READERS' CHOICE #33: PET SEMATARY (1989) - GUEST REVIEW BY ASHLEY

TW: Suicide, child death

THRILL SCALE 1-10

8

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, a few times

BEST SEQUENCE

My personal fave is Gage vs. Truck, but the Zelda scene is also very memorable

BEST LINE

"Sometimes dead is better" (the tagline)

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

55%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Pet Sematary is a bruising horror flick that wears its quirks on its sleeves, to the detriment of its scare factor."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"After tragedy strikes, a grieving father discovers an ancient burial ground behind his home with the power to raise the dead."

DIRECTOR

Mary Lambert

MAIN CAST

• Dale Midkiff, Fred Gwynne, Denise Crosby, Miko Hughes, Blaze Berdahl, Brad Greenquist

THOUGHTS

• Spoily alert, I'm going to tell you the whole movie
• The movie starts out with a delightfully creepy score as we're introduced to the "Pet Sematary". We see various pet graves/epitaphs. It's sad, eerie, but also sort of sweet. This opening credit sequence does a nice job of setting up a spooky atmosphere
• Enter the Creed family: Dr. Louis Creed, wife Rachel, daughter Ellie (played by twins), son Gage, and cat Church (short for Winston Churchill - a pretty great name for a cat). Louis is smokin' hot in this writer's opinion btw (apparently this part was almost played by Bruce Campbell). We meet the family as they arrive to their new home, which is located on a road where transport trucks whiz by in a very sinister, foreshadow-y way
• Next we meet the neighbour from across the street, Jud Crandall (Fred Gwynne). This character is played just as I always imagined him from reading the book, right down to his classic "A-yuh" responses. His accent is lots of fun to imitate and he smokes like a chimney. Jud takes the Creed family down to the Pet Sematary (here Rachel comments on the misspelling), which is conveniently accessed from a path on their property. He points out where he buried his childhood dog and recommends they get their cat fixed so he's less likely to wander  
• On Louis's first day at his new job, a jogger named Victor Pascow is brought in, having been hit by a truck. Here we see some great practical gore effects as the poor guy's head is basically half smashed. There's clearly no saving him. The dead man then wakes, talks some nonsense, and says he'll be back. Talk about a rough first day. I love this character and how he's played in this movie. He's scary, funny, helpful, and his jogging shorts are amazing. Later, Pascow comes to Louis in a dream, taking him to the Pet Sematary and warning him not to go beyond the barrier (a huge wall of trees/branches, ominously glowing blue). Louis wakes up with his feet covered in mud (DUN DUN DUN)!
• Fast forward to Thanksgiving. Rachel takes the kids to her parents' while Louis stays home (he doesn't get along with the in-laws). Shocker: poor Church the cat is hit by a truck. Jud takes Louis to the place beyond the Pet Sematary, has him bury the cat, and instructs him not to tell anyone. The journey to the ancient burial ground is arduous. The fact that Louis blindly follows his old-ass, chain-smoking neighbour, basically up a tree covered cliff for well over an hour, without any idea where they're going and why seems silly. The next day, Church comes home. He smells like death (ha!) and is now vicious. Jud confides that he buried his childhood dog there and that he came back different too. WHAT THE EFF, JUD!?
• Did I mention the Creeds have a housekeeper? Her name is Missy and she's miserable. We learn that she has stomach cancer and she ends up hanging herself to free herself from the pain. At her funeral, Stephen King plays the minister. I actually completely forgot about this mini plot-point, but as unnecessary as it seems, it gives us our sweet sweet cameo and inspires Rachel to tell Louis about her sister Zelda...
• Meet Zelda. Rachel's dead sister. She was kept locked away and suffered from spinal meningitis. For many viewers, this is the scene that causes nightmares. Zelda (played by a man) has a scary, raspy voice, gaunt face, and deformed spine. She basically looks like a monster. As Rachel tells the story of being left alone with her on the night she died, my face is always stuck in a grimace. It's both horrible and horrifying. On the plus side, it gives Rachel's character some substance. Up until now, she's pretty bland
