Emily Finlay1408: the best horror film I've seen in ages
November 20th 2007 07:48
Anyone who watches a lot of horror films is familiar with the concepts of the 'spring-loaded cat' and the fake-out scares. Those moments where everything is purposely really calm then suddenly OH MY GOD SOMETHING LEAPS OUT OF THE DARKNESS AND IS REALLY LOUD AND SCARY OH MY GOD WHAT IS THE HERO GOING TO DO?!. Or, worse still, where everything is purposely calm then suddenly OH MY GOD SOMETHING LEAPS OUT OF THE DARKNESS AND IS REALLY LOUD AN- oh, wait, no, it was just a curtain flapping! Haha! That's not really scary at all! Wow, I guess the hero is actually totally sa- no, wait, there's the killer. He was behind her all along!
Why can't horror films do psychological horror anymore? Rosemary's Baby doesn't have a lick of gore in it, yet creeps you out the whole way through. That vomitting moose head in Evil Dead 2 was scary for its entire duration, not for the first two or three seconds when it started up. These days horror films are either generic shock-tactic fests or Saw-style "if this was happening to you, it would be scary" sort of things. Have I mentioned how much I hate Saw II yet? Because I do. So, so much.
Earlier this year, I rented The Descent. 84% on Rotten Tomatoes and I have no idea why. The first half is pretty good, dealing with claustrophobia in a decent enough fashion, but once the monsters start appearing, it turns into generic "SUDDEN LOUD NOISES ARE TERRIFYING!" fare. It was at this point when I realised that even the top of the current crop couldn't even come close to, say, 1931's Frankenstein, let alone the many excellent horror films released from the 50s through to the 80s. What has happened to the genre? Because it's an excellent genre, or at least it should be. It's absolutely one of the strongest evokers of emotion you can find, but where is my fear? Why have I not squirmed in a cinema seat in so, so long?
1408, however, reaffirms my belief in the genre.
I'm not going to suggest that Mikael Håfström has crafted a perfect horror film, or even that he's the next big thing, but I have to give it a lot of credit for finally making me believe in the power of the horror film again. Håfström may not be teaching the class on horror, but he sure as hell took a lot of notes from some of the best teachers.
1408 (to clarify, yes, it's not out in Australia just yet, and yes, I did see it legally, I was at a press screening) is a Stephen King adaptation. This will instantly turn some people off, but it shouldn't. Think more The Shining than It. Obviously, it's not as good as The Shining (otherwise it would probably have its own public holiday by now), but it's pretty clear everyone involved in this film watched Kubrick's King adaptation a whole lot before making this. I'm not going to pretend there aren't a few 'LOUD NOISE' scares, but coupled with the psychological elements and the plot in general, they make a whole lot of sense.
Basically, this movie follows Mike Enslein (John Cusack), a paranormal writer with no actual belief in the paranormal, and- obviously- a troubled past. Wishing to write about supposedly haunted room 1408 at the Dolphin Hotel, New York, he travels there and meets with hotel manager, Mr Olin (the always enigmatic Samuel L. Jackson). The scenes between these two are fantastic, because they really set up the fact that this story is going to happen, in Mr Jackson's words, in "an evil f***ing room" (the movie has a very dark sense of humour that very occasionally comes into play). Long story short, the room is evil as hell, and the rest of the movie unfolds on the room's full-on, incredibly visceral, psychological assault on Mike.
The movie generally operates on a combination of the room messing around with Mike and the intense hallucinations it causes, some of them very personal. This is a movie that just plain doesn't let up- as Mike himself tries to assure himself near the start, as the first few minor incidents occur, "hotels are a naturally creepy place". The movie works on the idea of a steady build-up- the events that occur start out as fairly creepy, soon moving on to flat out terrifying, ending with the room's clear, concious attempt to actively destroy Mike. I don't want to spoil the scares to anyone, but they are great to discuss. I indulged myself by describing the film to an easily-scared friend (The Omen was a bit much for him). His eyes widened and he said "there's no way in hell I'm seeing that movie." For many of you, this will be the strongest endorsement I can possibly give.
The room itself feels like a character for much of the movie, but towards the end, as the movie begins to move into CGI territory, a bit of this organic feeling is lost. If I'm to fault this film, the way it moves towards a conclusion (which is quite good, actually) results in some loss of steam, and even lagging, despite its 90-or-so minute length. There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind the room. "Evil f***ing room" really does pretty much cover it entirelly. It does teach Mike a bit of a lesson (the subplot about his past and inner demons is pretty passable), but it doesn't seem like an intentional thing. So a bunch of crazy stuff happens, and it's pretty cool, but there's no real pattern or reasoning behind the room's intense evil, which takes away from the sustained creepiness towards the end.
All in all, though, this is a great example of why I love a good horror movie. It managed a strong box office return in the US- possibly better than what Saw IV is going to end on in their domestic office,- which is a good omen for the genre's future, I hope. 1408 opens across Australia on December 6. I heartily reccomend it to anyone not prone to heart attacks.
