What Lisa Marie Watched Last Night #98: Lizzie Borden Took An Axe (dir by Nick Gomez)

Posted on January 26, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(This post contains spoilers.)

Last night, I watched the brilliant Lifetime film, Lizzie Borden Took An Axe.

Why Was I Watching It?

First off, as everyone who reads this site should know by now, I love Lifetime movies. Add to that, I also happen to like true crime films. (It’s not for nothing that my twitter bio reads, “Just a sweet little thing with morbid thoughts.”) So, it’s really not so much a question of why I was watching it as how could I not watch it?

What Was It About?

On a hot summer day in 1892, both Andrew Borden and his wife are hacked to death. Suspicion is immediately cast upon their daughter Lizzie (Christina Ricci), a free-spirited Sunday School teacher who is also known for being a compulsive shop lifter. Is Lizzie guilty or was the crime committed by her older sister Emma (Clea Duvall) or the maid or a mysterious stranger who was seen around town on the day of crime? Though the case itself remains officially unsolved, this film makes a pretty convincing argument that Lizzie was guilty and was only acquitted because nobody, in 19th century America, could bring themselves to believe that a woman was capable of such a violent crime.

What Worked?

It all worked. Lizzie Borden was one of the greatest Lifetime movies that I’ve ever seen. It took all of the elements that we expect from a good Lifetime movie — scandal, sex, and girls literally getting away with murder — and pushed them to such an extreme that the end result was absolutely brilliant. Christina Ricci and Clea Duvall both gave great performances and Nick Gomez directed with an eye towards the surreal, the morbid, and the darkly humorous.

The scene towards the end where Lizzie whispered her confession to Emma was one of the best in the history of Lifetime.

What Did Not Work?

As I said above, it all worked.

“Oh my God! Just like me!” Moments

I related to the Borden family maid, Bridget Sullivan, because she was Irish and hated having to wash windows.

Lessons Learned

Lizzie Borden was guilty….maybe.

44 Days of Paranoia #41: Shattered Glass (dir by Billy Ray)

Posted on January 24, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

For our latest entry in the 44 Days of Paranoia, we take a look at one of the best films of the first decade of the 21st Century, 2003’s Shattered Glass.

Shattered Glass tells the true story of Stephen Glass (played, in a surprisingly brilliant way, by Hayden Christensen), a smart and charming journalist who, through a combination of showmanship and carefully calculated moments of vulnerability, has established himself as one of the top reporters at one of the top political magazines in America, The New Republic. As the film begins, we find Glass at his old high school, giving advice to a classroom of adoring student journalists. As the self-assured Glass talks about his career, we see scenes of him investigating, pitching, and writing his stores at the New Republic. It’s here that we see the other side of Glass — not only is he a good writer but he’s a good salesman. While the rest of his coworkers struggle to pitch dry-sounding stories about Congress, Glass puts on a show as he vividly describes articles about everything from offering his services as a boxing expert to witnessing drug-fueled hijinks at a Young Republican meeting.

However, as the film progresses, we see yet another side to Stephen Glass. Not only is he a talented writer and an enthusiastic showman but he’s also a pathological liar. When the head of the Young Republicans challenges Stephen’s article, New Republican editor Mike Kelly (Hank Azaria) investigates and, despite being initially suspicious, is eventually won over by Stephen’s apparent earnestness.

Later, after Kelly has left the magazine and been replaced by new editor Chuck Lane (Peter Sarsgaard), Stephen turns in an article entitled “Hacker Heaven.” In the article, Stephen writes about witnessing a 12 year-old computer hacker being given a million dollar contract from a company known as Jukt Micronics. The only problem is that a reporter at Forbes (Steve Zahn) checks the facts in Stephen’s articles and can find no evidence of a company called Jukt Micronics ever existing.

As Lane starts to look into Stephen’s reporting, it starts to become obvious to him that Stephen not only made up the events of “Hacker Heaven” but that he may have falsified several other stories as well. Already struggling to fill the shoes of the popular Kelly, Lane now finds himself having to investigate one of his most popular reporters.

