"Paranormal Activity," Paranormal Success

Take that, Hollywood.

You've been content to (almost) exclusively crank out pale, regurgitated horror fare for years and it has finally crept up and bit you. Some guy from Rancho Peñasquitos got two actors and $15,000 together and managed to make the best horror movie in years, possibly decades. Furthermore, he took a filmmaking gimmick that you have repeatedly failed to make functional – the "found footage" conceit – and made it look easy. Now, I suppose some credit is due to you here; you were smart enough to buy up the distribution rights and give the film wide enough exposure to make it the most profitable independent film ever. Then again, that was all at the behest of one of your reigning oligarchs, Steven Spielberg, who believed his copy of the movie was haunted. Perhaps you still have quite a bit to worry about.

Oren Peli's "Paranormal Activity" is meat and potatoes filmmaking. It is very easy to forget that less is generally more, and that this maxim holds particularly true for the horror genre. Yet, every aspect of this film benefits from precisely this sort of simplicity. Sure, many of the constraints that this film had were not necessarily Peli's choice, but many people would see his circumstances as an excuse to never even try. Thankfully, he did try and he was wildly successful.

"Paranormal Activity" presents the videotaped account of a San Diego couple's brush with the, ahem, paranormal over the course of a few weeks. The film begins when Micah (Micah Sloat), a day trader and technophile, switches on his new video camera. His girlfriend, Katie (Katie Featherston) claims to have been experiencing the presence of supernatural beings for the better part of her life. Thing is, most of the encounters occur when Micah is sleeping. He sees the camera as a way to have a bit of fun with it all and, hell, maybe even shed light on the situation. So, he proceeds to film just about every moment of their lives, even going so far as to leave a light on in their bedroom, so he can put the camera onto a tripod and capture them sleeping. Katie is cautiously complicit in the experiment. She is not a big fan of the camera (or Micah's lighthearted attempts at filming their more intimate moments) but she welcomes the opportunity for some vindication.

Needless to say, that vindication comes – in due time. Peli's script proceeds at a meticulous pace, always laying its next card on the table with devilish protraction. The film's overnight scenes are where the vast majority of the action takes place and their intensity is ratcheted up one, and only one, notch each time they roll around. What begins as a faint rumbling sound on the first night slowly evolves over the course of the film into the mayhem of the final night. So precise is this progression that each time the next night comes around, and the film returns to that static, blue-tinged, wide shot of the couple lying in bed, the shiver that runs down your spine multiplies in its intensity.

Perhaps an even larger surprise is that the intervening scenes do not drag. In fact, they keep the pace perfectly. Micah and Katie's relationship is obviously put through the ringer during the course of the film, but they have a genuine affection for each other, which makes the drama between them involving and sympathetic. Micah can be a bit smug, and it causes more than one hurtful moment for Katie, but he never fails to do the right thing when the chips are down. Similarly, she never fails to recognize his fundamental decency. This is one of the less obvious areas where the film benefits from its independent status; the characters never stop exhibiting a basic three-dimensionality, no matter how expedient the alternative may have become. With the result being a movie where people you actually care about are in danger, it pays off.

Peli's apparent genius, however, does not end with the script. Films like "Cloverfield" have proven that the on-the-scene-camcorder-footage approach to shooting a horror film can bear downright disastrous results. Yet, the moment they see Micah unfolding his tripod, skeptics will breathe a sigh of relief. Peli's cinematography is certainly convincing as amateur camcorder footage, with much practical lighting (as in, free of professional equipment) and the requisite shakiness. Thing is, whoever is holding the camera at any given point knows better than to swing the damn thing about or hold it at odd angles. Horrendous camerawork may be realistic in some circumstances, but that does not make a movie any more watchable.

Characters will even put the camera down at times, creating some amazing results. This includes scenes where we are left to marinate in the tension of an empty room or where our skewed perspective creates claustrophobic compositions. At one point, Micah finds Katie sitting on the floor, shaking. He places the camera on the floor and embraces her. We can only see the floor and, at the very top of the frame, Katie's quivering legs. Touching and unsettling at the same time, it is one of many moments of simple brilliance.

