Monday, October 26, 2009

The Scariest Thing about Paranormal Activity

The scariest thing about Paranormal Activity is what it illuminates about normal activity. Yes, the audience screamed three times when I saw it – quite a reaction – but for the reflective viewer the really scary part comes later, when you realize that this movie could be about how into every relationship both partners bring their demons. Some are just more demonic than others.

The action is gritty and claustrophobic. The hand-held, wobbly camera angles (we saw this in Blair Witch as the reviewers will note) reminds us of our own home movies, the kind we used to make in the nineties before our phones became video cameras. This and the introductory text commentary on the screen and generally low production values put us into an amateur documentary mode which makes us feel that everything we are about to see is very real.

When you focus on two people in a relationship in a closed place for a period of time with very little distraction, except, of course, the major one, you begin to see things:

A relationship that seems simple and straightforward at first grows increasingly complex and troublesome over time. I don’t think you need extraordinary events like the ones depicted on this screen for this scary phenomenon to be believable.

What some might consider a typically male reaction to a situation stands out in greater relief as events progress. The male character wants to “solve the problem.” He enlists technology ranging from cameras and computers to a Ouija board. He rejects the opinions of “experts,” insisting on direct engagement. Naïve, well- intentioned and fearless, he turns the drama into a contest of egos with an unknown force.

At least that could be the position of what some might consider the usual female reaction to that male reaction. In other words, “he just doesn’t get it.” The female character is in tune with a reality of greater dimension than the one the male character sets out to conquer; in this film, that’s an understatement.

The contrast between these two views, forget male or female, and their inability to understand each other in everyday life is scary. There is something positive, charming and deeply American about attacking daunting problems with confidence and optimism, which we cannot give up without reducing our national character. At the same time we hope that such an approach would be informed by a reasonable though not paralyzing sense of limitations, otherwise the prospect of whatever we call success when the target is as large as a global financial crisis or a fourteenth-century conflict in a faraway country, our “success” will indeed be limited. That’s scary.

This is a sighting, not a review. It’s not about how good or bad the film is, but about what insights we can draw from it. Imagine a time before photography when the only images of ourselves were paintings and sculptures; the static visual arts of that time had great power, inconceivable to us who peruse photos on Facebook every day. Go back beyond the cave paintings to the constellations; left on their own, the earliest stargazers searched for meaning and human patterns in the night sky. Our images are on electronic screens; think of these as raw materials. They reflect our preoccupations, values, anxieties, hopes to a degree that those who process them – producers and directors – may not even be aware.

So, do we feel today increasingly preoccupied with forces that operate mysteriously in ways that we cannot understand or control? What do you think?

Visit www.movieisghtings.com and comment.

No comments:

Post a Comment