Skip to main content

Into the Further you go.

Insidious
(2010)

(SPOILERS) Right from the off, Saw duo James Wan (director) and Leigh Whannell (writer) clearly intend to embody the most recognisable conventions of the classic frightener. Fraught strings accompany a roving camera around a darkened house, up until the point where the viewer is granted the briefest glimpse of … a disturbing face illuminated by a candle. For the first 40 minutes or so Insidious continues in this vein, laden with atmosphere, lurking menace, and sudden shocks. But then it unravels, falling back on sub-Poltergeist investigations, botch-job explanations, and an uninspired exploration of an underdeveloped alternate realm.


There’s an awful lot that seems familiar here in fact. Which can be a blessing to a genre that relies on the tried-and-tested, but it can also be tiresomely derivative if one isn’t careful. Insidious borrows liberally from both Poltergeist and A Nightmare on Elm Street, but Wan is unable to summon an ounce of their iconic lustre.


Initially, he is able to effectively plays with expectations. The Lambert family (Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne and three kids) has moved into a new house and, lo and behold, it appears to be haunted. When one of their children, Dalton (Ty Simpson, so good in last year’s Iron Man Three), mysteriously enters a coma we know something’s up but his parents seem oblivious. Yet this is a post-Scream horror (albeit not a self-reflexive one) where the filmmakers hopefully know heroes can’t be too slow to twig there are supernatural nasties about. In the case of Byrne’s Renai anyway. Wilson’s Josh is more resistant, but we’ll discover there’s good reason for this (I assumed his reticence was leading to a reveal that he was having an affair, but it never comes).


All the signs of a poltergoost are there; a box of sheet music mysteriously disappears and then shows up again, books end up on the floor moments after being placed on a shelf, a red handprint appears on the sickly child’s bed sheet, there are assorted ghostly apparitions, creaking doors and darkened shuffling attics. Joseph Bishara’s score greedily grasps every opportunity to pile on the shock tactics, any time a half-seen figure materialises.  A particularly effective sequence involves whatever the hell is making those sounds Renai can hear on the baby monitor. But then, as noted, Wan and Whannell pull off their front-loaded surprise (except if you’ve seen the movie poster). The dumb parents don’t follow the usual script, regardless of common sense. Oh no. Renai announces, “I’m scared of this house” and persuades Josh (who is experiencing seemingly unmotivated visions) that they should up and leave.


Of course, no sooner have they done so than Renai realises they’ve brought the haunting with them. Josh’s mum (Barbara Hershey) tells of a particularly spooky dream where a figure appeared in the corner of Dalton’s room (Whannell was likely plundering David Lynch). Of course, it’s slightly less terrifying to find this demon bears a strong resemblance to Darth Maul. But it isn’t until Lin Shaye’s psychic investigator Elise arrives that Insidious starts to lose its way. She’s accompanied by a duo of comedy geeks, Specs (Whannell himself) and Tucker (Angus Sampson) and she pays off the mystery with some really phoney exposition (“It’s not your house that’s haunted. It’s your son”; but what do I know, it’s the poster tag line).  When a writer introduces his trump card with a line like “Have you ever heard of astral projection?” you know you’re in trouble, and the realisation of Whannell has up his sleeve is decidedly deflating. Not only is there a lacklustre name for his other place; the Further, “a dark realm filled with the tortured souls of the dead”. Uh-huh. But there’s a reveal of some really in-your-face drawings Dalton festooned his bedroom wall with, that mom and dad somehow failed to notice, showing him astrally projecting and… that ever-so nasty demon chap. Doh!


The communication session is a bit of a botch too. The odd quirky moment aside (Elise wears a gas mask that somehow facilitates interaction with the other place) Wan has gone astray now, flooding his stage with unatmospheric lighting (not a patch on Poltergeist), no doubt fully aware that tiny Dalton throwing investigators around a room looks very silly. The revelation that Josh himself was once an astral traveller, preyed upon by a nasty demon all his own, is reasonably effective. But his trip into the Further is entirely lacking, with a one-note confrontation conjuring the memory of Robert Englund’s forays into unsuspecting teenagers’ dreamscapes. There is even a moment where, having rescued Dalton, Josh does the classic “I’ll catch you up” thing beloved of horror movie clichés, so forget that post-Scream awareness thing. Wan even throws in the de rigueur oldie put to sinister use (Tiptoe Through The Tulips by Tiny Tim).


And then he pulls a Brian De Palma, with a twist ending I probably should have seen coming but didn’t. During the ‘70s that would probably have been it, but fast forward four years and a second sequel is on the way for this minor cash cow. Byrne, Wilson, Shaye and Hershey all perform commendably, unified in their attempts to breathe life into hoary old dialogue. But it’s Wan’s aptitude for suspense and staging during the first half that deserves the most credit. Still, given that the communication session is the closest Insidious gets to an action scene and it’s also the least effectively handled, it gives me slight pause as to whether he can come up with the goods for Fast and Furious 7.


***

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Believe me, Mr Bond, I could shoot you from Stuttgart und still create ze proper effect.