Why can't horror films do psychological horror anymore? Rosemary's Baby doesn't have a lick of gore in it, yet creeps you out the whole way through. That vomitting moose head in Evil Dead 2 was scary for its entire duration, not for the first two or three seconds when it started up. These days horror films are either generic shock-tactic fests or Saw-style "if this was happening to you, it would be scary" sort of things. Have I mentioned how much I hate Saw II yet? Because I do. So, so much.
Earlier this year, I rented The Descent. 84% on Rotten Tomatoes and I have no idea why. The first half is pretty good, dealing with claustrophobia in a decent enough fashion, but once the monsters start appearing, it turns into generic "SUDDEN LOUD NOISES ARE TERRIFYING!" fare. It was at this point when I realised that even the top of the current crop couldn't even come close to, say, 1931's Frankenstein, let alone the many excellent horror films released from the 50s through to the 80s. What has happened to the genre? Because it's an excellent genre, or at least it should be. It's absolutely one of the strongest evokers of emotion you can find, but where is my fear? Why have I not squirmed in a cinema seat in so, so long?
1408, however, reaffirms my belief in the genre.
I'm not going to suggest that Mikael Håfström has crafted a perfect horror film, or even that he's the next big thing, but I have to give it a lot of credit for finally making me believe in the power of the horror film again. Håfström may not be teaching the class on horror, but he sure as hell took a lot of notes from some of the best teachers.
1408 (to clarify, yes, it's not out in Australia just yet, and yes, I did see it legally, I was at a press screening) is a Stephen King adaptation. This will instantly turn some people off, but it shouldn't. Think more The Shining than It. Obviously, it's not as good as The Shining (otherwise it would probably have its own public holiday by now), but it's pretty clear everyone involved in this film watched Kubrick's King adaptation a whole lot before making this. I'm not going to pretend there aren't a few 'LOUD NOISE' scares, but coupled with the psychological elements and the plot in general, they make a whole lot of sense.
Basically, this movie follows Mike Enslein (John Cusack), a paranormal writer with no actual belief in the paranormal, and- obviously- a troubled past. Wishing to write about supposedly haunted room 1408 at the Dolphin Hotel, New York, he travels there and meets with hotel manager, Mr Olin (the always enigmatic Samuel L. Jackson). The scenes between these two are fantastic, because they really set up the fact that this story is going to happen, in Mr Jackson's words, in "an evil f***ing room" (the movie has a very dark sense of humour that very occasionally comes into play). Long story short, the room is evil as hell, and the rest of the movie unfolds on the room's full-on, incredibly visceral, psychological assault on Mike.
The movie generally operates on a combination of the room messing around with Mike and the intense hallucinations it causes, some of them very personal. This is a movie that just plain doesn't let up- as Mike himself tries to assure himself near the start, as the first few minor incidents occur, "hotels are a naturally creepy place". The movie works on the idea of a steady build-up- the events that occur start out as fairly creepy, soon moving on to flat out terrifying, ending with the room's clear, concious attempt to actively destroy Mike. I don't want to spoil the scares to anyone, but they are great to discuss. I indulged myself by describing the film to an easily-scared friend (The Omen was a bit much for him). His eyes widened and he said "there's no way in hell I'm seeing that movie." For many of you, this will be the strongest endorsement I can possibly give.
The room itself feels like a character for much of the movie, but towards the end, as the movie begins to move into CGI territory, a bit of this organic feeling is lost. If I'm to fault this film, the way it moves towards a conclusion (which is quite good, actually) results in some loss of steam, and even lagging, despite its 90-or-so minute length. There doesn't seem to be a lot of logic behind the room. "Evil f***ing room" really does pretty much cover it entirelly. It does teach Mike a bit of a lesson (the subplot about his past and inner demons is pretty passable), but it doesn't seem like an intentional thing. So a bunch of crazy stuff happens, and it's pretty cool, but there's no real pattern or reasoning behind the room's intense evil, which takes away from the sustained creepiness towards the end.
All in all, though, this is a great example of why I love a good horror movie. It managed a strong box office return in the US- possibly better than what Saw IV is going to end on in their domestic office,- which is a good omen for the genre's future, I hope. 1408 opens across Australia on December 6. I heartily reccomend it to anyone not prone to heart attacks.
| 119 |
| Vote |
Comment by Damo
good review.
I personally think fine horror is an artform.
Comment by Cibbuano
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Comment by 4bidnsnowflake
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
you should check out my blog sometime ...
I haven't seen this yet ... I'm a fan of early Stephen King, not such a huge fan of John Cusack though ...
I saw the trailer for this, and to be honest, it looked like crap ... but hey, you know what they say, crap trailer means good film ...
I'll probably catch this on DVD though.
BTW, I loved The Descent.
Comment by JohnDoe
Film & TV on DVD
I had heard some good things about this film and am certainly a Cusack fan. The films starts off alright but 15 minutes in shows its hand and then in the final act just gets plain silly and worse still repetitive. Overall i found it weak and unsuspensful, Cusack's acting was good even of the script became ludicrously contrived..
Identity was better, granted it was silly and the ending retarded but in a fun trash way.
For me a good film of this type is Frailty, it lets you guess the finale but not the way it goes down and the journey in intense.