Shattered Glass is one of those fascinating and unusually intelligent films that I always make a point of watching whenever it shows up on cable. Not only does it tell a genuinely interesting story but it also features excellent performances from Sarsgaard, Azaria, Chloe Sevigny, and especially Melanie Lynesky.

Even more importantly, it features a revelatory lead performance from Hayden Christensen. Fairly or not, Christensen is always going to be associated with Star Wars. In Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, Christensen didn’t seem like he was a very good actor but then again, did anyone comes out of those films looking better than before they went in? As bad as Christensen may have been in those two films, he’s absolutely brilliant in Shattered Glass. He plays Stephen Glass with a puppy dog eagerness to please that is deceptively charming and likable. It’s only as the film progresses that the audience realizes that there’s nothing behind that affable facade. Instead, it becomes apparent that he’s a sociopath who lies to hide the fact that his existence is ultimately an empty one. It’s an amazing performance and one that will make you think twice before blindly accepting the analysis of any of the journalistic “experts” who are regularly trotted out on any of the news shows.

Shattered Glass is also a film that should be seen just so viewers can appreciate the brilliant way that Peter Sarsgaard delivers the line, “This doesn’t seem like a real business card to me.”

Shattered Glass needs to be seen.

Other Entries In The 44 Days of Paranoia

Guilty Pleasure No. 16: Keep Off The Grass

Posted on January 21, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

It’s been a while since I shared any of those wonderfully dramatic Sid Davis educational films that were designed to encourage our parents to stay in school, stay healthy, and stay American.

With that in mind, here’s Keep Off The Grass. Initially filmed in 1969, Keep Off The Grass tells the story of what happens when Tom’s parents find out that Tom thinks that marijuana is no big deal. At both the insistence of his father and the local cops, Tom takes a serious look at his stoner friends and discovers that they’re all a bunch of losers. As is typical of a Sid Davis educational film, there’s a disapproving narrator who is quick to make sure we all know that all of Tom’s friends kinda sorta suck.

Enjoy Keep Off The Grass!

Previous Guilty Pleasures:

What Lisa Watched Last Night #97: Flowers in the Attic (dir by Deborah Chow)

Posted on January 21, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

This weekend, I watched the Lifetime original movie Flowers in the Attic.

Why Was I Watching It?

How could I not watch it? From the minute Lifetime first started to air commercials for it back in November, I knew I was going to watch Flowers in the Attic. What especially captured my attention was the way Flowers in The Attic was referred to as being “the book you weren’t allowed to read.” Even though I hadn’t even heard of the book before I saw the commercials, that tag line hooked me. The forbidden is always so inviting.

Add to that, every time I mentioned Flowers in the Attic on Twitter, Mason Dye (who played Christopher in the film) always favorited my tweet. That was so sweet that there was no way I couldn’t watch the movie.

What Was It About?

The time is the 1950s. The recently widowed Corrine (Heather Graham) returns to her childhood home in Virginia. As Corrine explains to her children, she comes from a rich family but was disowned when she left home. Now, her plan is to make up with her disapproving father and inherit his fortune once he dies. Corrine also claims that the only way for her to win back her father’s love is for her to keep the existence of her children a secret.

Hence, Corrine’s children — teenagers Cathy (Kierna Shipka) and Christopher (Mason Dye) and twins Carrie and Cory — are forced to hide in the attic while Corrine charms her father. The children are watched over by their ultra-religious, abusive grandmother (Ellen Burstyn).

Once in the attic, the children soon realize that Corrine doesn’t seem to be in any hurry to win their freedom. While Cathy and Christopher struggle to come of age without any adult supervision, Grandma occasionally brings up mysterious powdered donuts. Soon, Cathy and Christopher are exploring their desires and the twins are falling ill…

What Worked?