• Next comes my favourite scene in the movie. It's a beautiful day and the Creeds and ole Jud are having a picnic and flying a kite. Despite the cheesy music, we know right away that something bad is coming as we're shown a transport truck driver barrelling down the road. As Gage is flying the kite, the family is distracted by a gust of wind. Gage drops the kite string and begins to chase it towards the road. The family finally notices what's happening, but it's too late. We see a single shoe land on the road. This image has always stood out to me and the sequence as a whole has always filled me with such dread. The entire scene is so effective and even though we know we can't stop what's going to happen, we're on the edge of our seats  
• Another great scene takes place at Gage's funeral. Rachel's father confronts Louis, blaming him for Gage's death. There's a scuffle and the two men end up knocking over the coffin. As it falls to the floor, the lid opens briefly and we see Gage's little hand for just a second before it closes again. Super creepy 
• Rachel brings Ellie to her parents' place and once again we see that men can not be left alone. Louis gets the bright idea to dig up his son's grave and bury him in the ancient burial ground (this is after Jud has told him of someone trying this in the past and it going very wrong..). By this point, Dr. Lou Lou has gone cray cray (we see this very obviously as he's digging up Gage). Zombie Gage comes back and gives us a seriously impressive performance for a 2 year old (this actor would go on to star in Kindergarten Cop and another fave of mine, Wes Craven's New Nightmare). As Louis sleeps, Gage takes one of his scalpels and goes to Jud's house. Here we have some very obvious foreshadowing as Jud shuffles around in his slippers looking for Gage, the camera focused on his ankles. Sure enough, Gage reaches out from under the bed and slices Jud's achilles, giving us another great gore shot. Gage finishes off Jud, somehow calls his dad on the phone (can't explain that one), and invites him over to "play" 
• Meanwhile, Rachel is rushing back home after Ellie has had a bad dream about her father. And lucky for Rachel (and us!), Pascow is back to save the day! He uses his ghostly powers to help her catch her flight and get the last rental car! Thanks Pascow! (Fun little easter egg - when Rachel gets out of the truck she got a ride in, we see that the truck number is "666". SpOoKy!) She gets home and goes straight to Jud's because she hears a voice. She's so happy when she sees Gage, but of course he's evil now and kills her. Also, we get some real "Chucky" vibes from lil Gage in these scenes. Very fun!
• Let's wrap this up: Louis makes it over to Jud's, discovers what has happened, puts Gage to "sleep" with some doctor drugs, lights the place on fire, and decides to BURY RACHEL IN THE BURIAL GROUND! Dr. Creed, you are hot, but damn you are dumb. Men, am I right!?
• Louis waits up for his dead wife to return. In she saunters, and girl is looking rough. Like, pus coming out of her eyeball rough. It's actually pretty awesome until they start making out. In the original cut, the scene was more ambiguous, ending when Rachel entered the kitchen. The studio thought it was too tame, so it was re-shot with much more gruesome effects. The audience sees Rachel reach for a knife during their embrace, Louis screams, cut to black
• To sum up, I love this movie. I love the gore, the characters, even the silly, unbelievable bits (like Louis wrestling what is clearly a dummy version of Gage). It's fun and it's memorable. And while the story has some minor deviations from the book, I think that SK writing the screenplay really helped to keep the same spirit of the original story. I have seen the sequel and very much enjoyed it (more great practical effects), but have yet to see the 2019 remake
• Looking back at my notes, I see that I wrote "Jud and his Buds". This was a reference to all the Budweisers he drinks. Just wanted you all to know. Other things I wrote : "Hot Doctor Daddy", "Men are idiots", "Church's eyes" (forgot to mention their cheesy glow)
• Kudos to my husband for writing these things. I need a drink now

