Mockingbird

My favorite thing about this is the clown; I'm barely a fan of found-footage films. I originally saw this years ago when it came out in 2014 on a streaming service and even then I didn't mind it, it's definitely disturbing! Bryan Bertino has much better films like The Strangers and The Monster - both are spectacular in my opinion. Also found-footage types are really hard to enjoy in most cases but I recommend this, if not anything in the VHS series is great.

The idea of a couple of people have to film something over a strange contest is a interesting idea, but the actual story feels similar to the director first movie. The story is kind of like the found footage version of The Strangers with three characters being targeted and harass by an unknown person. Its easily predictable and there's a couple of cheap jump scares throughout the movie. There's also a minor side plot of Leonard doing a bunch of random things by the unknown person, but that isn't that interesting to watch. Also the movie spends a lot of time with the three characters hiding or thinking of a plan.

I have to say that the ending is really stupid and doesn't make any sense. No spoilers, but its really bad compared to The Gallows.

I don't understand why everyone is hating on this movie. I thought it was genuinely, a good watch for horror fans. It had really good jump scares (especially if you have headphones on), a good plot line, if you stay through the whole thing, and a crazy twist ending that will make you think. And, the fact that everyone hated it, probably made it better. Maybe, i watched it with low expectations, but either way, I enjoyed it. If you're looking for a movie to watch with your friends on a rainy day, or Halloween night, or if you want to watch this alone, under the covers, watch it, please!!!!! I beg you!!!! And, believe me, if you hate clowns, this one will scare you!

4/10. Three set of people: a woman, a couple, and a man who lives with his mother are mysteriously given large bulky VHS cameras (it takes place in 1995) on their doorsteps and told to "keep filming." In addition the man is told has been entered in a contest where he can win 10 thousand dollars.

This starts out as an interesting premise but doesn't really go anywhere. The woman and the couple stay in their homes as they begin to be terrorized by bangings at the door and sinister telephone calls but are given very little to do.

The man is given orders to leave his home and perform a variety of tasks in full clown suit and makeup and this is a little more interesting, but it doesn't really carry the movie.

Eventually it all culminates in a twist that I didn't see coming, but thought was full of plot holes and didn't make much sense.

I wouldn't necessarily say avoid this one but don't look for anything groundbreaking or very cohesive and entertaining.

Bryan Bertino needs to put his ego aside and go back to film school to learn how to make a watchable movie. Since this comes across as a movie a novice film school student might make, here are some hints for him:

* The shaky camera technique used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It worked for "Blair Witch Project", but has never worked since. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. It's also obvious that not all the shots are done with the cameras the characters are given. It is a very sloppy use of the "found footage" technique, which has already gotten old, and should be abandoned by any capable writer or director.

* The lighting flashing from dark to bright used throughout the movie becomes annoying after a point. It doesn't make any movie more suspenseful or scary, unless used sparingly. Using it this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. That's especially true since there is no realistic reason for the relatively constant rapid changes from darkness to light in large parts of the film.

* Having all the characters react in unrealistic ways does not become more believable by covering them up with shaky camera movements and flashing lights.

* Long, drawn out shots that add nothing to the plot drag a movie down. Using them this much shows a lack of creativity on the part of the writer/director. But I guess he had to turn what could have been a possibly decent short film into an hour and 22 minutes feature somehow.

* A movie needs to have some context, some cohesiveness that draws the viewer in. That is completely lacking here, all the way through. I don't look for realism or a complete lack of plot holes (and there are plenty here) in a B horror movie, but I would like some logic in its progression. There is none here.

The above makes any experienced viewer lose interest before the 1-hour mark. I only stuck it out because the movie is thankfully short.

Then there is the final scene, which is drawn out painfully long (again, probably to pad the movie), and ends with a ridiculous payoff. The inexplicable makeup and utter lack of believability that the characters that pulled off this "prank" could have done so further ruins what is already a very bad movie. I even "get" the ending, which I guess was supposed to surprise me. But no. It only added to how badly written and executed the film was.

How Bertino managed to get a major studio to back this mess with somewhat good production values and a large crew is a mystery. The fact that it went directly to disk (ones that are being sold dirt cheap) is not a mystery. It is disappointing, though, that a film like this gets to disk while so many older and recent much better movies never do.

I am amazed at the few positive reviews I see here for this mess. Since the one guy misspells "style" in his title, it makes me think that only young viewers that haven't seen very many horror movies, or movies in general, could enjoy this.