally find the most terrifying. The mere suggestion of something lurking in the darkness and making menacing sounds or peering at me with glowing eyes is enough to make me shut the movie off and enjoying the rest of my life without ever learning what those eyes were attached to.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have the scary grandma jumping off the top of a closet in The Conjuring, which is an image that will only elicit laughter from me because it's just so over the top and not subtle in the slightest. But at least I can still understand and appreciate why millions of other people were flipping out when they saw that because of how sudden and shocking that shot was, and how well it managed to build the tension before the jump scare happened.

 

[LiquidMetal14]

I had the stomach for this when I was younger. Can't say I enjoy being purposefully frightened to the point of leaving the lights on in every room.

It's not saying that I'm not manly enough more than a state of mind not wanting to purposefully get that feeling when you spend life trying to feel as happy as you can.

I have a friend who doesn't like to watch tear jerkers because he doesn't like to get to that point of emotion needlessly and it reminds him of real things that have happened to evoke that.

But hey, if you like that feeling then knock yourself out.

 

[Winter John]

Yeah, I've been puzzled by the use of the term "experimental" for this movie. I didn't see its choices as risky, I saw them as spineless, like large swaths of the movie were just periods where it wouldn't try anymore. It felt a lot like an excessively derivative imitation of those YouTube analog horror videos. I mean, I guess fears are subjective, and it seems there's a audience who finds those spooky (like if anything can be a fetish, maybe anything can be a phobia too?). I always came out of those analog horror videos thinking they were just dumb, so of course I'd come out of a feature length analog horror movie thinking the same thing.
The sound design was so dumb I actually laughed at a few points, and I hate laughing at earnest attempts in filmmaking. Lots of the best movies I've ever seen are very polarizing, but looks like this time I stand on the other side.

I give the guy credit for trying to copy Lynch. That's a high bar to aim for. Who knows, maybe some studio will give him a decent budget and he'll go on to do something great. Also op, if your reading this. If you really thought this was the most paralyzing film you've ever seen, do yourself a favor and go watch Eraserhead as soon as you can