Up next: Oh hey, it's me, Mark again! Thanks to my wonderful wife Ashley for the review, she did an excellent job! Which is convenient because our next movie is also about a wonderful wife who does an excellent job: Gone Girl from 2014

READERS' CHOICE #34-C: IT CHAPTER TWO (2019)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

6.5

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, just like the first movie, I saw it in the theatre and I haven't seen it again since

BEST SEQUENCE

When Pennywise meets Vicky under the bleachers at a baseball game. It's a very effective echo of his scene with Georgie in the previous movie, and it's one of the best scenes to rely primarily on Bill Skarsgård's performance. And again, I do like Bev's scene with Mrs. Kersh, even when the CGI makes it a little ridiculous

BEST LINE

"Let's kill this fucking clown"

- Richie Tozier

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

62%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"IT: Chapter Two proves bigger doesn't always mean scarier for horror sequels, but a fine cast and faithful approach to the source material keep this follow-up afloat"

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"Twenty-seven years after their first encounter with the terrifying Pennywise, the Losers Club have grown up and moved away, until a devastating phone call brings them back"

DIRECTOR

Andy Muschietti

MAIN CAST

Bill Skarsgård, James McAvoy, Jessica Chastain, Bill Hader, Isaiah Mustafa, Jay Ryan, James Ransone, Andy Bean

THOUGHTS

• It's actually kind of fascinating that the previous movie was so successful in ways that this one whiffs so completely. They both had the same director, the screenwriter (Gary Dauberman) also co-wrote the original, and the plot is a continuation of the same story with the same main antagonist; it would seem that all the pieces would fall into place to make an equally effective second chapter and it honestly makes you wonder why this failed to happen. Was this movie just hamstrung by the fact that these events happening to kids is more interesting and novel than with adults? Was it an issue with needing to depict the somewhat ineffective climax from the book? Did they purposefully try to approach the filmmaking differently to make the two movies distinct from one another, or did they make the wrong conclusions about what made the original so good? The world may never know
• In my previous review I wondered what distinguishes good jump scares from bad ones, and conveniently enough I think this movie serves as a pretty good demonstration of when they're used poorly. Firstly, there are just too many - it's basically the only trick this movie has to play and we get numb to them pretty quickly. The rhythm and pacing are also off - jump scares are best used to punctuate tension, but they come so fast and furious in this movie that they don't have enough time to breathe and there's barely enough tension to even punctuate
• And speaking of tension, while I liked the comedic moments in the previous movie, in this one they largely fall flat and, more importantly, they pop up at the weirdest times when they actually work against this movie's attempts to scare us. A real clash of tones. Although I did like the jokes about Bill's inability to write a good ending to any of his books
• Which, of course, is a very thinly veiled jab at the climax of the book IT, which I've spoken about before, mostly about how underwhelming it was that the IT entity turned out to be just a big spider monster. So with this in mind, I was actually OK with the final monster keeping the appearance of Pennywise all the way up until its death, although this does kind of distract from the fact that Pennywise isn't actually IT, Pennywise is just an appearance that IT found effective in luring and killing kids. It was nice that we got some more of Skarsgård's performance, though, and I liked that the climactic battle had some more layers to it, including splitting the Losers up for their own individual scenes
• Way too much CGI, and used badly in a way that distracts instead of thrills. There was CGI used in the first movie too, of course, but I feel like in the first movie it was used to enhance what we were seeing; in this one it was basically all that we were getting at times
• If there's one thing this movie got right, though, it's the casting. The cast is almost all great and, very impressively, they pretty much nailed the important aspect of making it seem like these characters really are the grown-up versions of the kids from the previous movie, not just in looks but in behaviours too. Bill Hader as Richie and James Ransone as Eddie are standouts, and it's amazing how much Ransone looks like Jack Dylan Grazer, who played Eddie as a kid. The only dud is Jay Ryan as Ben - maybe he was underserved by the script, but he's a very forgettable part of the movie
• And so, that will wrap up our time in Derry. While IT Chapter One was the most successful adaptation of its sections of the book, and while it's always fun to see these things depicted on screen, the movies definitely did not surpass my appreciation for the book, and really this whole experience made me want to read it again

Up next: But we're not done with Stephen King quite yet! It's Pet Sematary, and more specifically the original movie adaptation from 1989. And even more exciting, it will be our first guest review! So if you're getting sick of hearing me prattle on about Stephen King, you're in luck - my wife, Ashley, will prattle on in my place!