It all worked. This was Lifetime at its absolute best: entertaining, fun, and wonderfully melodramatic. Along with being full of wonderfully gothic Southern atmosphere, Flowers in the Attic featured great performances from Heather Graham, Mason Dye, and Kiernan Shipka. Best of all was veteran actress Ellen Burstyn, who made Grandma into a wonderfully over-the-top monster.

What Did Not Work?

If I have any complaints, it’s that the film’s conclusion felt a bit abrupt. However, a sequel to Flowers is already in production so that ending was actually a perfect set-up for part two of the story.

“Oh my God! Just like me!” Moments

Cathy was into ballet, just like me! If I ever found myself locked in an attic for a year and a half, I’d probably use the time to do some pointe work as well.

Lessons Learned

Don’t eat mysterious donuts.

44 Days of Paranoia #40: The Manchurian Candidate (dir by John Frankenheimer)

Posted on January 19, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

With only five entries left in the 44 Days of Paranoia, now seems like the perfect time to look at one of the best conspiracy films ever made. First released in 1962, this film is not only one of the most influential thrillers ever made but it’s also a fiercely sardonic political satire that remains just as relevant today as when it was first released. It was also remade in 2004 and, while we’ll get to the remake, today we’re focusing on the original.

I’m speaking, of course, of the John Frankenheimer-directed classic, The Manchurian Candidate.

The Manchurian Candidate tells the story of Raymond Shaw (Laurence Harvey). The son of the wealthy and ambitious Eleanor (Angela Lansbury) and the stepson of the moronic Senator Johnny Iselin (James Gregory), Raymond is also a decorated war hero who has been credited with saving an entire platoon during the Korean War. When asked about Shaw, all of the members of the platoon respond with: “”Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.”

Of course, that’s not true. It only takes a few minutes of screen time for the audience to realize that Raymond Shaw is none of those things. Instead, he’s a rather depressed loner who is full of resentment towards his mother and his stepfather. Shaw is so socially awkward that even he is shocked when he manages to successfully tell a joke. (“I just told a joke, didn’t I?” Shaw says in amazement.)

While Shaw pursues a career as a journalist, the fellow members of his platoon — including Maj. Marco (Frank Sinatra) — start to have disturbing nightmares, in which they find themselves observing a genteel garden show, during which Raymond is ordered to strangle one soldier and shoot another one in the head. Marco comes to suspect that the platoon may have been captured and brainwashed with communists. With the backing of Army Intelligence, Marco starts to investigate.

Meanwhile, Sen. Iselin has come to national prominence by claiming to have information about a communist conspiracy deep within the U.S. government. As becomes obvious in some of the film’s best scenes, Iselin is less concerned with fighting communists and more focused on keeping Raymond’s mother happy. Eleanor has decided that her husband is going to be the next President and her brainwashed son is going to help make it happen.

I think sometimes we tend to assume that, up until 1967, all movies were safe and predictable. The Manchurian Candidate, however, proves that is simply not true. In fact, with its cynical view of politics and its cast of fragile and damaged characters, The Manchurian Candidate is one of the most subversive films ever made. Rejecting the boring partisanship that typifies most politically themed films, The Manchurian Candidate presents us with a world where both the left and the right are equally corrupt and ultimately equally meaningless. It’s a political satire that transcends ideology and that’s certainly something of which America could use more.

It’s also an amazingly entertaining film. George Axelrod’s screenplay is full of wonderfully snarky moments while John Frankenheimer’s directs with an appreciation for both absurdity and melodrama. Angela Lansbury is both hilarious and chilling as one of the worst maternal figures to ever appear in the movies and she more than deserved the Oscar nomination that she received for this film. However, the entire film is brilliantly acted. Laurence Harvey is both sympathetic and off-putting as Raymond while Frank Sinatra (who previously appeared in another entry of the 44 Days of Paranoia, Suddenly) brings a wonderful blue-collar humanity to the role of Marco. Janet Leigh has a small role as Marco’s lover and the scene where they first meet on a train and have a charmingly nonsensical conversation is wonderfully odd and romantic. Finally, James Gregory gives a hilarious performance as the type of stupid but bombastic politician who will be familiar to anyone who has ever watched C-Span.

