I had recently heard so many good things about this movie that I was very hesitant to watch A Dark Song. But I will say that I was initially gripped by the idea of a woman hiring an occultist to help her summon an angel, her guardian angel, to help her right a wrong in her life. Compelling performances and what seems to be a thorough presentation of occult rituals and the importance of intent and purity when pursuing such endeavors.
The strongest elements of this movie are the atmosphere and believability to the occult practices. The discussions of sleep deprivation, dehydration, and other naturally occurring bodily functions playing such a role in the occult is something not often seen in such narratives. The occult is a science when practiced. There is mathematics, scientific applications, and observation, and experimentation involved in the practices. This movie shows the moving parts of an occultic working, something along the lines of what Aleister Crowley probably would have done. And the depictions of the mental breakdown that can occur during a summoning seems relatively realistic, considering what is happening. Overall, I was very impressed and unnerved during most of the movie, enjoying every moment.
I was pleasantly surprisd by what seems to be a return to form for M. Night, as he seems to understand the importance of story above the aesthetics of storytelling. The performances by all were top notch, often elevating the minor contrivances of the plot. The story worked well not only as a standalone narrative, but also as a platform for continuing, or rather, creating a franchise from a cult classic among early fans of his work. Where M. Night succeeds in this movie is that there is a complexity to the characters not really seen since Unbreakable, the movie that this acts as a sequel for.
Where Unbreakable was a DC comic in tone, showing the origins of a villainous mastermind, this movie shows the evolution of a man who was tormented to such a degree in life that he has evolved into the ultimate defender of himself and only those he deems righteous or “clean” enough. Which is ironic because of his intention to wreak havoc through his multiple personalities. This is the tone of the older pre-code comics of EC, whose lurid and often supernatural tales seem to be an inspiration for this movie. This is not strictly a horror movie, while it does have many elements of captivity and survival horror, but it is more of a psychological thriller, showing the slow breakdown of a tortured soul who at his core does not want to hurt anyone. However, the fractured personalities that sprang up in defense of itself as a result of the trauma inflicted have other ideas and plans to punish the world at larg. So many interesting ideas at play in the story, and M. Night handles them with surprising depth and a sure hand.
I wasn’t sure what to expect with Demon. I had read so many reviews that talked about how palpable the dread was, and how terrifying some of the sequences were. And while those words of praise are not complete rubbish, my experience is that those words were a little bit hyperbolic. Again, not to take away from its qualities, of which there are quite a few, but overall I wasn’t as moved by the movie as many had seemingly been.
There was a sort of palpable tension at times, but it wasn’t really sustained as long as I would have liked. What does work, especially when the tension is supposed to be at its highest, is the effects of the interactions between people. The bride and groom don’t really know each other all that well, as it was a whirlwind courtship, and her father is not all that pleased because he is a well-to-do businessman in the town and is suspicious by nature. He’s also a jackass, which plays into the larger narrative. There are some really great moments in the newlyweds’ home, one gifted by the bride’s father. It has a built-in sense of dread and history that suits the situation and the narrative. And another positive is that the story underplays the “demonic” elements overall, and instead letting the situations play themselves out and cast doubt on what could really be happening. That type of doubt subtilely sewn into any horror or supernatural narrative works for me because now I’m questioning the reality of the story. When I do something like that, I’m usually in for a good ride. I did really enjoy Demon, but I also felt there were some moments that could have been handled better; however, the final product did unsettle me to an acceptable degree.
Dir(s). St. Vincent, Karyn Kusama, Jovanka Vuckovic, and Roxanne Benjamin (2017)
I want more from these filmmakers, as horror needs more female voices to guide us through the horror landscape. Here is how I enjoyed the different segments: the first entry was one of the better entries, the second was the “worst”, the third was…the third best, and the final installment was the best. The first was great because of its creepiness and unique narrative. The second wasn’t as good because it did have some good moments, but it was dark comedy that fell flat for me; if there is something horrific, I missed it. The third was effective and told a well trod trope of the creature in nature, and it was quick enough, although also a little thin on narrative. The final is the best because, in my opinion, Kusama is the best filmmaker of the bunch and she knows how to wring out tension from a slow burn perspective. I want more horror from these women specifically, and women in general.
Now, I will make this clear about the ratings I gave: even the “worst” is much better than most mainstream fare in horror. This is another title that I feel warrants another viewing. And I don’t buy any arguments that women’s directing style is any different in a negative way, let alone a general sense. Looking at Kusama, her direction is lean, mean, and ferocious. BUT I will concede there is a warmness at times, but that could very well be the material she wrote and what she put into that material. All of the entries have an energy to them that is refreshing. I’m not sure if it is because of the unjustified perceptions about women in horror, and while I don’t buy those perceptions and criticisms, I’m kinda glad they took to them head on because their dedication to genre shows. I need more movies from all of these filmmakers. Now.
I cannot believe how much fun this movie is. And I can’t believe that I put off watching it as long as I had. Playing with time and the effects of toying with it is not easy at all. Most often the fatal flaw is forgetting to consider which type of cosmology of time travel is being used. The filmmakers often forget to ask whether they are looking at a multiple worlds theory, a loop, or any iteration of time travel aesthetics. And even more difficult to make work well is when a minor detail pays off in later acts. This movie has all of that in spades.
Timecrimes works well because of the affability and relatability of the the male lead, and how quickly his desperation warps him into a cruel person. And the deaths that he creates at first seem to be unavoidable, the further into the time spiral we go, the more we realize how easily the situations are engineered. They are built from multiple failed attempts at course correction, with multiple versions of the male lead running around causing one situation to spiral out of control. And with each iteration of the lead we see a callousness to the “first” with each attempt at course correction. But, the film succeeds in building tension from a very simple premise that quickly escalates and becomes overly complicated because of very simple and human flaws. And the ending is simple and dark. Which in this case is the most rewarding type of ending.
This was somewhat interesting and it did one thing that most found footage does not do well – era specific tech and footage presentation. This looked as if it were filmed and presented on Hi8 or similar tech from 1997. It wasn’t miraculously filmed in HiDef 1080p resolution like too many found footage titles are. Some great moments that felt real, and the build up was cool, but the ending was sort of a letdown, considering how some lead up sequences were tense and well executed. Good, but not great.
As stated, the one great achievement is its success with aesthetic presentation and immersion. The era specific degradation of the film quality is so on point that I did pause for just a moment and ponder its origins. But that is the point of found footage – to make it seem plausible that the footage has indeed been found. There is a good wraparound with the “survivor’s family” or in this case the father of a man who was supposedly killed for possessing the footage that we see. It’s a nice touch for the genre and the presentation. However, as also stated, the third act is a let down and a disappointment considering all of the good will built up to that point. It is well worn and trodden, the path of the narrative in the third act. Which I would not have any real problem with, but noting interesting is done with it. This is the same problem that many other recent alien abduction mockumentary, found footage, or general narratives all have in common – painted into a corner within the confines of the genre tropes. The banter between the friends in this movie seems genuine, which also built a solid foundation for believability. But that felt inert and ultimately ineffective in the third act. The rest of the movie is fun and has some interesting ideas that are not executed effectively enough. But still, not a bad way to spend about 90 or so minutes.