READERS' CHOICE #34-B: IT CHAPTER ONE (2017)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

9

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, in the theatre when it came out, and I don't believe I've seen it again since

BEST SEQUENCE

It may have been surprising when I didn't even mention the scene where Georgie meets Pennywise in my previous review, and I probably should have - it's an iconic scene and it was totally fine when Tim Curry performed it. I'll give it the edge in this movie, though. Bill Skarsgård is terrifying and it's a perfect introduction to his take on the character - immediately more off-putting, and more animalistic with the way he's constantly drooling and hungrily eyeing Georgie. The kid who plays Georgie is also a pretty good actor. It's just a great introductory scene, an excellent first scare, and it gives us an idea of things to come 

BEST LINE

"I'll take him! I'll take all of you! I'll feast on your flesh as I feed on your fear"

- That's some nice alliteration, there, Pennywise!

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

86%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Well-acted and fiendishly frightening with an emotionally affecting story at its core, IT amplifies the horror in Stephen King's classic story without losing touch with its heart."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"In the summer of 1989, a group of bullied kids band together to destroy a shape-shifting monster, which disguises itself as a clown and preys on the children of Derry, their small Maine town."

DIRECTOR

Andy Muschietti

MAIN CAST

Bill Skarsgård, Jaeden Lieberher, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer

THOUGHTS

• This is a great adaptation of IT in so many ways. The actors are great and the characters feel real, and some of the best scenes from the book are brought to life (scenes like Eddie meeting the leper or the blood geysering from Bev's sink). Beyond that, there are also some effective updates to old scenes and some cool additions whole cloth - for my favourite scene I almost picked the slideshow projector scene, which was a nifty update to the kids flipping through a photo album, and brand new sequences include most of what happens in the house on Neibolt Street, like Richie in the room full of clowns
• And speaking of Richie, again he's my favourite character, this time played by Finn Wolfhard. All of the child actors are consistently great, though, believable and genuine. It's also always fun to hear the kids swear like sailors
• And, as Pennywise, Bill Skarsgård is chilling. The voice is creepy as hell, as are the unnatural way he moves, and the ways he can contort his face (that bizarre smile is just a way Skarsgård can position his mouth, and he can naturally point his eyes in opposite directions). This Pennywise is way scarier than Tim Curry's, and yet, Skarsgård is also so immediately, unmistakably evil that we do lose some of the playfulness in Curry's performance, the joyfully malicious way that Pennywise likes to toy with his victims
• Also terrifying, the way that this movie uses Henry Bowers, who I've always considered one of the scariest parts of the book. He's not supernatural, he's just a violent, sadistic kid - a real danger as opposed to an otherworldly one
• I would never call this a horror comedy, it's way more focused on the horror side of the equation, but what jokes we get are pretty funny and character based so they don't distract from the scares
• Quite a few jump scares, which I've discussed a few times now - I have no problem with jump scares as long as they're done well. Although, while thinking of this review it also occurred to me, what even is a bad jump scare? What factors are there between effective horror filmmaking and hacky, uncreative button pushing? If anyone has examples of movies that use jump scares poorly I'd love to hear them, and hey, at least according to a few reviews, this very movie might be thrown out as one example

Up next: Wrapping up our time with Pennywise and the Losers Club, IT Chapter Two

READERS' CHOICE #34: STEPHEN KING'S IT (1990)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

6.5

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Never

BEST SEQUENCE

Whenever Pennywise turns feral and shows his yellow eyes and sharp teeth it's pretty creepy, and I liked the Losers' first showdown with Pennywise when they were kids. The fortune cookie scene was also fun. But the actual scariest scene was probably Bev's cup of tea with Mrs. Kersh

BEST LINE

"I'll kill you all! Ha Ha! I'll drive you crazy and I'll kill you all! I'm every nightmare you've ever had! I am your worst dream come true! I'M EVERYTHING YOU EVER WERE AFRAID OF!"

