It Follows

It Follows

The last time a movie scared me I was eleven and snuck into my sister’s bed to use her as a human shield in case the Wolf Man attacked. Luckily nothing happened. This movie is not full throttle scary like the Exorcist, Poltergeist or Alien. It is a low budget art house movie. But it is very effective and clever. Instead of using big FX and expensive special effects it relies on imagination and a good story. The movie is a mash up between Alfred Hitchcock and Stephen King. It has the timing of Hitchcock and the creepiness of Stephen King. The actors are not well known (at least to me), but they do an effective job of scaring themselves and the audience.

There were genuine moments of fear. At one point the hair on the back of my neck went up and I am ashamed to admit I covered my eyes while peeking through my fingers (I think twice).  The “It” of It Follows is a specter that only can only be seen by the person possessed. The victim then tries to pass on the curse to some else to free themselves of the damnation. The tension comes when the victim sees a specter but no one else does. The movie creates an atmosphere of dread. The location is some depressed suburbia past its prime where lawns are tattered and rusty chain link fences need to be replaced. There is nothing evil about the neighborhood, but its banality intensifies the sense foreboding. Like the victim you do not know if the person approaching is real or not, making you a participant of the movie. The killings are not terribly gruesome but are inventive and wicked.

I realize this an art house movie and may not be available near you (especially in New Jersey). But when it comes up in Netflix it is worth viewing. A human shield is not required, popcorn is optional. 

50 Shades of Grey

50 Shades of Grey

OMG, this movie was so boring it could be used as a general anesthetic. Everyone went to this movie for the sex, but the lead up story was grueling tedious. There was no sex for the first 43.5 minutes (typical). The dialogue was inane. The actors were uninspired. Instead of camp the acting it was damp. Dakota Johnson was submissive with sparks of defiance. Jamie Dornan plays Grey with dull seriousness. As a twenty eight year old CEO of a major corporation he cares more about his ties than business. He sports a look of consternation which is either from conflicting emotions or constipation.

The books were written by E.L. James, some bored middle aged English housewife, and sold over 100m copies; quantity does not imply quality. I am certain everyone skipped the prologue and went directly to page 189. There is a back story about Grey’s origin and savory hints are dropped in the movie. If the sex is unsatisfying, hopefully Grey’s dark origin will bring you back to the theatre (God help us, there is a sequel (s)). It is difficult to comment on the acting. I am sure Johnson and Dornan are capable actors but they are victimized by boring dialogue, indifferent directing and a meaningless plot. When I looked up the plot summary in Wikipedia it said forgetaboutit.  

So why did the audience put up with this nonsense? For the sex of course. Although this was hyped as an S&M primer, there was nothing new here. The Marguis de Sade, who is the godfather of S&M, piled his trade in the 1700’s; regrettably before VHS. A quote from the Marquis, “It is always by way of pain one arrives at pleasure”. The sex scenes were stern and lacked passion. The rope was red but too thin. The pain room was a very neat and well organized with wipes neatly hung in a row. There was a discernible lack of titillation.

For all this badgering, the movie cleared to date $500m (production cost $40m). Sex does sell. Before seeing the movie I thought this was smut. It is too listless to be smut. Remember to renew your Playboy subscription.