Any good horror director borrows from Hitchcock and Peli is no exception. Much of the claustrophobic tension in "Paranormal Activity" can be attributed to the camera being confined to Micah and Katie's two-story house, much like James Stewart's apartment in "Rear Window." The fact that Micah works from home and that the couple descends into a state of drowsy exasperation over the course of the film essentially prevents them from leaving the house. It makes the sole, significant outdoor scene all the more surreal.

So limited is the scenery in this film that roughly a quarter of it is one setup – the overnight shot of Micah and Katie in bed. I have never seen a movie that milked so much drama out of a single angle. For most who have seen "Paranormal Activity," one look at the murky interior of the bedroom will be enough to recall much of the film's terrors. Peli devises a number of memorable scenarios that take place in these scenes. Some are a bit unoriginal but many are quite fresh, and all of them are genuinely effective within the context of the film. His use of the bedroom door is nothing we have not seen before, but the events involving the door happen at such long intervals and with such delicate escalation that he manages to reinvigorate this tired device. By the film's halfway point, the audience begins to dread nightfall as much as Micah and Katie do.

My analysis of the bedroom door in the movie should make this clear: "Paranormal Activity" has no pretensions. It is content to utilize the simplest means to build tension and elicit scares. Consequently, the film is a revelation – a reminder of what truly good horror filmmaking looks like. The film largely deserves all of the buzz it has received. Which is, of course, a double-edged sword; Paramount has already snatched up the rights to "Paranormal Activity 2." Now that is horrifying.

On a broader note...

I have run into a few people who insist that this movie is rather terrible. Now, this is par for the course with sleeper horror hits (see: "The Blair Witch Project"), but I think part of it can be blamed on the fact that people have forgotten how to watch movies. One person I spoke to, I believe, watched a bootleg of the film on his laptop. Hear that? That is the sound of palm-to-forehead contact.

Film requires immersion in order to be effective and this is especially true for horror film; of course the movie will seem largely ineffective if you are watching it on your cell phone as you drive to work in broad daylight with the radio on! That is not the movie's fault. If you at all intend to enjoy a film – and I assume most people put on a movie with this intention – you have to do everything within reason to remove yourself from the outside world for those few minutes. That means shutting off the lights, watching it on a screen that's bigger than your forearm and, for the love of all that is Good, turning off your shitting cell phone. Until people do that, I will have a great deal of trouble sympathizing with any gripes they may have with a film.

Also, stealing movies is wrong, kids. Especially when it is a movie with a $15,000 budget. Come on!

Catholic Camp in Toronto... I mean Boston

On some days and with some movies, blogging is an act of masochism. Today is one of those days and Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day is one of those movies. Why, oh why, did they ever let Troy Duffy make another movie?

In an earlier piece on Martin McDonagh, I talked about In Bruges as a sort of revisionist Tarantino film – it had humor and ultraviolence and odd conversations, but it had depths utterly lacking in QT's mostly superficial work. Troy Duffy's first film occasionally pretended to mean something, though his dialogue, his cinematography, and his plot were all far weaker than Tarantino "classics" like Pulp Fiction. In the ten years since Duffy made The Boondock Saints – and alienated half of Hollywood – he hasn't improved. If anything, he's moved backwards. The action sequences remain weak, the dialogue is still thoroughly unfunny, and Duffy has removed all the first film's (barely perceptible) nods to moral ambiguity.

There's not all that much to distinguish the second Boondock film from the first, aside from a substantially more ridiculous plot, which is sporadically interrupted by sepia flashbacks to Billy Connolly's character's youth. These flashbacks – ostensibly to the sixties – look like they're taking place in the twenties or thirties. We may be supposed to feel something – the flashbacks tell of the making of an assassin – but they're awkwardly staged, lit, and shot. At least they make more sense than the entirely random dream sequence pep talk Duffy introduces solely so he can bring back a dead character from the first film. But the film's worst moment comes in its final twist and revelation. It involves Catholic assassins (maybe like this?), a celebrity cameo, and a sequel hook. The implied follow-up looks to be even worse than this film.