- Pennywise, almost jumping out of a picture in a photo album to threaten the kids

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

68%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Though hampered by an uneven second half, IT supplies a wealth of funhouse thrills and an indelible turn from Tim Curry as Pennywise."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"In 1960, seven pre-teen outcasts fight an evil demon who poses as a child-killing clown. Thirty years later, they reunite to stop the demon once and for all when it returns to their hometown."

DIRECTOR

Tommy Lee Wallace

MAIN CAST

Tim Curry, Richard Thomas and Jonathan Brandis, Annette O'Toole and Emily Perkins, John Ritter and Brandon Crane, Harry Anderson and Seth Green, Dennis Christopher and Adam Faraizl, Tim Reid and Marlon Taylor, Richard Masur and Ben Heller 

THOUGHTS

• To avoid confusion, when I'm referring to the movie, the book or the character, I'll use capital letters for IT
• Stephen King is my favourite author, and IT is my favourite book - not just by King, at this point I think it's safe to say it's my favourite book, period. I first read it in high school, and since then I've probably read it at least 6 or 7 more times, which is not nothing for a book that weighs in at over 1,100 pages. It's definitely one of his scariest books, but it's also so much more than that. I love it for the characters and the world, the little details and the broad strokes. Give or take a couple of multidimensional entities, IT has a relatively simple plot - seven kids get scared and hunted by a shapeshifting monster, they fight it, and then they do the same thing 27 years later as adults. However the book contains so many memorable tangents and vignettes that might not be essential to the plot but they all combine to equal one of the most fulfilling reading experiences I've ever had
• Which is all to say that we're here to discuss the adaptations of the book, not the book itself. I don't think a movie needs to be 100% faithful to a great book in order to be a great work in its own right (and Kubrick's adaptation of The Shining is actually a pretty great example of this in how it deviates from its source material), but I do think anyone adapting IT has an uphill battle in deciding what to show and what to cut, and I think it's fair to remember that I know exactly how great this story can be and it's pretty impossible to force myself to ignore something like that
• So yes, somehow this was my first time seeing the 1990 TV miniseries IT, and I'll be honest, I was prepared to be underwhelmed. I expected Tim Curry to be fun as Pennywise, but I didn't really expect much else to hold up very well. I'm happy to say, though, that I was quite entertained throughout the whole 3+ hours! 6.5/10 might seem like a pretty underwhelmed Thrill Score, but I liked a lot of the choices that were made and it's fun to see a new depiction of a work you're familiar with
• But is it scary? There's the rub. They were definitely a little hamstrung by making this for network TV and needing to tone down the violence and the disturbing imagery (although it did still get darker at times than I expected). I'm positive that most people think of Tim Curry's Pennywise when they think of this movie, and I have no doubt that he caused a lot of nightmares for kids who saw this at an early age, but he just wasn't that scary. Fun to watch, and delightfully malevolent, but aside from a few intense scenes and some effective makeup work he was more comical than anything. It is a great performance, though, to the point where it might be very surprising to learn that Pennywise had less than 20 minutes of screentime for the whole movie
• So outside of Pennywise we mostly have scares coming from IT terrorizing the Losers Club in other guises. Some are scarier than others, but when adult Bev goes back to her childhood home and meets the woman living there, Mrs. Kersh, it was the most chilling scene for me, especially when Mrs. Kersh morphs into a twisted version of Bev's father
• As much as I've rhapsodized about the book IT, however, there is one aspect of the story that I've always found disappointing, even going back to my very first time reading it - the fact that the creature IT, this all-powerful shapeshifting being who can read minds and turn into its victim's darkest fear, eventually had one final physical form and it was essentially just a big spider. For a book that was bursting with limitless creativity this was just such a letdown for a big climactic battle, and this movie definitely did not change my mind on that front. The creature effect was kind of fun in a very cheesy way, but it deflated a lot of tension. And I laughed out loud when the main characters defeated IT once and for all by basically just beating the hell out of it
• And speaking of the Losers Club (the self-appointed nickname for the seven main characters), I thought the actors were pretty good for the most part. Seth Green was my favourite kid as Richie (and he would go on to have the biggest career of all the child actors by far), but ironically Harry Anderson was my least favourite adult actor, also as Richie. I have a fondness for Harry Anderson, and I've liked him in other things, but as Richie he was just annoying and without any of the more endearing qualities found in Seth Green's performance or in the character from the book (probably my favourite book character, incidentally)
• So, in conclusion, I'm glad I finally got to watch this movie/miniseries. I don't think there's anything that it did better than the book, but that's an extremely high bar to clear for me and it was great to see some of this story brought to life. Also, if they hadn't decided to make a few changes to the source material we never would have gotten to see Bill's sweet, sweet ponytail