Tomorrow Never Dies (1997)
(SPOILERS) Some of the reactions to Spectre would have you believe it undoes all the “good” work cementing Daniel Craig’s incarnation of Bond in Skyfall. If you didn’t see that picture as the second coming of the franchise (I didn’t) your response to the latest may not be so harsh, despite its less successful choices (Blofeld among them). And it isn’t as if one step, forward two steps back are anything new in perceptions of the series (or indeed hugely divisive views on what even constitutes a decent Bond movie). After the raves greeting Goldeneye, Pierce Brosnan suffered a decidedly tepid response to his second outing, Tomorrow Never Dies, albeit it was less eviscerated than Craig’s sophomore Quantum of Solace. Tomorrow’s reputation disguises many strong points, although it has to be admitted that a Moore-era style finale and a floundering attempt to package in a halcyon villain aren’t among them.

The Bond series’ flirtations with contemporary relevance have a…

Remember, you're fighting for this woman's honour – which is probably more than she ever did.

Duck Soup (1933)
(SPOILERS) Not for nothing is Duck Soup acclaimed as one of the greatest comedies ever, and while you’d never hold it against Marx Brothers movies for having little in the way of coherent plotting in – indeed, it’s pretty much essential to their approach – the presence of actual thematic content this time helps sharpen the edges of both their slapstick and their satire.

On account of you, I nearly heard the opera.

A Night at the Opera (1935)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers head over to MGM, minus one Zeppo, and despite their variably citing A Night at the Opera as their best film, you can see – well, perhaps not instantly, but by about the half-hour mark – that something was undoubtedly lost along the way. It isn’t that there’s an absence of very funny material – there’s a strong contender for their best scene in the mix – but that there’s a lot else too. Added to which, the best of the very funny material can be found during the first half of the picture.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989)
(SPOILERS) There’s Jaws, there’s Star Wars, and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy, to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “mainly boring”.

Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the system when Burton did it (even…

Poor Easy Breezy.

Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood (2019)
(SPOILERS) My initial reaction to Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood was mild disbelief that Tarantino managed to hoodwink studios into coming begging to make it, so wilfully perverse is it in disregarding any standard expectations of narrative or plotting. Then I remembered that studios, or studios that aren’t Disney, are desperate for product, and more especially, product that might guarantee them a hit. Quentin’s latest appears to be that, but whether it’s a sufficient one to justify the expense of his absurd vanity project remains to be seen.

This better not be some 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea shit, man.

Underwater (2020)
(SPOILERS) There’s no shame in a quality B-movie, or in an Alien rip-off done well. But it’s nevertheless going to need that something extra to make it truly memorable in its own right. Underwater, despite being scuppered at the box office, is an entirely respectable entry in both those arenas from director William Eubank, but like the recent Life (which, in fairness, had an ending that very nearly elevated it to the truly memorable), it can’t quite go that extra mile, or summon that much needed sliver of inspiration to set it apart.

I still think it’s a terrible play, but it makes a wonderful rehearsal.

Room Service (1938)
(SPOILERS) The Marx Brothers step away from MGM for a solitary RKO outing, and a scarcely disguised adaption of a play to boot. Room Service lacks the requisite sense of anarchy and inventiveness of their better (earlier) pictures – even Groucho’s name, Gordon Miller, is disappointingly everyday – but it’s nevertheless an inoffensive time passer.

I just hope my death makes more cents than my life.

Joker (2019)
(SPOILERS) So the murder sprees didn’t happen, and a thousand puff pieces desperate to fan the flames of such events and then told-ya-so have fallen flat on their faces. The biggest takeaway from Joker is not that the movie is an event, when once that seemed plausible but not a given, but that any mainstream press perspective on the picture appears unable to divorce its quality from its alleged or actual politics. Joker may be zeitgeisty, but isn’t another Taxi Driver in terms of cultural import, in the sense that Taxi Driver didn’t have a Taxi Driver in mind when Paul Schrader wrote it. It is, if you like, faux-incendiary, and can only ever play out on that level. It might be more accurately described as a grubbier, grimier (but still polished and glossy) The Talented Ripley, the tale of developing psychopathy, only tailored for a cinemagoing audience with few options left outside of comic book fare.

Goodbye, Mr Chimps.

At the Circus (1939)
(SPOILERS) This is where the brothers sink into their stretch of middling MGM movies, now absent the presence of their major supporter Irving Thalberg; it’s probably for the best this wasn’t called A Day at the Circus, as it would instantly have drawn unflattering comparisons with the earlier MGM pair that gave them their biggest hits. Nevertheless, there’s enough decent material to keep At the Circus fairly sprightly (rather than “fairly ponderous”, as Pauline Kael put it).

My name is Dr. King Schultz, this is my valet, Django, and these are our horses, Fritz, and Tony.

Django Unchained (2012)
(MINOR SPOILERS) Since the painful misstep of Grindhouse/Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino has regained the higher ground like never before. Pulp Fiction, his previous commercial and critical peak, has been at very least equalled by the back-to-back hits of Inglourious Basterds and Django Unchained. Having been underwhelmed by his post Pulp Fiction efforts (albeit, I admired his technical advances as a director in Kill Bill), I was pleasantly surprised by Inglourious Basterds. It was no work of genius (so not Pulp Fiction) by any means, but there was a gleeful irreverence in its treatment of history and even to the nominal heroic status of its titular protagonists. Tonally, it was a good fit for the director’s “cool” aesthetic. As a purveyor of postmodern pastiche, where the surface level is the subtext, in some ways he was operating at his zenith. Django Unchained is a retreat from that position, the director caught in the tug between his all-important aesthetic pr…