There are a lot of things to hate in Boondock Saints II, but I think its most galling trait is its fundamental dishonesty. The film's two main "characters" are supposed to be quintessential Boston Irish, but we can only tell because a) they have Latin- and Catholic-themed tattoos, b) they drink a lot, and c) they spend some time as shepherds in Ireland. Troy Duffy tries hard to give the film a Boston identity, but it simply won't happen; he shot in Toronto, and it shows. His cinematic "Boston" consists of stock footage of downtown and a generic skyscraper that stands in for the Prudential Tower. And, to be fair, there's about two seconds of a news report that shows an actual MBTA train. But at least Duffy knows his Boston slang, right? When the film makes a character speak of "Beantown," it's so shoehorned, unnatural, and poorly-delivered that it becomes unintentionally funny. Sorry Troy, but all the spokes have fallen off from your Hub.

As atrocious as Duffy's portrayal of Boston is, his take on Catholicism is far worse. One gets the sense that in Duffyland, murder is some sort of eighth sacrament. All the priests collude in the protagonists' rampages. According to the film's ending, the titular Saints are somehow following the Catholic party line by ventilating mobsters. Damn, I never knew the catechism was so bloodthirsty. Duffy fills his movie with shots (often slow-motion close-ups) of clerics, collars, crucifixes, and confessionals, but it doesn't mean anything. Then again, what does have meaning in this utterly empty film?

Boondock Saints II is, in theory, an action movie. Unfortunately, the action is pretty awful. There're a lot of slow motion shots, but none of them are graceful or interesting enough to justify the slowdown. Most of the the movie's bullets are aimed at the camera; the average shootout is a few shots of the Saints yelling and shooting in silent slow-mo interspersed with reaction shots of mobsters and criminals falling backward. Only rarely do shooters and shot share a frame. There's nothing inventive or intense about the movie's shootouts. They would be far better if Duffy had dropped his slow-motion gimmick – at least then the pain would be over more quickly.

There's plenty more to complain about in Boondock Saints II. Troy Duffy has quite a few misguided beliefs. He seems to think we care about his protagonists' backgrounds. We don't. He believes we have never watched The Closer on TNT, so we won't notice how much Julie Benz (as an FBI agent) rips off Kyra Sedgwick's role in that show. He thinks gross-out humor to make 90's Adam Sandler blush is funny. And worst of all, he somehow imagines that people will want to see a sequel to this film. Saints preserve us.

In one of my first reviews here, I called Taken a "good bad movie." This is a bad bad movie. Perhaps a discerning viewer could enjoy it inebriated or ironically; it could be a midnight double-feature with The Room or the first Boondock Saints. But instead let us hope that the world forgets this film. Somehow, though, I doubt it will. The audience I watched the movie with seemed to really and honestly enjoy it. What ever will become of us?

High Honors Among Thieves

If "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune" marked the opening shots of a revolution, "Uncharted 2: Among Thieves" will prove to mark the moment when the war became winnable. The original game had an emphasis on narrative that changed the standards for video games as a storytelling medium. The sequel does not necessarily change the standards again, it just ensures that future games will have no choice but to meet them. Everything, absolutely everything, that worked in the first game (and everything that did not) has been polished to perfection in "Among Thieves," instantly elevating the series into the pantheon of seminal gaming franchises.

There was a moment while I was playing the gripping single-player campaign in "Uncharted 2" when I stopped and thought, "This game is going to have other video game developers throwing themselves off of buildings." Before I get too exalting, however, let me concede that there remains room for improvement (the game's final third cannot maintain the perfect pace of the previous sections – it all degrades into mere greatness, in lieu of excellence). So, at the very least, let us hope that no one at Naughty Dog will be defenestrating themselves over the prospect of the inevitable "Uncharted 3."

Now, Mr. Keeley has already discussed the game's myriad improvements in his two posts, so I will look closely at a specific segment of the game that I believe best illustrates its strengths: Chapter One.

We find Nathan Drake sitting in a train car, stunned. He quickly realizes that he is bleeding heavily, then he slowly realizes that the train car is dangling off of the side of a snowy cliff. Debris comes tumbling down onto him, knocking him out of the car and leaving only the car's back handrail from which to hang. With this, gameplay begins. Scaling the car is every bit as nerve-wracking as it should be. The cliffside is crumbing, the train is pulling apart, winds are blowing and Drake is dying. All of these factors inform the gameplay. Progress is slow, as falling boulders set Drake back, unreliable footholds nearly throw him to his death, and his injuries keep him in nearly palpable pain.