If you’ve never seen the original Manchurian Candidate, drop everything you’re doing and go watch it now.

Other Entries In The 44 Days of Paranoia

Film Review: Devil’s Due (dir by Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillet)

Posted on January 18, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

Devil’s Due is a lot better than you may think.

Yes, it’s tempting to judge Devil’s Due without giving it fair a chance. January is traditionally the time of year when the studios dump all of their most hopeless films into theaters, hoping to make a quick buck while more discriminating audiences are distracted by the Oscar nominees. Found footage horror movies usually suck. The commercials make Devil’s Due look like little more than just the latest film to rip-off Paranormal Activity and The Last Exorcism. On top of all that, Devil’s Due wasn’t screened for critics and we know that’s usually a bad sign.

So yes, there’s a lot of reasons to be skeptical about Devil’s Due but I’m here to tell you to put your skeptism aside. Devil’s Due is a surpisingly intelligent horror film, one that totally defied my expectations.

If you’ve seen any of the commercials then you already know the basic plot. Zach (Zach Gilford) and Sam (Allison Miller) are newlyweds. While on their honeymoon in the Dominican Republic, they have both a frightening encounter with a fortune teller (who repeatedly tells Sam that “They’ve been waiting for you,”) and a seemingly more pleasant encounter with a friendly taxi driver who takes them to an underground nightclub. Though Sam and Zach wake up the next morning with no memory of when they left the club, we know (via Zach’s still-running camera) that a ritual was performed while Sam was passed out drunk.

Returning home to New Orleans, Sam is shocked to discover that, despite being on the pill, she is now pregnant. Zach and his family are so excited about the idea of Zach becoming a father that nobody seems to notice that Sam is far less enthusiastic. Not only does this mean that she might have to put her education and career on hold, but she also soon starts waking up with bruises on her stomach and having nosebleeds. She flies into unexplained rages, at one point smashing the windows of a van that pulled out in front of her. Despite being a vegetarian, Sam starts to crave raw meat. While everyone else just assumes that she’s having a difficult pregnancy, Sam becomes convinced that something is wrong with the baby.

Meanwhile, Zach grows increasingly paranoid about the strange men who always seem to be following Sam and him around. When he spots the cab driver sitting in church, watching as Zach’s neice takes communion for the first time, Zach realizes what the rest of us already know.

Devil’s Due won’t necessarily win any points for originality but it’s still an effectively creepy and genuinely frightening horror film. By letting us know, early on, that Sam is carrying the antichrist, the filmmakers are allowed to spend their time developing atmosphere and character (as opposed to building up to a twist that the audience would have seen coming from a mile away). Zach Gilford and Allison Miller are both very likable and have a lot of chemistry and, as a result, you care about their characters and you continue to hope for the best even when it becomes obvious that they’re destined to experience the worst.

(One need only look at the bland and forgettable lead characters in January’s other found footage film — Paranormal Activty: The Marked Ones — to understand just how important Gilford and Miller are to making Devil’s Due into an effective and memorable film.)

My most common complaint about found footage horror films is that they require you to believe that someone would actually continue to artfully film everything around him even while literally running for his life. Director Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillet manage to avoid that problem by using a variety of different methods to create the illusion of “found footage.” While a good deal of the film is presented as having been filmed by Zach, the directors also make good use of store security footage (one of the film’s best scenes features Sam eating raw meat in a supermarket while a small child looks on in shock and the store’s employees fail to notice) and several stationary cameras that, about halfway through the film, are secretly installed in Zach and Sam’s house. The use of different cameras not only keeps the film from getting monotonous but it also helps the film to avoid the nausea-inducing shaky cam effect that almost made it impossible for me to watch The Marked Ones.

