It Follows

Right before I saw David Robert Mitchell's "It Follows" at my local theater, I was greeted with previews for forthcoming supernatural horror films like "Before I Wake," "Insidious: Chapter 3," and the remake of "Poltergeist," all of which could've probably taken clips from one another and I wouldn't have even noticed. This is how basic and thoroughly unimpressive horror has gotten over the last few years and why we need to support films like this one. Is "It Follows" worthy of such praise along the lines of "the best horror film of the decade," "one of the scariest films ever made," and so forth? Sadly, no. I sometimes think critics either speak too soon or simply want to see their name stamped before advertisements, claiming such outlandish assertions that could not only be disingenuous to their actual viewpoints but, in turn, set unrealistic expectations up for films that leave the audiences disappointed.

Make no mistake however, for "It Follows" is definitely worth seeing and is bound to be one of the strongest horror films of the year. Even if we consider its few shortcomings and some instances of serious monotony, I'm more than happy to support this little festival darling and commend it for what it does well. As I stated, just before you settle into watch the film, you'll more than likely see previews for horror films made by people and studios who have simply stopped trying to make good, memorable films and copped out at settling for mediocrity. Here's to a film that went left when most of the pack went right.

After an opening sequence that hooks you from how absurd it is, we focus on Jay and Hugh (Maika Monroe and Jake Weary), a couple of twentysomethings out on a movie date. In the theater, Hugh notices a woman in a yellow dress, who apparently cannot be seen by Jay or anyone else, and orders her out of the theater. When the two are alone in their car, following sex, Hugh takes a chloroform rag to Jay, knocking her unconscious and ties her to a wheelchair. It's here when Hugh informs Jay that something has been following him for a long time but only he can see it. It often appears to be a naked woman, but can take the form of anyone, even the people you know and love, and passing it on occurs by having sex with another person. The soul will follow whomever is affected by its curse at walking pace, and if it catches up to Jay, it will kill her, and proceed to go after Hugh.

"It Follows" is an early candidate for one of the most beautifully shot films of the year, and more than likely to be the most beautiful looking horror film of 2015. It has a delightful moodiness to its cinematography, captured crisply by Mike Gioulakis, as it uses a dark purple, gray, and teal color palette to look simultaneously uninviting and immersing. Colors like blood red boom with the feel and visual power that echoes Dario Argento, almost like an homage to "Suspiria" in look and feel. The story moves with the kind of slowburn intensity we've seen from horror directors John Carpenter and Wes Craven, or even Ti West, if we're talking more contemporary.

The real aesthetic treat here is how Disasterpeace's music combines with the film's cinematography. The use of heavy, bass-rattling synthesizers makes the film look and operate like a horror film of the 1980's to the point where looming tension becomes almost overcompensating in the way it appears to be taking over the entire film. The synths are loud and unsettling, and at times, can really propel the film to a suspenseful climax. Other times, however, they are obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious and slightly disrupt the tonality Mitchell sets by making the film operate on a low-key playing field.

While the plot appears confusing, "It Follows" is surprising in how little there really is to it. Teenagers walk around, run from ostensibly nothing, comfort one another through sex and aimless conversations, and assure one another that it will all be okay amongst discussing different ways to combat this force. It's almost like Larry Clark made another horror film, as the tonal shifts feel like they're almost part of a coming of age film in addition to a horror film. These shifts aren't bad, however, as they function nicely to the film's more suspenseful elements by slowing the action down but never coming to a grinding halt. There's an unevenness, but it's not made as apparent as one would presume.

I find this is largely because of how well everyone works together here. With Gioulakis evoking consuming cinematography, Disasterpeace emphasizing a score that's alive and intense, Mitchell taking screen writing and directorial risks for his genre (employing long, clean shots that provide for a beautiful sense of location), "It Follows" is sound on almost all fronts. The only negatives that arise from the film are occasional structural burdens, or the fact that, towards the end of the film, its idea seems to change to fit the situation and create something unexpected.

Nonetheless, "It Follows" is a film to see and support, for it's one of those many opportunities we have as consumers that we keep blowing to see quality entertainment. It's almost like voting in elections; vote now and hopefully experience something that will satisfy you in the future. Even if "It Follows" isn't the perfect gem some have claimed, I'd rather see a pretty good independent horror film than a mediocre or downright abysmal carbon-copy that's spit into 3,000+ theaters with nothing but money in mind. There's heart in "It Follows" and that, at all times, is evident.

I just recently rewatched this film and really enjoyed it. I had forgotten how well made it is. I love the way it makes you feel tense and unsettled, but does it in a way that feels like the old school classic horror films. It's got a good pace, believable characters and feels very real. Like this could happen to you, which is why I think it works so well. It definitely is thought-provoking, and has the same kind of feeling as a John Carpenter movie. On second viewing, you start to see all the creative elements going on that all work well together. (score, choice of locations, production value, props) Some have said the idea of having a curse put on you through having sex is a little silly, but I think it's a fresh approach and like that the writer was thinking outside the box. Too many people like to bash on filmmakers, but I am here to praise people for their creativity and their hard work. It's not easy to get a film made, and I commend anybody for getting it from script to screen.

Does anyone else wish this had been a short film? The mood and atmosphere are so thick for the first half hour or 45 minutes and then it just trucks along for the rest of the movie without a lot of energy. Fantastic cinematography and music, but the characters are pretty limp and it's hard to care what happens to them. Once they go into the investigation part of the film, everything falls apart and it becomes a chore.

That is the only way to review this film.

The goal of every journeyman film-maker from the beginning of the medium to the present, is to produce something that has the most impact per dollar spent.

Think of the first Night of the Living Dead. Shot on location with unknowns and local residents as extras. And the local butcher donated the entrails.

Think Ginger Snaps, which started as an obscure Canadian horror flick but found an audience because of the great writing and the charisma of its stars.

What we have here is another attempt to strike film gold by going for a high I/B ratio.

A small cast. Minimal special effects. No special sets or backgrounds.

A really clever idea, sort of a take off on the Ring which itself was a riff off a Japanese horror classic.

So what's the bottom line? Well done for what you get. Writer/Director Mitchell has a heck of a career ahead of him. Several "jump out of your seat" moments. And also a plot riff which you just know was contributed by some of the frat boys who crowd-sourced the film -- "you can get rid of the curse if you just sleep with someone, fast!"

The bad news? It is not in the same class as Living Dead or Ginger. There are lulls. There are gaps. There are times you start to wish you have purchased the extra large popcorn and coke.

Great career launch.

This is a creepy movie. It doesn't have a ton of jump scares, it isn't bloody or gory. What is has is enough creep factor to make you start looking around the room while you're watching it. Great music to help set the tone of a sense of dread. The acting is pretty good and it isn't too long. Overall a really good creepy movie that doesn't overdo it with the "sex" theme. There is plenty of tension and it starts at minute one and doesn't stop. There were no surprises and it was done "right". Definitely should be watched in a dark room at nighttime. Oh yeah, the females in the movie are really easy on the eyes. Just sayin. Worth the watch.