Reviews

PLEASE DO NOT READ IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE SPOILED!!!

--- --- ---

Remember Warm Bodies? It was a better version of Twilight and Teresa Palmer's loose rendition of what Bella Swan should really have been like was much appreciated by yours truly. This is a rendition of yet another Kristen Stewart role. This time it's The Messengers -- check out the little brother (again with the little brother and the brave older sister) being protected by the sister from a demonic presence in their home. Not that there's anything wrong with Stewart's role in the Messengers but it's eerie that this is the second time Palmer's following in Stewart's footsteps.

In and of itself, Lights out is a spooky, atmospheric vehicle with quite a few jump-out-of-skin scares. I liked how sold the "boyfriend" was on Teresa's character. He was stuck to her like glue (yet another Twilight nod... ugh) and very protective of her and her family. Maria Bello was wasted in this role and the little brother was sadly underused.

Other than this, the depression angle seemed to be the only way out of the dilemma this story presented but it must have killed any hopes of a sequel for its die-hard fans (thank god).

My rating -- a solid 6 with little re-watch potential. Btw, IMDb - I am STILL mad at you for taking away our discussion boards. Not cool and a really bad move.

The best way to approach a screening of this decidedly non-Hollywood fare is to not have any expectations. Bava succeeds to an extent in terms of bringing us the ambiance of the classic horror flick because there are definitely some weird/creepy scenes that do stand the "horror" test. But the script/dialogue/pacing/editing was so badly done that they completely drown the few virtues (which are):

1) interesting "chemistry" between Harring and the actor who plays the baby. The baby is actually very well chosen. The actor -- I guess without any real intent -- had an interesting face: that of a man-child. In his key scenes of interaction with his "mother", right after he did the "naughty" stuff (i.e., biting his mom's breast, vomiting on her, and then, of course, the... ahem... shower scene in which he has a little "accident", the camera focuses on his face and we see that he has this sort of mischievous smile on his face and his eyes are extremely "aware" of his deeds. I don't know but these may have been the only times I got a kick out of this movie -- watching that kid's face. So whomever edited/directed that bit did an okay job.

2) The cinematography was simply superb (despite the choppiness of some cuts) but then even this is a problem as the African landscape is criminally underused.

3) Laura Harring's er.. figure (for the boys watching the thing) ;)

Anyway, the virtues are few and far between. The whole thing is an exercise in frustration and futility as all it made me do was regret ALL of the choices not made. Perhaps Bava was trying to not be predictable and so not use certain horror elements... but, hey, using green vomit is pretty much a standard horror element, so why not use some other ones to better effect? For instance, we don't ever get to see or hear Thandi's mom. Why not?! I mean, this is a GHOST story and you don't do anything with the oft-mentioned ghost in the tale? It's just, well, frustrating.

So, yes, this is not a movie even five bucks will cover. So don't even try to buy it in a bottom of the pile sale. Use that fiver elsewhere. Just watch this thing on cable when they show it (which is quite often, actually).

Don't wait for the DVD, you'll miss the point. All three (four, really, because Tai/Rosie is great actor) leads do well and the movie has an old Hollywood glow to it that's been missing for years in Tinseltown. Perfect it's not. Why? Mainly, two reasons: 1) a less than commendable emphasis on the cinematography rather than character development. This is somewhat understandable as Francis Lawrence seems to have assembled an academy-winning crew and probably couldn't help but let them do their thang. And 2) slight tedium in editing during the middle sequences. That said, Reese Witherspoon was a stellar circus act and played jaded but romantic hopeful Marlena to perfection. Christoph Waltz's scenery-chewing prowess had ample display but I'd like to see him as the "hero" in his next venture as I'm not German or Austrian so I haven't seen enough of his work. As for Robert Pattinson, I'm not going to say "woah the dude CAN act after all" as I already knew that. What he's done with the badly-written Edward is really commendable. He made THAT role iconic and this one luminous. The kid has a bright future if he chooses well. Lastly, Rosie. If ever there was natural actor -- she's it. The movie stayed with me for a while, so that must mean something. Imperfect as it is, I'd rather spend my ten bucks on this than Fast Five.