Архиепископ Гамби
Верую, ибо нелепо
“The scariest movie of all time”. Is it “Exorcist”? Is it “Paranormal activity”? No, it’s “Insidious”!
Some kids want to be like Gagarine when they’re adult, some – like Bill Gates. But as for me, I wanna be like James Wan, the Chinese-Australian guy who directs horror movies over and over and over. When I’ve started watching “Insidious”, I’d seen only his “Saw”, which is a goddamn good recommendation for horror director. But this spooky low-budget (just 1 million of dollars) work which I’m gonna review is something completely different.
Well, when do we start? Some smoking titles… little boy in the bed… camera is moving so slowly… Aaah, what the hell, old lady?!
I’m not kidding – the film’s opening is scary as Old Nick’s ass. It’s not jumping with “Boo!”, it’s not stupid cat round the corner – it’s just a camera turning you right to the monster’s face in the darkness. And this old lady with the candle – maybe it’s not absolutely new image of creepy ghost, but it’s still creepy enough to scare any viewer.
When we jump into the main plot. It’s about a couple (played by Patrick Wilson and Rose Byrne) and their little kids who’ve just moved into a new house. Guess what? It’s haunted from basement to roof! Oh, wait, no. It’s not about the house, it’s about little boy named Dalton, who can travel into the world of spirits when he sleeps. The real problems begin when Dalton gets lost between the worlds, so evil entities can use his empty body to terrorise poor family. Children’re servants of evil after all, aren’t they?
As you can see, the story is not too original. We have a typical haunted horror, with creepy children, bloody handprints, women in white, paranormal researchers who help to save the day etc. At some points the plot repeats Tobe Hooper’s “Poltergeist” almost literally (especially in old-nice-medium-woman part). Shame on you, James. You’ve just given users of “Kinopoisk” another possibility to write their usual review like: “Oh, it’s so trivial, the plot didn’t surprise me at all, I’ve seen it so many times, I watched this movie only because my friend told me, I’ve got nothing to do, but it was so disappointing, na-na-na-na!”
But what about “Insidious” advantages? Actually, I’ve found a lot of them. Actors are quite good, especially Rose Byrne: her performance as caring mother who desperately tries to set things right and find good way to live is very enjoyable to watch (by the way, the scene when she exercises writing some bland song is pretty ironic and sad at the same time, it’s one of my favorite scenes in whole movie). The characters themselves are developed enough, we can see their inner problems and obstacles, fears that paralyse them (yet, some of them are very stereotypic, like old medium and her comical supporting cast). The music is conservative, like in 80-es horror movies, but it provides a good support for suspence and sudden scares. And the main advantage – atmosphere. The movie takes almost every chance and every instrument to frighten you: lights, noises, furniture, shadows, smokes. They used all the possibilities, especially in the climax, when Patrick Wilson goes into the other world to find his son. Images are wonderful: every monster has something special to make you shit your pants. Old Lady, Demon (yeah, they just call it “Demon”, not any other names), Guy in a Black Cloak and my personal sexy nightmare – Smiling Girl. Then I saw her smile, I was ready to throw my computer out of window.
Finally, do I see “Insidious” as a good film? Well, it has some serious flaws – first of all, the story, which elements we’ve seen in many other movies. Do I see it as a good horror? Definitely yes. Would I recommend it to watch? Mmm… if you can relax, not care about some obvious horror tropes, and just enjoy all the things “Insidius” gets right – in other words, if you are just as smart and happy person, as I am. “Insidious” can’t give you a ticket to the Museum of High Arts, but it certainly can send you in a perfect trip through your own Tonnel of Fear.