Finally, Devil’s Due works because it manages to get at the root of a very real and primal fear. Though it’s not something that we’re encouraged to admit, just the very idea of pregnancy is a very scary thing for a lot of women (this reviewer included). Beyond the physical changes, there’s the knowledge that, once you’ve given birth, nothing will ever be the same. There’s a great moment in Devil’s Due in which Sam and Zach argue about whether or not Sam should continue to pursue her career while she’s pregnant. This is followed, a bit later, by a scene where it’s casually mentioned that Sam’s office has now been transformed into a nursery. These are very human moments and ones that are full of very real emotions that any woman will be able to relate to. It’s moments like these that elevante Devil’s Due and make it into a surprisingly effective and intelligent horror film.

Give Devil’s Due a chance.

44 Days of Paranoia #39: The Fury (dir by Brian DePalma)

Posted on January 14, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

For our latest entry in the 44 Days of Paranoia, let’s take a look at one of the silliest films ever made, Brian DePalma’s 1978 horror/thriller hybrid The Fury.

The Fury opens on a beach in Israel. CIA veteran Peter (Kirk Douglas, who grimaces up a storm) is hanging out with his teenage son Robin (Andrew Stevens) and his friend and colleague Ben Childress (John Cassavetes). Two things quickly become apparent.

First off, Robin has psychic powers. We know this because Peter is obsessed with protecting him from being captured by a shadowy government agency that wants to use his power as a weapon.

And secondly, Ben is evil. We know that Ben’s evil because he’s played by John Cassavetes. As one of the first truly independent filmmakers, Cassavetes would often raise the money to make his fiercely individualistic films by playing villains in bad B-movies, like this one.

Ben, in fact, is so evil that he’s arranged for terrorists to attack the beach. After Peter is apparently killed in a ludicrously violent gunfight, Ben takes off with Robin.

However, Peter is not dead! Somehow, despite the fact that both the beach and the ocean were pretty much blown up with him on it, Peter survived and now, he’s looking for his son. Peter makes his way to Chicago where he calls up his girlfriend, Hester (Carrie Snodgress), and says things like, “I want your body, baby.”

Hester, meanwhile, works at the Paragon Clinic, which is run by Dr. James McKeever (Charles Durning) who, himself, is secretly working for Ben. The Paragon Clinic is a front to try to discover other teenage psychics and to turn them into weapons as well. The newest patient is Gillian (Amy Irving), a teenage girl who might be able to help Peter track down his son.

Of course, what Peter doesn’t take into account is that, in his absence, Robin has turned into a power-mad sociopath who spends his time doing things like killing tourists at amusing parks…

Wow, that’s a lot of plot, isn’t it? And, with all of that, I haven’t even gotten into what happens during the second half of the film!

The Fury is an enjoyably silly film, an awkward attempt to combine DePalma’s previous film, Carrie, with a paranoia-fueled political thriller. There’s a certain charm to a film that takes itself so seriously and yet, at the same time, manages to be totally over-the-top and ludicrous.

For example, just consider the performances of the high-powered cast and the fact that none of the actors appear to be acting in the same film. Playing a character who is a bit of a hero by default (because, seriously, how stupid did he have to be to not realize that Ben was evil to begin with), Kirk Douglas grimaces so manfully that Peter’s stupidity almost starts to feel like a satiric comment on hyper-masculinity. John Cassavetes, on the other hand, is so disdainful of the film that he actually rolls his eyes while delivering some of his more melodramatic lines. Meanwhile, Carrie Snodgress is forced to say things like, “Here comes the Pony Express!” and Charles Durning brings the full weight of his talent to deliver lines like, “If you’re having your monthlies, I don’t want you near the patient.”

And finally, there’s Amy Irving. In DePalma’s Carrie, Irving played Sue Snell, the sole survivor of a psychic rampage. In The Fury, Irving gets to play the psychic and she gives such a dramatic and emotional performance that you almost get the idea that she was trying to challenge Sissy Spacek. “This is how you play a psychic, Sissy!” she seems to be shouting. Of course, the big difference is that Carrie was actually a good film whereas The Fury is a bad film that happens to be watchable.