This one train car proves to be a marvel of level design, as the changing state and position of the car force the player to traverse every side of the car's exterior, as well as its vertical interior. First time players will find a number of small, yet thrilling surprises in the gameplay, simply during the course of the minute or two spent climbing the car. No average person could look at a train car and see so much potential for challenging, dynamic platforming; this is the work of true artists. Furthermore, it serves as a wonderful refresher on Drake's abilities. Almost every aspect of the climbing mechanic is utilized here, but with a stilted speed that both heightens the tension and allows players to ease back into the controls.

Reaching the top of the train car brings a second car, this one horizontal (for the moment). This triggers the first of many harrowing, scripted sequences in the game. The second car begins to slip off of the cliff as Drake is walking through it and he must to run for his life. This is not, however, a cutscene. Like so many moments like this throughout the game, the player remains in full control, forcing him or her to frantically work to reach safety; as Drake finally scampers onto solid ground, he is not the only one breathing a sigh of relief. For far too long, video games have featured gameplay that fails to reflect the circumstances within which they are set. Throughout "Uncharted 2," however, contextual handicaps to the controls, dynamic level design, dramatic camera positioning and, of course, excellent voice acting ensure that the emotion of a situation is always brought home to the viewer.

What follows the collapse of the two train cars exemplifies this, too, as the game's narrative enters the mix. Drake must stumble through a dangerous wreckage of about a dozen other cars. He receives some very serious blows here, as other parts of the wreckage explode or collapse, and many of them trigger flashbacks. In these flashbacks, players watch and play through the events that lead up to the train wreck. The trickle of information has a bewildering effect that only brings the player even closer to Drake's stunned state. The final flashback lasts a few hours, as the story circles back around to the wreck.

If one were to look at the elements that compose this sequence, he or she would find very little in the way of new things. Predetermined camera angles, quick-time events, cutscenes, scripted musical cues – all of these things have been used (and, often, overused) for years, but never before to this effect. Games of the past dreamed of an experience that combined all of these elements into something truly seamless and immersive. "Uncharted 2" is brimming with sequences that are wildly successful at it. Time and again, the game leaps two or three steps ahead of the player, sparing him or her those all-to-familiar thoughts of, "Wouldn't it be awesome if I could..." In other words, "Uncharted 2" is the game that players have been unconsciously wishing for over the past few years, but never received.

Again, there is little in the way of apparent innovation in "Uncharted 2" – and that is what will undoubtedly make it so scary for other developers to see. What Naughty Dog has achieved with this game cannot be easily replicated because, on some level, it cannot be attributed to anything other than unadulterated talent. It is difficult to believe that this game was crafted in two years. So many developers devote more time to games that do not feature anything approaching the minute level of polish that this game does (not to mention its incorrigible personality). The past few years have been great for video games, without a doubt, but Naughty Dog has ensured that no one in the industry will be allowed to rest on their laurels any time soon.

Praising with Faint Damns: Uncharted 2 Multiplayer

As I hope Tuesday's review made clear, the singe-player mode alone made Uncharted 2 one of the best games that I've ever had the pleasure of playing. The game didn't need a multiplayer mode, and I don't think many fans of the first game expected one. For one thing, Naughty Dog has never been known for crafting competitive games. In the past, they've made very very good games designed for single players. The last game they made with multiplayer was the PS2 racer Jak X. Still, when Naughty Dog announced that Among Thieves would contain a robust online multiplayer feature, I was optimistic. Few companies have as consistently successful a track record as Naughty Dog and I believed their first venture into online multiplayer would work. I was right.

I should make it clear that Uncharted's multiplayer isn't quite as good as its single-player. It's nearly as good, however, and that is high praise indeed. The game features most of the classic shooter game modes, including Deathmatch, variations on Capture the Flag and Zones, and an Elimination mode. In addition, there are a few co-op modes pitting you and your teammates against the same sort of AI opponents you encounter in story mode. And while there are more than enough modes to satisfy, there are a few odd omissions. For one thing, there's no traditional Capture the Flag. The closest equivalent, Plunder, has two teams rushing for one golden idol (the "flag") placed in neutral territory. There's no need to guard your own flag, as you don't have one. I tend to think Plunder is more enjoyable than CTF would have been – CTF works best if there are a lot of players, and Uncharted only supports ten at a time – but some shooter devotees might grumble. Somewhat more irritating is the lack of splitscreen play. I get the impression that even the most talented development team would be hard-pressed to have multiple players running off the same Playstation, so I can't fault the game too much. It's disappointing, but hardly a deal breaker.