Up next: We'll find out if the 2017 movie IT Chapter One is a more effective adaptation than this one (spoiler alert, it is). But it's been quite some time since the last time I saw it, so how much more effective honestly remains to be seen

READERS' CHOICE #35: DONNIE DARKO (2001)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

7

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, but not for a very long time. Maybe not since university, but maybe not since high school (which would have been when it was released or shortly after)

BEST SEQUENCE

When Frank appears in the movie theatre

BEST LINE

"Why are you wearing that stupid bunny suit?" "Why are you wearing that stupid man suit?"

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

87%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Richard Kelly's debut feature Donnie Darko is a daring, original vision, packed with jarring ideas and intelligence and featuring a remarkable performance from Jake Gyllenhaal as the troubled title character."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"After narrowly escaping a bizarre accident, a troubled teenager is plagued by visions of a man in a large rabbit suit who manipulates him to commit a series of crimes."

DIRECTOR

Richard Kelly

MAIN CAST

Jake Gyllenhaal, Jena Malone, James Duval, Maggie Gyllenhaal

THOUGHTS

• Having not seen Donnie Darko for a long time, I remembered liking it but I didn't consider it a favourite of mine. Upon rewatch, that sentiment pretty much stands. It's worth watching but also kind of a mixed bag, and maybe not as effective as some people remember
• Frank the Rabbit is genuinely creepy and anytime he shows up there's a shiver down the spine, including a couple of pretty good jump scares. His voice is also extremely unnerving. However, he's quite a bit less scary once we learn that he is, indeed, just a guy in a Halloween rabbit suit
• Jake Gyllenhaal is really fantastic in this, one of his first starring roles (October Sky came out 2 years earlier, another movie that I quite like). As Donnie he's very likeable, while still legitimately off-putting at times. It's a tricky balance to pull off, and also somewhat similar to how I described his performance as Lou in Nightcrawler, a connection I didn't even remember until about halfway through Donnie Darko, as the two characters share some qualities but they're still very distinct performances. Unless some surprise movies get added to my list this is the last we'll see of Jake Gyllenhaal and he's had a pretty great showing in these reviews. Looking at his filmography, there are even a few other thrilling movies that may have been considered, including Zodiac, Prisoners and Source Code
• A few times during this watch I thought, "wow, they're really trying to be edgy." And while I think there's some truth to that and while I think the movie is most effective when the effort to be edgy isn't quite so obvious, it may also be fair to acknowledge that it's easy to forget that the movie is set in 1988, a fact which is even easier to forget watching the movie 20+ years after its release date in 2001. So I'll give a little bit of a concession that perhaps what I perceived as forced edginess was also intended to show the general awfulness of people in the Reagan-era 1980s