Finally, no review of The Fury is complete without talking about Brian DePalma’s direction. To put it lightly, Brian DePalma directs the Hell out of The Fury and the effect is something like what an episode of Agents of SHIELD would look like if directed by Martin Scorsese. The entire film is a collection of tracking shots, zoom lenses, and sweeping overhead shots with the camera only stopping long enough to linger over scenes of violence and spilled blood. In perhaps the film’s most ludicrous scene, Amy Irving runs away from the clinic in slow motion while the orchestral score plays out on the soundtrack. We get close-ups of Irving’s face and close-ups of the faces of her pursuers. One character gets shot multiple times but we don’t hear the gunshots. Instead, we only hear the music and watch as the character overacts and dies in slow motion. It’s almost as if DePalma was trying to win a bet by achieving the most counter-productive use of slow motion in film history.

Ultimately, The Fury is so thoroughly silly and over-the-top that it simply has to be seen.

Other Entries In The 44 Days of Paranoia

What Lisa, Evelyn, and Erin Watched Sunday Night #96: The 71st Annual Golden Globe Awards

Posted on January 14, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

On Sunday night, my sister, my best friend, and I gathered together and watched the 71st Annual Golden Globes.

Why Were Watching It?

Because it was an awards show! Seriously, I love awards.

What Was It About?

When you think about it, the Golden Globes are a lot like that nerdy kid in high school that everyone tolerated because he had rich parents but who they still made fun of every chance they got. Whenever his parents went out of town, he would throw a wild but somewhat desperate party. Everyone would spend the weekend trashing his house and drinking all of his alcohol and then leave without bothering to help him clean up afterward.

(I guess now would be a good time to add that, if Taylor is reading this, sorry!)

Seriously, the Golden Globes are so weird! Nobody is really sure who is in the Hollywood Foreign Press but, every year, they serve free drinks and give out a lot of awards and, as a result, everyone in Hollywood gets together for one night.

What Worked?

Okay, first thing first — a lot of people on twitter thought that the speech Diane Keaton gave and song she sang while accepting the Governor’s Award for Woody Allen was creepy but I thought it was really sweet! I know that a lot of people have issues with Woody Allen (see below) but I usually enjoy his movies.

(When they were showing clips from Allen’s career, they showed Diane Keaton in Annie Hall going, “La dee da, la dee da…” and Evelyn says, “Is she playing Lisa?”)

Last year, I was one of the few people who didn’t think that Tina Fey and Amy Poehler did that great of a job as hosts but this year, I agree with everyone else. Tina and Amy should host everything.

I loved it when Melissa McCarthy was pretending to be Matt Damon. What I especially loved was how Matt Damon played along with the joke, to the extent that when Michael Douglas praised him while accepting his Golden Globe, Matt actually pointed over at Melissa.

I can’t complain about any of the winners, which is a rarity for me. I was surprised to see Brooklyn Nine Nine win the Golden Globes for Best Actor and Best TV Show Comedy but I’ve never actually watched the show so I can’t complain.

My favorite acceptance speech came from Matthew McConaughey, mostly because he said, “Alright, alright, alright…”

Finally, a most importantly, a lot of redheads were honored this year. It was a good night for my fellow members of the 2%.

What Did Not Work?

Oh, where to start? Because of all the alcohol involved and the mix of television and movie stars, the Golden Globes have gotten a reputation for being more fun than the Oscars but, for every celebrity who is a fun drunk, there’s about a hundred more who are boring drunks and the 71st annual Golden Globes proved this point. For every Emma Thompson, there was a Jacqueline Bisset. For all the attention that’s being given to a few unexpected moments (and NBC’s reaction to those moments — who would have guessed the censors would get so worked up over vagina?), the Golden Globes were actually rather restrained and boring this year.

The award for most obnoxious presenter goes to Diddy. What was Diddy even doing up there?

The Golden Globes Ceremony was scheduled to last three hours and, unlike the Oscars, it ended on time. However, a lot of those three hours were taken up with watching the winners trying to navigate their way up to the stage. It got boring. Add to that, I am so tired of nominees who don’t bother to come up with a coherent speech before they win their award. It’s not that cute.