Each and every multiplayer map in Uncharted 2 is well-planned, subtly-detailed, and enjoyable to play on. Alas, there are only a very few maps: There are seven "normal" maps and three levels of "story lite" co-op. The multiplayer arenas are every bit as pretty as the single-player levels they derive from, though I was somewhat surprised that there were no maps based off the jungle or museum levels of the single-player mode, as both seem appropriate deathmatch settings. What Uncharted's maps lack in quantity they make up with quality. In most matches you will have opportunities to use all your various Uncharted skills: gun combat, fistfighting, stealth, and platforming. Though Uncharted lacks the vehicles of the Halo or Battlefield games, combat is far more varied than in many other shooters.

Uncharted players don't have character classes like medic or infantry, but there's still room for customization. In all competitive modes, you get to equip two "boosters" that do things like improve your pistol accuracy or let you carry more grenades. Though most of the boosters are useful, none, as far as I've seen, are game-breaking. An "unboostered" novice, if good or lucky enough, can take down an old hand. When you first start playing multiplayer, you don't have access to any boosters – you get them as you gain experience in the game and increase your multiplayer level. Thankfully, many of the best boosters become available at relatively low levels – Uncharted, unlike Killzone 2, is friendly to its new players.

In addition to the money you earn just for playing and making kills, Uncharted gives "medals" and "cash" for accomplishing various feats, such as throwing an enemy off a ledge, killing multiple enemies in short succession, killing someone by blowing up a propane tank, etc. The medals, for the most part, are very well thought-out. In Plunder, for example, the entire team gets points for getting a treasure to the base. It's almost as if Naughty Dog wanted to encourage teamwork! In addition to new boosters, gaining levels allows players to select new multiplayer avatars: If you see someone playing as gag character, Skelzor or the bearded Lt. Draza, you know they're dedicated players.

In addition to the leveling system, Uncharted has a very easy-to-use Party system. If you wish to play multiple matches with the same group of friends, it's very easy. I hardly ever play "alone," as fun as that might be. I'm usually in a group with the co-runner of this blog or with people I know from the Internet. Uncharted 2 does socialization extremely well; though seemingly minor, I think it's one of the best features of the Among Thieves multiplayer package.

As much as I enjoy the competitive aspects of Uncharted 2's multiplayer, I think I prefer co-op. So much of the single-player story of the Uncharted games is about camaraderie and derring-do in the face of uneven odds; co-op brings story mode's ethos to multiplayer. I'm especially fond of survival mode, which pits you against increasingly brutal AI foes, often far more intimidating and clever than they are in story mode. It's tough, certainly, but addictive.

I have nothing but praise for Uncharted 2's single player campaign; my feelings on multiplayer are slightly more mixed. I wish there were a few more levels available – though I imagine the downloadable content due before year's end will rectify this – and I wouldn't mind the addition of a more traditional CTF mode. Still, Uncharted 2's multiplayer has given me some of the most fun I've had all year. On its own, Among Thieves' multiplayer is absolutely brilliant. It only falls short when compared to the main game.

To sum up my two-part review: If you have a PS3, you should buy this game.

The Drake's Progress: Uncharted 2 Single-Player

Uncharted: Drake's Fortune was a wonderful game. It was balanced, well-written, and player-friendly; it had a great story and high replayability. But, after playing Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, I never want to touch Drake's Fortune again. Nathan Drake is back and in great form.

Among Thieves' basic gameplay isn't much different from Drake's Fortune's, but the accumulation of small tweaks and changes has made the second game far superior to the first. As Mr. Hollis-Lima mentioned, the combat in the original Uncharted was comparatively basic: Duck, cover, shoot, repeat. It was fun – and later levels did mix it up a little – but it was also the least compelling part of the Uncharted package. Among Thieves has just as many gun fights as its predecessor, but these battles are far more interesting. In Drake's Fortune, strategy often came down to selecting which rock, piece of masonry, or log you would hide behind for the duration of the violence. Enemies always knew where you were – Drake would enter a room and immediately the bullets would begin to fly. In the new game, however, Drake often manages to enter rooms undetected, allowing the player to pick off a few enemies with stealth moves. Though the first Uncharted featured a rudimentary stealth system, I used it maybe three times in the course of the adventure. Here it's vital. Hand-to-hand combat has also been improved, though not quite so dramatically as the stealth.