• The plot is convoluted, but in a good way, a way that intrigues instead of frustrates. When I sat down to watch it on my streaming service of choice the runtime said 2 hours and 13 minutes, and I thought there was no way that could be right. In fact, I had accidentally pulled up the Director's Cut, which is something I've had to consider a few times in this blog. I decided to forgo the Director's Cut in favour of the theatrical version, since the general consensus online is that the longer version mostly just over explains the plot and, therefore, removes some of the ambiguity and mystery. Any Director's Cut defenders out there?
• Very strange to see Seth Rogen in a tiny role with very little to do, and as a really terrible person. It was his first movie but he was also in Freaks and Geeks on TV previously (which wasn't exactly a smash hit at the time, so maybe the small part in Donnie Darko shouldn't be surprising, but still strange to see)
• Also someone who'd go on to bigger things, including the horror genre, Daveigh Chase plays Donnie's younger sister. A year later she'd play Samara in The Ring (not to mention the voice of Lilo in Lilo and Stitch, also released in 2002)
• Great soundtrack, including several songs that I will forever associate with Donnie Darko - "The Killing Moon" by Echo and the Bunnymen, "Mad World" covered by Gary Jules (originally by Tears for Fears) and "Head Over Heels" also by Tears for Fears. Richard Kelly originally wanted to use "Never Tear Us Apart" by INXS for the opening scene, which is funny to think about considering how appropriate it was to start the movie with a song by a band called Echo and the Bunnymen. One might even call it a little on the nose with how much we'd be seeing of a sinister-looking bunnyman
• Finally, a couple of references to other movies we'll be talking about: the movie that Donnie and Gretchen are watching in the theatre when Frank appears is The Evil Dead. Evil Dead II is #25 on the readers' list, and I might even review The Evil Dead as well when that comes along. As well, early in the movie there's a shot of Donnie's mother reading Stephen King's book IT, which I'll be reviewing...

Up next: Yep, that's right! Coincidentally, after a quick cameo in Donnie Darko, it's time to review IT (which I'll continue to spell with all capitals, since it gets incredibly confusing at times to talk about the book/movie and not just read it as a pronoun; hopefully information technology doesn't need to be discussed in the following reviews). And yes, reviews! Because that's not all, folks, we'll be looking at all the variations of IT, starting with the 1990 TV miniseries which, believe it or not, I have never seen. See you next time, when we'll all float down here!

READERS' CHOICE #36: PARANORMAL ACTIVITY (2007)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

8

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, at least once, and I'm almost certain I've seen it multiple times. However, I couldn't say how many times total, or even when the last time was

BEST SEQUENCE

The original ending, which was changed after Paramount acquired the movie but which is still available on YouTube

BEST LINE

None worth mentioning

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

83%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Using its low-budget effects and mockumentary method to great result, Paranormal Activity turns a simple haunted house story into 90 minutes of relentless suspense."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"After moving into a suburban home, a couple becomes increasingly disturbed by a nightly demonic presence."

