XIII

Is there any way to rate a movie a 0? This movie just absolutely TERRIBLE. How can you even call it a horror movie? It is 46 minutes but literally feels like 2 hours. Absolutely NOTHING happens the ENTIRE FREAKING MOVIE. Literally nothing. There's a brief glimpse of some ghostly looking girl for like less than a second and that is it. Otherwise the rest of the movie is this group of students walking around with a videocamera the entire time. This movie really could have had potential but they ruined it. I haven't seen the Blair Witch Project as mentioned in other reviews, but I imagine that one has to be better than this. It just downright awful. By far the WORST movie I have EVER seen!!! Don't waste your time!

I get that it is a low budget film, but this movie lacks so very much.

The only reasons I gave this 3 stars and not 1is because the film had an interesting idea, and the acting wasn't downright awful.

This movie is a slow burn to nothing. I love Found Footage films, but don't waste your time with this one. Not once did I feel like it was eerie. Zero jump scares. Zero scares period.

I really hate downing a film, especially when I know that the directors and entire team put a lot of effort into their work, but it has to be said. This film is genuine garbage.

Save yourself some time and watch something else.

This is a very bare-bones simple film that was directed, filmed, edited, etc by the film's 2 actors. This simplicity is what makes the creepiness of it so effective in my opinion.

The plot is two students are assigned to do a video project based on a book. They find a mysterious book with creepy drawings in the library, which leads them to an abandoned building in the woods.

A huge plus here is that there are only 2 characters. So many found footage movies try to have 5-7 characters going out in the woods, making it impossible to even learn who is who (as filming themselves makes this more difficult than in a traditional film). Having only 2 characters kept things simple and allowed them to get right to the point.

The movie is short, at just 46 minutes. Many other found footage movies could benefit from this. There was no unnecessary filler, no ridiculous side-plot conflicts, etc.

The creepy atmosphere of the film is effective and keeps suspense high as you're not sure what will happen. You're also able to sustain the feeling of dread and suspense because, as I said, there's no extra filler or side plots (for example, if other found footage filmmakers had made this with their typical filler-side-plot-conflicts, there probably would have been an extra 20 minutes of one character finding out the other slept with his girlfriend and then a bunch of unnecessary arguing). Without that, you are able to remain tense throughout the film.

The negative reviews on here are the typical cliche "but you don't even see anything! Nothing happens!" whining that applies to pretty much all found footage movies. Really not sure why these people continually watch found footage and then complain about found footage.

There's no dumb CGI ghosts or monsters. There's no delving into the details of what happened or backstory of the antagonist; it's left as a mystery and up to your imagination, and THAT's what makes it a good creepy film.

Bravo to the two fellas that made this.

For all the novelty that the "found footage" genre represents, or did at one time, over the years it has become little more than another conceit that a filmmaker might choose to employ in framing a story. Illustrating the point, some of the best found footage flicks I've seen, such 2014's 'As above, so below' or 2010's 'Trollhunter,' very notably employ substantial special effects. Furthermore, many follow the familiar bent of modern cinema of fleshing out their plots with a wealth of information and lore, giving viewers some sense of world-building, and an explanation for how the various ideas fit together, connect, and make cohesive sense in-universe. In major contrast, no small part of why I find this tiny 2019 film so fascinating and enjoyable is that it very emphatically bucks those trends. 'XIII' is wholly independent, no-budget, no-frills horror, so distinctly imparting the tale from the perspective of its two characters that we DON'T get a peek at The Big Picture. To wit: what is the origin of this book, and of the information inside it? From an outside point of view it has effectively shown up out of nowhere - and that's exactly the point. We don't know, because the characters don't know, and can't know. All the more we know as an audience is what Archie Meyer and Nathan Cox's fictionalized selves see, and the bare minimum amount of research they are able to conduct about the strange book they find. That minimum amount of research also happens to give all the slight background info that we need to understand, as viewers, that Archie and Nathan may have stumbled onto something very old and very dangerous, laying the foundation for the fun to come. For my part, I love this!

