It might be that aspect of it that frightened me the most - it definitely was reminiscent of my childhood ghost experiences.Įveryone is different, for sure, but this is the first movie that "got" us in several months. There was constant spooky shit happening down there that would immediately cease when the lights were turned back on. In the house I grew up in in Idaho, I was the only one with a bedroom in the basement. This movie had what I was expecting from Skinamarink, where many commenters mentioned that it preyed on their childhood sense of the dark. There were no jarring moments that took me out of the out of the settings. While the acting could have been a bit better, it certainly wasn't lacking. Watched a bit more, had to let the pups outside, and repeated our previous actions of going together and turning on every light in the house. This time we went together, and flipped on every damn light between point A and B. My wife and I had to go feed our housemate's dog in another part of the house about midway through the film. This creates the illusion that the monster is potentially in the room with you. At home, most horror buffs watch their flicks in the dark. There's also the concept of the monster itself playing with the environment beyond the screen. They didn't have to spend time designing a monster, building a puppet, putting make-up on an actor, or blow money on CG effects. The sheer brilliance of a monster that is never really shown directly, only as a silhouette, allows the audience's imagination to fill in the blanks. While I wish they'd drawn it out just a touch more, I really enjoyed the film overall. If you get a kick out of hearing yourself and like-minded others scream, “Lights Out” is just the ticket.Came here to write a post about this one, actually. The final showdown between the family and Diana is well-staged and, in one bit, even clever (something this film is usually not). The frightened little boy angle doesn’t approach the depth and complexity of “The Babadook.” That PG-13 rating is a joke, given the amount of gruesome violence. The Diana back story is lifted from any number of other films and not very plausible. The film may be full of dumb dialogue, not completely well-acted and shaky-cam-plagued, but Palmer and her big hair are no match for Maika Monroe (“It Follows”). They just want the shocks, and they get them in “Lights Out.” Minute by minute, there are more of those cinematic equivalents of someone shouting, “Boo!” in someone’s face than in any film I have seen. They don’t mind anything concerning credibility.
The demon also appears to have the ability to make lights go off at will, which is really an arbitrarily stupid device, although people who go for this kind of thing won’t mind. When a light comes on the demon disappears.
In opening scenes, the Diana demon can be seen, but only in the dark. His older sister Rebecca (Aussie Teresa Palmer in full vocal fry mode) is some sort of Goth performer with a place of her own and a boyfriend named Bret (Alexander DiPersia), whom she won’t allow to sleep over. Martin has been falling asleep in school because he has not been getting much sleep at home, where Diana wanders about at night. The boy, Martin (a very good Gabriel Bateman), can be seen at the start on a computer screen, telling his dad, Paul (Billy Burke), who no longer lives at home, that “Mom is talking to herself again.” The friend is named Diana, but she looks like a very tall shadow with glowing eyes and a big mop of black hair. Mommy Weirdest has a not-so-imaginary friend with very nasty claws. It tells the story of a boy unfortunate enough to have to live with his crazy mother, Sophie (a twitchy Maria Bello). Sandberg’s “Lights Out” recalls several far better J-horror films of the past. A dimwitted yet frequently jolting fright film, David F.
0 kommentar(er)