All in all, the ceremony could have really used a big production number or two.

Of course, Woody Allen can’t ever win an award without his son, Ronan Farrow, going on twitter and whining about how terrible his father is and all of the little sycophants who follow him chimed in with their usual, “Oh Ronan, I’m sorry!” Uhmmm, just curious — would anyone know who Ronan Farrow is if not for his parents? A lot of people have had shitty fathers but very few of those people have managed to get their own show on MSNBC as a result of it. Just saying.

Who exactly told Emma Stone it would be a good idea to wear a dress that appeared to be decorated with sperm?

“Oh my God! Just like me!” Moments

I’ll Show You Some Golden Globes!

Lessons Learned

Award shows can be boring.

Why Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones Nearly Made Me Sick

Posted on January 11, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

The latest Paranormal Activity film nearly made me sick.

Now, I know what you’re saying. “Oh my God, Lisa — we all know the Paranormal Activity films aren’t great but was it really that bad!?”

No, actually it wasn’t that bad. In fact, by the standards of the found footage film genre, I would say it was about average. It had everything that you’d expect from a Paranormal Activity film. There were bumps in the darkness. There were amazingly stupid characters who continually said things like, “Are you filming?” and “Did you hear that?” Most importantly, there were the shout-outs to the previous films in the series. Old VHS tapes labeled “Katie and Kristi” are found in a closet. One character talked about having a dream where he was on a farm surrounded by old women. Katie and Micah showed up yet again.

(You have to wonder how Micah Sloat feels about having a film career that is pretty much based on being murdered by Katie Featherstone in film after film after film…)

Listen, it’s easy to criticize the Paranormal Activity films. God knows that I’ve certainly criticized them a lot. But the fact of the matter is that they give the audience exactly what the audience is expecting. After five of these films, we all know exactly what we’re going to get when we go see a movie with the words Paranormal Activity in the title. You know that you’re going to jump a few times, you’re going to wonder how the characters can always be so stupid, and, if you’re so inclined, you can have fun spotting the references to previous films. If you’re going into a Parnormal Activity film expecting to see something brilliantly original or good, you’re doing it wrong. These films are the equivalent of the silly, but still scary, ghost stories that are best told in the middle of a dark, stormy night by someone with a flashlight pointed at her face.

In other words, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones is exactly what you would expect it to be.

So, why did it make me sick?

Like the other films in the series, The Marked Ones is told using “found footage.” However, whereas those previous films at least found an excuse to make use of a stationary camera, The Marked Ones is almost entirely hand-held. In other words, it’s shaky cam time and, for me at least, it was also nearly motion sickness time. Unfortunately, the hand-held work doesn’t really add any sort of immediacy to the film. Instead, it just makes you wonder why the character of Hector (Jorge Diaz) is still filming even while he’s running for his life. Sometimes, you just have to drop the damn camera. (Then again, it is a Paranormal Activity film…)

The Marked One is being sold as not a sequel but spin-off from the original Paranormal Activity films. As opposed to the other films, which all took place in the haunted homes of upper middle class white people, The Marked Ones takes place in a California housing complex where the majority of the residents are working class Latinos. The filmmakers are to be commended for both trying to open up the material with a new setting and for trying to give the film an authentic Latin flavor but ultimately, this is a Parnormal Activity film and it really doesn’t matter where you live or what your ethnicity is, the same old shit is going to keep happening to you.

Recent high school graduates Jesse (Andrew Jacobs) and Hector taunt an old witch who lives in the apartment downstairs. Shortly after Jesse awakes one morning to discover a strange bite on his arm, the witch is murdered and Jesse starts to act possessed. It’s up to Hector to try to figure out why his friend is acting so strange and to hopefully save him from the same witches who have popped up in every other Paran0rmal Activity film. Will Hector succeed or will he just keep filming?

