The movie is only about an hour and 15 minutes. Nothing after the credits and the credits are the slowest scrolling credits I’ve ever seen in my life. My assumption is that it scrolled so slowly because there weren’t a lot of people who worked on the film (since the cast was small and budget was low) and they didn’t want the run time to be so short as to devalue the movie and discourage people from paying to see it; thinking they wouldn’t get much bang for the buck. I guess they had to do something to extend it and this is what they chose.
It’s filmed in a found footage/documentary style that works for the movie. It doesn’t use too many cheap or jump scares. The only bad acting belonged to the chick who played Isabella Rossi. The most important character in the entire movie is actually the person filming everything named Michael and he gets the least amount of face time and dialogue. None of the footage would even exist if he wasn’t filming. Therefore, without him, no movie. He does express that during an MTV’s Real World type confessional. There actually is a story here. It’s not just a bunch of things happening on screen with no rhyme or reason. The story itself is very good. I like it. It’s not necessarily original but the way the movie ends, if there is a sequel, it would have to be filmed in a more traditional movie-making style. That means no found footage. I just gave something away if you’re paying attention.
There are intentional holes left in the movie that can only be answered with a sequel. Like Maria Rossi’s possession. Why was she chosen to be possessed, why did the demon who possessed her make her do what she did, and which demon possessed her? I think exorcism as a whole could be explored more since part of the theme of this movie is the law surrounding the act of exorcism and how it needs to change. Another theme is distinguishing between mental illness and possession; a separation of science and religion. I liked what they were doing here by exploring other aspects of an overused genre but all the questions weren’t answered. That’s not a bad thing. A different twist is similar to what was done in the movie Fallen and that concept was explained during the movie.
If you’re gonna see this, and I’d give this a thumbs up to see it, then go when there’s gonna be less people in the auditorium or see it at a reputable theater and that’s what I recommend for every movie anyway. This movie ain’t worth full price. Catch a matinée or half price or something. Dollar movie works too. It’s worth seeing in theaters.
This movie didn’t back down on violence. Just when I thought they weren’t gonna show certain things, they showed it and I appreciated that. No watering down here although I believe some brief nudity in one scene would have added to the realism. This also reminds me of REC but this isn’t anywhere near as good as that. REC, when watched under the right conditions, will stay with you for a while. It burns an image into your head that doesn’t go away and that’s what a good horror movie is supposed to do: make you look over your shoulder and around corners and through shower curtains and keeps you awake at night. REC does just that and gives a compelling story. This also has a good story that I’d really like to see continued if it makes enough money because, similar to REC, it appears there’s something bigger going on and this first installment only scratches the surface. It teases more and I believe it can deliver with a second movie.
The way the movie ends, there was a collective sigh of disappointment. It leaves you wanting more and since that’s what made people disappointed, I’d say it did its job. It also makes you wonder because there is something that happens in that last scene and you don’t know who the survivor is. That’s all I’ll say about that. The last scene was unique and a bit funny given the circumstances, I’ll give it that much. It was original. If that last survivor is who it should be, then we have a sequel if they ever make it and I’d love to see it at an equal or better level of quality. No complaints about the special effects which weren’t that many to begin with. I give this 7 out of 10 stars. Not a bad movie. Worth seeing. Not too scary but I’m sure some people will be affected by certain scenes because it doesn’t use too many tricks to get the job done. It has a very creepy scene that affects you as if you were watching the movie Session 9. It’s short but effective and that describes the entire movie. Just make sure to watch this with the right people in the right environment.
Fast Tube by Casper
This movie had so much potential but in the end, it was nothing but an unfinished, unexplained, mess with no questions answered & a cheesy, stupid ending.
Stake Land is a dark vision of a post-apocalyptic America that stands out in a sea of formulaic look-alikes. In director Jim Mickle’s world, creatures who blur the line between vampires and zombies are creeping northward toward the Canadian border and eating everyone in their path. This is no typical genre film, though, as the real story unfolds slowly and deliberately with surprises at every turn.
