Darkness

I had heard bad things from the few people I know who had seen this film. I was still curious though, I think Anna Paquin is a somewhat underestimated actress who is rarely given what you could call a leading roll. Other than that, I knew nothing that the back of the DVD case couldn't tell me. Anyways.

I really enjoyed this film. It was well made, it was tastefully done and yes I found it to be scarier than just about anything else I've seen lately. Plus it features a pretty good turn by Fele Martínez who also starred in 'Abre los ojos', the film Cameron Crowe dubbed in English and called Vanilla Sky.

Darkness was purchased for distribution in 2002 as what appears to be a tax write-off on the part of Dimension Films. It has yet to see so much as a straight-to-video release in Australia, and appearances suggest that in spite of Anna Paquin's minor stardom, it never will. This is a pity, because Jaume Balagueró's economical approach to making a horror film is something that we need more of in today's box office. Like Tobe Hooper before him, Balagueró gives the viewer short bursts of scenery for the imagination to use as a foundation. Everything that scares the viewer in this film is the product of their imagination, which might go some way to explain the poor reception it appears to have had on the IMDb. Trusting in the imagination of your audience is a risk, especially when a large part of that audience has been indoctrinated against using theirs by twenty or more years of eMpTyV. Put simply, the reception Darkness suffered in the US market can be attributed to a clash of cultures.

This is not to say the film is not without flaws. The first half hour in particular comes across as a collection of scenes without transition. This is something that occurs often in British television, where people are shown doing things in different places with nothing to explain how they got there. Those who have seen Lock, Stock, And Two Smoking Barrels or any of the Law & Order series will have some idea of what I am talking about. In comedies, this can help reduce the lag time between laughs. It can also help dramas function effectively in scope. In the case of Darkness, unfortunately, it can leave the viewer in some state of confusion as to what is meant to be happening, or the chronology of events. Subtitles are occasionally flashed across the screen to indicate what day of the week it is, but this leaves the events of the film seeming to not fit.

The acting, on the other hand, is top-notch. I am not ashamed to admit that the entire reason I bought the DVD is because of how prominently Anna Paquin was featured on the cover. The entire film rests on her slender shoulders, and she carries it heroically. Lena Olin and Iain Glen give Anna plenty to bounce off, and they all make it seem as though they thoroughly enjoyed working together. Stephan Enquist is, naturally, the weakest link in the main cast, but he holds up his end of the story with a grace you rarely see in one so young. Granted, the scenes he appears in are more or less specifically tailored to him, but this is only natural. This film is the only credit listed under his name on the IMDb, so it is possible that he never even had any plans to become an actor in the first place. He is more of a plot device than a character, but he fills that role very nicely. Giancarlo Giannini appears to have bounced back nicely from Hannibal, and proves that he can deliver a great performance when the script is right.

Rather than cover up the holes in the story or its execution with a hodge-podge of computerised graphical effects. Darkness, on the other hand, relies upon practical effects in order to deliver what some might call the money shots. Lights flicker on and off in predetermined sequences, subliminal images rocket across the screen to disorient the viewer, and sound is effectively placed or mixed in order to place the viewer in the scene. The only practical effect here I can seriously object to is the manner in which Jaume Balagueró shakes the camera during some of the scenes that are meant to be high-tension. This is the first time I have seen this despicable move during a European film, and Darkness in particular reminds me of how the technique throws me out of the picture. It reminds me that I am watching a film or DVD, not a family acting out a crisis before me. It's a shame that I have to even mention this, because the other effects in the film deliver far more punch.

As I tried to make clear, this film is very much an acquired taste. Fans of Paul Verhoeven's work in the Dutch film industry will have little trouble adjusting to the Spanish stylings of Darkness. Those who are only acquainted with the American film industry will have a little more trouble, in spite of the fact that in terms of content, Darkness differs little from most American fare. It is the little things, such as the casting or the ability to show things that America's attempts to appeal to everyone disallows, that make Darkness stand out. Sure, it is a standard horror formula, but the fact that it has not been attempted in this manner for some time is a bonus. The twist ending is hardly a surprise, but it does add an unusual edge to the proceedings. In spite of some very conventional material, the end result is anything but.