Listen, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones isn’t really a very good film. It’s predictable, the characters act in ways that no normal person would act, and even the expected scares — while occasionally jump-worthy — are no where close to being as effective as they were in the previous films. But you already knew that because it’s a Parnormal Activity film. If you enjoyed the previous films in the series, you’ll probably find something to enjoy about The Marked Ones. And if you didn’t enjoy the previous films, you wouldn’t be watching The Marked Ones to begin with.

44 Days of Paranoia #38: Z (dir by Costa-Gavras)

Posted on January 8, 2014 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(SPOILERS!)

For today’s entry in the 44 Days of Paranoia, we take a look at the 1969 political thriller, Z.

Though Z is based on events that actually happened in Greece and features a soundtrack of Greek music that manages to be both haunting and lively at the same time, the film itself takes place in an unnamed, European country. While the country is officially a democracy, it’s actually controlled by a cabal of politicians and military leaders who use fear and intimidation to maintain power.

As the film opens, The Deputy (played by the charismatic Yves Montand) and his aides arrive in a small city. That night, the Deputy is scheduled to speak a rally for nuclear disarmament. As we’re shown from the start of the film, the outspoken Deputy is considered to be a threat by both his country’s government and the United States as well. Despite having received word that an attempt is going to be made on his life, the Deputy speaks at the rally. After the rally, as the Deputy walks across the street, a truck comes out of nowhere. A man in the back of the truck strikes the deputy with a club, killing him. The official story is that the Deputy was simply hit and killed by a drunk driver but the Deputy’s followers know otherwise.

Realizing that the Deputy has the potential to be an even more powerful symbol in death than he was when he was alive, the government assigns the Magistrate (Jean-Louis Trintignat) to investigate the Deputy’s death. Since the Magistrate is known to have political ambitions of his own, it’s assumed that he’ll simply rubber stamp the government’s story. However, the Magistrate surprises everyone by turning out to be a man of integrity. Working with a journalist (Jacques Perrin), his investigation uncovers a conspiracy and leads to the indictment of several high level military officials. In a scene that will be familiar to anyone who has ever seen a movie, the Deputy’s wife (Irene Pappas) is told that the men responsible for her husband’s murder will be held responsible…

And this is where you would normally expect the film to end.

However, Z goes on for another few minutes and it’s those final minutes that elevate this film from just being a well-made thriller to being one of the most effective political films ever made. The film’s narrator informs us that the government was subsequently overthrown by the military. The indictments were dismissed. The Magistrate was reassigned to other duties. The “drunk drivers” who were officially held responsible for the Deputy’s death were given light sentences. As for the Deputy’s loyal aides, some were forced into exile while another was killed while running from police. Finally, we’re told:

“Concurrently, the military banned long hair on males; mini-skirts; Sophocles; Tolstoy; Euripedes; smashing glasses after drinking toasts; labor strikes; Aristophanes; Ionesco; Sartre; Albee; Pinter; freedom of the press; sociology; Beckett; Dostoyevsky; modern music; popular music; the new mathematics; and the letter “Z”, which in ancient Greek means “He is alive!”

As the film ends, a long list of everything and everyone that has been banned rolls up the screen. It’s a devastating scene, one that firmly establishes that the greatest enemy of dictatorship (as well as the first victim) is freedom of thought.

However, even before that ending, Z had already established itself as a powerful film. I usually dread watching politically themed films because, for the most part, I find them to be drearily heavy-handed. Well, make no doubt about it, Z is a very political film and it’s also a very heavy-handed film. However, it’s so well-acted and well-directed that I hardly minded the fact that the film was essentially trying to indoctrinate me. It’s rare that you find a polemical film that also works as entertainment but Z is one of those rare films.

Z made history in 1970 when it was the first film to be nominated by the Academy for both Best Foreign Language Film and Best Picture of the Year. Watching it today, it’s easy to understand why Z was so honored. It remains an exciting thriller, a powerful political statement, and a bold call to action.

Z, incidentally, won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. However, best picture was won by Midnight Cowboy.

Other Entries In The 44 Days of Paranoia