The improvements to combat don't stem just from the changes in mechanics; equally important are the changes in combat environments. The areas in which Drake fights are now far larger and more sophisticated than they were in Drake's Fortune. In most battles, there are several viable strategies, from stealth to sniping to rushing the foe. In addition to the "normal" scuffles, Uncharted 2 has several wonderful action set pieces. Though the events are quite scripted, the player still has a degree of freedom within the madness of (say) a fight in a collapsing building. Where many developers would put in a cutscene or a QTE (i.e. an exercise in timed button-pressing), Naughty Dog trusts players with full control.

One of the best things about Uncharted 2 is its remarkable attention to detail. In one early mission, for example, Drake has to sneak into a museum without killing anyone. When he attacks a guard from behind, he does one of several special non-lethal attacks that appear for that level only. Later in the same mission, the game forces you to throw a hapless guard off a roof and into the water thirty-odd feet below. I doubt most players will particularly care about the fate of their innocent victim, but someone at Naughty Dog thought about him. If you look down from the roof, you can see the unlucky man swim to safety. There are plenty of similar details in Among Thieves. Several puzzles require the player to flip through Drake's notebook for hints; if you look at earlier pages in the book, you'll find several funny jokes and a few callbacks to the first game, plus Drake's list of past girlfriends.

I don't want to speak too much about the plot of Among Thieves, as the game doesn't deserve to be spoiled. I thought the artifact du jour wasn't quite as interesting as its Fortune counterpart, but that character development was extremely well-done. The first game's plot had Drake fighting mostly Asian or African pirates; in this game there's a bit more ethnic diversity. Most of the villains are (gasp!) white.

More than one Uncharted player has commented on the disconnect between Drake the Everyman and Drake the Videogame Hero. Yes, Drake kills hundreds of trained soldiers in his adventure. This is, after all, a shooter. Yet, somehow, Nate still seems fallible and human. Nolan North's voice acting has a lot to do with this – if a grenade comes towards Drake, he is going to yell or curse, not just coolly evade – but so does the gameplay. You spend a good portion of the game scrambling away from more powerful enemies, including tanks and helicopters. And surviving the game's final fight requires much frantic dodging of a faster and stronger enemy.

I suppose I should talk about graphics. They're gorgeous. All the characters look, if not realistic, then plausible. It's very easy to believe in Drake and Company. Especially impressive is the game's train level, as the jungle, villages, and lakes you so quickly pass by look as good as everything else in the game. I have never before been so impressed with a game's appearance. Most of Drake's Fortune took place in the jungles and ruins of an uninhabited Pacific island, allowing Naughty Dog to showcase their beautiful tree and water effects. Among Thieves doesn't entirely dispense with the wet jungles, but Naughty Dog has new graphical toys to show off. Much of Among Thieves takes place on the heights of cold mountains and the snow effects are incredible. Drake and his companions get believably dusted with snow, the footprints left behind look realistic, and the mountain weather varies from clear skies to whiteouts. Uncharted's world, for all its concessions to jumping and shooting, feels real.

Uncharted 2 took me about twelve hours to beat, but it seems to have excellent replayability. There's a level select (Thank you!) and 100 well-hidden treasures to find. I'm at sixty-six right now and enjoying myself – treasures aren't just scattered about; you have to think like a game designer to find them. In addition to the treasures, you can also change your hero's appearance: If you want to go through the game as Francis Drake's skeleton or one of the female leads, you can do that. Even better, you can give yourself (almost) any weapon you want. If ever you want a minigun, you can have it. I beat Uncharted 2 almost a week ago, but it's still all I want to play.

Were Uncharted 2 "merely" a single-player game, it would remain the best game I've played on the PS3. But Among Thieves is not just a one-person experience, it has an extremely good multiplayer component as well. My multiplayer review arrives Friday.