You will sleep with the light on after Paranormal Activity 3



Reviews of “Paranormal Activity 3” blabbed about its last 15 minutes “messing you up for life.” It’ll have to be your call. As for the rest of the film, however, it will definitely stand out as one of the more seriously unsettling films of the year.

For those who have lived under a rock since 2009, “Paranormal Activity” emerged as an instant hit, despite its status as a low budget horror film completely filmed with a handheld video camera.

The first film focused on a young woman and her husband dealing with the unknown occurrences transpiring within their home; the second focused on the woman’s sister and her related home hauntings — but this time around, the latest film delves slightly deeper into the plot as it details the origin of the paranormal activities surrounding the sisters, as children.

Once films the likes of “Paranormal Activity” reach their third outing, more often than not, they become redundant, predictable and generally not worth the time. “PA3” serves as a welcomed exception.

Newcomer Christopher Nicholas Smith, in his first lead role, plays the spooked amateur filmmaker boyfriend of young Katie (Chloe Csengery) and Kristi Rey’s (Jessica Tyler Brown) mother Julie (Lauren Bittner).

As usual within the “Paranormal” franchise, once a camera begins rolling, it captures some pretty creepy things — dust slightly outlines an invisible figure watching the couple in bed; random knocking; items inexplicably moving on their own. But it goes much further than the common scare tactics overly used in most horror films. Exposition is provided — finally — and the white-knuckled scares continue throughout the film, directly leading to a conclusion you may not have seen coming.

If you’ve seen the second installment of “Paranormal,” you most likely remember the kitchen scene as Kristi Rey (as an adult) sits sipping coffee at a table. There’s silence, no movement, then suddenly every cabinet and drawer blow open at once. It definitely startled the audience wisely, and obtains the scares with relatively no sound effects or sudden music.

You can expect a similar frightening scene in “PA3,” and it’s also set in the kitchen, but takes the scare intensity to a new level, as does most of the film.

Directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman were selected to direct the third installment, coming off the buzz from their 2010 “true story” thriller “Catfish.” The two are young and eager to thrill, startle and completely toy with audiences. And they too succeed.

What works best with “PA3” is the acting doesn’t seem forced so the family dynamic begins to reveal itself. The more you can relate with the family members, the more effective the scares are.

Just in time for Halloween, “Paranormal Activity 3” is already a box-office blowout for the season — showing low budget films can truly hit the high millions in gross — and the ending leaves audiences desiring much more in the future.

I’m sure they’re already working on “Paranormal Activity 4.” But let the filmmakers take a lesson from the “Saw” franchise: don’t let greed overshadow film quality by making dozens of sequels that overplay an effective horror story.

Read more ...

Paranormal Activity 3 OFFICIAL TRAILER




Paranormal Activity 3 Trailer : Discover the Secret Behind the Paranormal Activity. The first and official trailer of Paranormal Activity 3.
Read more ...

Paranormal Activity 3... is pretty scary REVIEW

Horror movie franchises are the cinematic equivalent of fast food restaurants — the audience feels comfortable because it knows exactly what it’s going to get. Such is the case with the third installment of Paramount’s low-budget cash cow series. Although not exactly breaking any new ground with its by now all too familiar found-footage format, "Paranormal Activity 3" hews to the formula in expertly crafted fashion, mustering up the requisite scares and then some. With no "Saw" sequel to provide competition this year, this should be the trick-or-treaters’ movie choice in October.
Newcomer directors Henry Joost and Ariel Schulman, who have some experience with faux documentaries ("Catfish"), have collaborated with returning screenwriter Christopher Landon to effectively reprise the series’ trademark elements. But this edition — a prequel that concerns the younger versions of the adult sisters from the first two — is tighter and scarier than the previous installment. It also features ample doses of humor that both provides a pressure valve for the tension and brings a welcome self-conscious mockery to the proceedings.
After a preamble featuring Katie Featherston and Sprague Grayden briefly reprising their roles as the ill-fated siblings Katie and Kristie, the story goes back to 1988, when their childhood selves (Chloe Csengery, Jessica Brown) are living in a well-appointed suburban California home with mom Julie (Laurie Bittner) and her boyfriend Dennis (Chris Smith).
Things inevitably start to go bump in the night, and since Dennis is a wedding videographer he’s well equipped to blanket the house with the video cameras that will provide the sort of spooky footage that always seems to somehow wind up as feature films in our multiplexes...

Among the creepier elements that the filmmakers have devised are Kristie’s interactions with an imaginary, ill-tempered playmate named Toby and a game of “Bloody Mary” (hinted at in the film’s trailer with a scene that isn’t in the feature) that goes seriously awry.
But the most ingenious idea is also wonderfully simple. In addition to the stationary and hand-held cameras previously employed, there is a jerry-rigged camera on a slowly swiveling oscillating fan that provides some of the scariest moments. In such sequences as one involving a babysitter who probably won’t be returning to work for this family anytime soon, the audience is forced to wait breathlessly as the camera pans back and forth, back and forth, slowly revealing the horrific goings-on.
Although there’s an undeniably repetitive aspect to the films, audiences probably won’t mind very much. And certainly this series, despite the fact that it thankfully doesn’t need to use gimmicky 3-D, fairly demands to be seen on the big screen. Resembling cinematic versions of “Where’s Waldo,” the films demand intense concentration as the audience peers at the frame trying to spot the element that doesn’t belong.
As usual, the climax, in which the family makes the mistake of retreating to the sweet grandmother’s (Hallie Foote) house, replaces the air of mystery with an all too explicit explication for what’s been going on. But it does effectively fulfill its requirement of setting things up for the inevitable next installment. One doesn’t need a Ouija board to discern that it will probably arrive sometime around next Halloween.
What do you think of the "Paranormal Activity" series? Scary or stupid? Tell us on Facebook.
Read more ...