Part of

Part of

Wednesday, November 11, 2009

THE FOURTH KIND REVIEW (spoiler alert)




Spoiler Alert: Includes discussion of whether or not the movie was real


  The story of this movie centers around psychologist Dr. Abigail Tyler and her video taped sessions with patients. The patients were having problems sleeping, but were not sure why. As the movie goes on, you see documented footage of what was supposed to be the real Dr. Tyler and her patients along side the regular movie. Apparently in this part of Alaska, there were suspicions of alien activity, and this was what Dr. Tyler feared was happening to her patients. As the movie goes on, the patients are no longer the only ones affected by the alien activity.
  Getting right to it, this movie presents two important issues to discuss. First, did the movie create enough buzz to get people interested? Good or bad, I think this movie did create some buzz. For me, right after watching it, I wanted to know how real this story was. I did the usual searches on the Internet, and read several articles and reviews of the movie. Even if you decided not to see the movie but saw the previews, I think they pushed the story in a way that got you to do the kind of search that I did. Sorry to say, from everything I have read, the story behind the movie is bogus. 
   I could see how people would be mad that the movie portrays itself as real, but was just another Hollywood movie. Putting that aside, I liked the unique way they decided to approach the movie even though it was fake. How many movies start off by having an actor/actress explain to you this movie was based on real events before the movie starts? I know, but she was just lying to us. Still, it set a different tone for the movie. I mean, how many movies have you seen that start off saying something on the screen such as, "the events you are about to see are based on real life events,” and the movie is just as fake as this one? Yes, it did disappoint me that it was not “based on real life events,” but I did not let it change my opinion of the movie. 
  That leads me to the second issue here: was this movie any good? As mentioned, I read other reviews of the movie, and I looked at some comments from people that saw the movie. Most of those opinions, including the reaction from the audience where I saw the movie, were that the movie was bad. I did not get the feeling that a lot of people liked the movie. Maybe it was that after the movie pushed for you to believe that these events were real, the audience just could not buy into it after seeing the film. 
  Well, I have to disagree because I happen to like the movie. I liked the movie for several reasons. The first one is, as I said earlier, the unique way that they went about presenting this movie. I bought right into them saying this was a true story, and kept that frame of mind the whole time. To me, that is what made the movie good. If I doubted the truth to this movie from the start, I could see how it would have sucked from that point of view.
  The second thing I liked was how they showed what was supposed to be documented footage of the real events the movie was based on. Again, that was a unique twist on how to show a movie. It was different to see what was supposed to be documented footage shown at the same time as the scene was being acted out for the movie. I particularly liked the scene early in the movie where they split the screen into four parts, two showing documented footage and two showing the movie. I know some people hated this and compared it to shows they have seen on TV, and said the documented footage looked worse than the movie itself. I'm sorry; I liked it, and appreciated the different point of view the movie was trying to show. Yes, the footage went static, but that was the point. It was an added element to show that the aliens were in control of the person and recording devices at the time the footage was being taped. 
  Another thing I liked is that the footage actually did freak me out a little. I know, you are thinking, "what a sucker, he fell for the movie and got scared. No wonder why he liked the movie!" Oh yeah, well how many people were scared by Paranormal Activity. As I said in that review, I liked how they tried to scare you, but the movie never really freaked me out. I also mentioned in that review that one of the things that could scare you is if you believe in that kind of thing happening (ghosts for Paranormal, aliens for this movie). Even though I believe in ghosts, Paranormal never really got to me. Some of the documented footage in this movie got to me such as, what the policeman saw outside the house, and all the screaming that the people did while being hypnotized. Does that mean I believe in aliens more than ghosts? I do not know, maybe. I am sure most people will say Paranormal was better, but you can read my review of the movie to see my major problem with it. 
  Yeah, maybe you thought there were holes in the story, the documented footage was terrible, or that they went so far in trying to prove that this was real that you never bought into it, but I liked it. Real or fake, I give them credit for trying to give us a story in a different and unique way. I liked how they came right out and told you it was real, and tried to back that up with documented footage throughout the movie. I may have fallen for it, but I know you fell for Paranormal Activity. I give this movie 3 pools of blood.

HorrO


2 comments:

  1. Im very interested in this movie, Ill be seeing it and reviewing it soon, thanks for that review! I think that when done right, the hand held camera technique can be quite effective in horror films!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree that the hand held camera is a good way to go about a horror movie. It worked for Blair Witch and Paranormal. This movie is a little different. The documented footage feels more like a regular video then the hand held ones in Blair or Paranormal. I still like the use of the footage and the split screens. It was something different.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...