In all, I gave Darkness an eight out of ten. There is plenty that it does wrong, but there is also so much that it does right. While I don't recommend it for a look at foreign film industry, I do recommend it if you need to see that an effective horror film can be made for less than a hundred million dollars.

This movie is not your typical American horror flick (which makes sense since it's a Spanish film). It's a far cry from the gory, cliché-ridden and painfully explained horror movies that American audiences are used to.

Darkness disturbed me on different levels. One of them was the family dynamics (notably the father's mental issues), and the suggested potential for violence. The other was the supernatural element, which was used in a subtle and truly frightening manner.

I've seen thousands of horror movies in my lifetime, and this is one of the best. However, if you are not one for nuances and feel that gore is a requisite from a horror movie, then stay away from this one.

Spain - what a great country! It gave us Julio Medem, it gave us Alejandro Amenabar, and now there's Jaume Balaguero, the man who brought us Darkness, a horror film that's clever, fresh & intriguing. An american family (Iain Glen & Lena Olin) with a teenage daughter (Anna Paquin) & a little boy (Stepnah Enquist) moves into an old house somewhere in Spain, and soon enough find out that there's something wrong with it. There are ghosts of children, supposedly murdered in this very house, there's a strange man walking around the house watching it silently, the little boy is afraid of the dark & wakes up with bruises on his body & the father, who A) has a dark secret in his past, which is somehow connected to the house & B) is not very well in the mental department, starts going a little bit crazy. Sure, it all sounds corny enough, and every person who've seen films like The Sixth Sense, A Stir Of Echoes and The Shining can smile his way through the first half of the film thinking he's seen it all already. But Balaguero has more tricks up his sleeve then just a collection of genre cliches. In fact, he enjoys playing with these cliches, because later things turn not quite the way you were dead sure they would, and the final act has even more surprises in stock. The film is genuinly scary, especially in the second half when the tension just won't let up. The visuals are good - a couple of scenes are pretty likely to haunt you days, maybe even months after watching the film. The final verdict: definitely worth seeing, maybe even more than once. I haven't received that much pleasure from a horror film in quite a while

P.S. And please, people, stop comparing it to The Others, the two films have very little in common except for the set-up (children in a haunted house)

I was quite impressed with Jaume Balaguero's first feature "The Nameless" which mightn't have been original, but it was coldly disturbing and effectively suspenseful. Now I heard and read nothing but poor things on his second feature "Darkness". I couldn't escape the negativity, and naturally I was expecting something very weak. However came away from it thinking what an interesting failure into supernatural/occult territory. The main problem is due the story's stale familiarity, which never really is given the chance to rise above its foreseeable hints, embarrassingly shallow script and ludicrously ragged framework. Talk about hazy, and I mean real hazy. It's cryptic, but extremely convoluted and mundane. Even with Balaguero's understated, glossed up icy direction, which works in some eerie, and jarring visuals that go a long way of building up a quiet intensity and dreary atmosphere.

Still everything about it is downright mechanical and probably a bit long in the tooth, but it didn't seem to bother me because I found it rather intriguing despite the muddled, paper-thin intentions. There's just something lurking behind this jilted mess that I found fascinating, but the narrative does get lost amongst the busy visual style. From the beginning, we learn it's all about the casually paced build-up, but the shocks are too clichéd (like creaky sounds, moving shadows) and the final pay-off doesn't have too much of a sting to it. Technically the film looks the part with its dark composition and sterile cinematography, and the weeping, otherworldly music score works a haunting tone. The sound devices are so old-hat and forced, but they're pinpoint, vitriolic and really do surround you. The characters don't fair any better, and I thought the performances from a solid cast were modest enough even with their flimsy characterisations. Anna Paquin was suitably appealing and maturely strong, but a awful Lena Olin looked quite uninterested and Iain Glen was terribly uneven. Giancarlo Giannini stays on cruise control, and Stephan Enquist turns in a fine performance.