As such a small-time affair I can't imagine this will ever have the same viewership as other features with any sort of distribution deal. That's unfortunate, because I think this represents a proverbial shot in the arm that found footage has long needed as a genre. Meyer and Cox strip away all the bells and whistles and tell a simple narrative of two students who set out to write a book report, and whose curiosity about the strange tome they discovered leads them down a forsaken road. The film-making duo very shrewdly edit the picture, and tailor the dialogue and imagery, in such a way that the abandoned building they use for the key filming location - busted, gritty, and definitely uninviting - really does seem like an oddity in the middle of nowhere. The small kernels that the script and propwork lays out, hinting at ancient beliefs and corresponding to what Archie and Nathan find in the book, seem contrived or trite as we first see them, and mundane after that, yet provide a course for the sequence of events that tickles our fancy and whets our appetite for more to come. Every step along the way would seem harmless and trivial in daylight, yet with the utmost care in how 'XIII' is made,' and the fragments of information we share with the protagonists, those surroundings become much less friendly. Why, setting aside "found footage," I think horror filmmakers at large could take a cue or two from this to remind that the reason we revel in dark stories in the first place requires no CGI, nor blood or gore, nor creature effects. This little flick latches onto that ingenuity that made 2007's 'Paranormal activity' so terrific at its best: not the biggest and splashiest moments, but the minor abnormal details that trigger the alarms in the instinctual part of our brain. What was that sound in this rundown building in the middle of the night? What if we do find something in here? Did we see something in that flash of light? The congruity between what we saw then and what we're seeing now surely has to be some elaborate joke, but what does it all lead to? Our rational minds discard such notions, but 'XIII,' like 'Paranormal activity,' bypasses conscious thought and reason to ping that deep part of us that is high on alert for Something Wrong. That unadulterated ethos, more pure than even what Oren Peli gave us, is what makes Meyer and Cox's flick so great.

Further solidifying how smartly this was crafted, as we see it the movie doesn't even particularly require much of the two as actors (though they are quite fine in that regard), and this is much more about the experience of the characters outside of themselves. Meyer and Cox demonstrate keen awareness of what does and doesn't work in shaping found footage: while the camerawork is handheld and shaky, and the image bare-faced (none of the discrete third-person, heavily-produced imagery that characterizes the likes of 'The possession of Michael King'), it is still sufficiently steady (begone, 'The Blair witch project') and clear such that viewers can easily see what's going on (I'm looking at you, 'Greystone Park'), or what is deliberately selected as "enough" of what's going on, while also avoiding the problem of motion sickness that is sometimes described. Moreover, they cut out the superfluous nothing - exposition, introduction of characters, establishment of dynamics - that sometimes weighs on like-minded fare. Through to the very end the title retains its ultra lo-fi, unsophisticated, unvarnished tenor, and while I can understand how this won't appeal to all comers, I could hardly be more pleased with how good the end result is. Accentuating even more how well this works, not only do the proceedings elicit some low-key chills in the back end, but for a fair bit after I finished watching last night I found that I my imagination was still sufficiently active that I did a couple double-takes as I went about my activities; how many horror flicks can we say that about? And even as I wouldn't go so far as to say that 'XIII' is completely perfect, I also can't identify any singular flaw to earn criticism. If nothing else is true about this film then it unquestionably reflects the admirable earnestness and hard work of Meyer and Cox, but beyond that I'm of the mind that even in its brevity, frankness, and obscurity, it stands taller than many of its kin. I can only repeat that I, for one, had a fantastic time, and I'm happy to recommend 'XIII' to just about anyone!

Two young student filmmakers decide to make a film, after finding a mysterious book in a library, upon discovery of the book's details, it leads them to an old dipalidated building.. To say any more would spoil it. For a first time found footage film, it works, the actors are natural and realistic, the slow build up and fear of dread is suspenseful, the scares made my hair on my neck stand up on end.. Well done guys, hope to see more of your work soon.