DIRECTOR

Oren Peli

MAIN CAST

Katie Featherston, Micah Sloat

THOUGHTS

• 8/10 is a perfectly respectable Thrill Score, but in my memory it was higher, maybe even approaching a 10/10. It's still good, but this speaks to the movie's effectiveness upon first watch, before you know all the tricks it has up its sleeve. If you haven't seen Paranormal Activity, you should watch it, and hopefully your first viewing experience will also be a 10/10. Also, stop reading, because of spoilers
• Of certain horror movies, it's often said that your imagination can create things far scarier than the filmmakers ever can, and Paranormal Activity subscribes to this belief. And while I don't disagree with this in principle, I also think it makes a difference when there's still the potential to see something terrifying. Paranormal Activity plays with dark spaces and things happening just out of your field of vision, and on first viewing you may be afraid that something will suddenly appear in frame, or be right there when the camera turns a corner. However, knowing that this never really happens in this movie deflated some of the tension for me, especially combined with having a pretty good memory of all the big scares. Don't get me wrong, I still jumped a few times, but I also knew what to expect and when
• A while back, during my review of REC, when talking about horror found footage I made the claim that Paranormal Activity is pretty flawless in its execution of the idea. Upon rewatch this may have been giving a little too much credit, as there are still times when it strains belief that Micah would rush to grab the camera while spooky things are happening. However, what really stood out in my memory, and what still makes this movie far more believable than most found footage horror, is the fact that the majority of the scares, especially the big ones, happen while the camera is unmanned and passively watching Katie and Micah sleep. Of the found footage movies I've reviewed so far I can now say that REC is quite a lot scarier, but kudos to Paranormal Activity for being thoughtful about its logic. And by the way, eventually we'll be watching The Blair Witch Project, film #20 on the readers' list
• Also of utmost importance for found footage movies is the conviction of the actors, and Katie Featherston and Micah Sloat are both pretty convincing, especially late in the movie when they're scared out of their minds. Earlier in the movie there are times when they still come across a little actorly, but hey, they're also playing characters who are fully aware that they're being filmed, so maybe this is intentional. Also, Micah's kind of a jackass, huh?
• Depending on your metrics, Paranormal Activity was the most profitable movie ever made. Initially costing $15 000 to make, it had a worldwide box office of $193 355 800. Therefore, it's not surprising in the least that it spawned sequels. I definitely saw the first two sequels, but beyond that I couldn't say for sure. And finally, beyond just spawning a franchise, some might say it also spawned a horror empire. It was the first horror movie produced by Jason Blum and Blumhouse Productions, the company which would also bring us Insidious, Sinister and The Purge, as well as many others, including Jordan Peele's first two movies, Get Out and Us

Up next: Another movie I've seen before, but not for a very long time, Donnie Darko from way back in 2001 

BONUS REVIEW: FRIDAY THE 13TH (1980)

THRILL SCALE 1-10

8

HAVE I SEEN IT BEFORE?

Yes, several times, but most recently in May of 2016

BEST SEQUENCE

Gotta go with the final jump scare. I knew it was coming, I knew exactly what would happen and what it would look like, but it still got me

BEST LINE

"Did you know that a young boy drowned? The year before those two others were killed? The counsellors weren't paying any attention. They were making love while that young boy drowned! His name was Jason."

ROTTEN TOMATOES SCORE

64%

ROTTEN TOMATOES CRITICS CONSENSUS

"Rather quaint by today's standards, Friday the 13th still has its share of bloody surprises and a '70s-holdover aesthetic to slightly compel."

IMDB SYNOPSIS

"A group of camp counsellors trying to reopen a summer camp called Crystal Lake, which has a grim past, are stalked by a mysterious killer."

DIRECTOR

Sean S. Cunningham

MAIN CAST

Betsy Palmer, Adrienne King, a bunch of people you've never heard of, and Kevin Bacon

THOUGHTS

• You may be wondering how I can pinpoint with such precision the last time I saw this movie, in May of 2016. Well, there's an easy answer for that: ever since my wife and I started dating, in 2016, with every Friday the 13th that rolled around on the calendar we would watch the next movie in the franchise. Always in order, never watching the next movie when it wasn't on a Friday the 13th, and finally, after almost 7 years, we finished the franchise this past January by watching the 2009 reboot. And now, appropriately enough in October, we have the next Friday the 13th, so we decided to start all over again and we plan on keeping the tradition going. We'll have a fair while before the next one, though; the next Friday the 13th isn't until September of 2024
• I feel like I should stop worrying about spoilers, especially with movies like this. If you haven't already seen Friday the 13th, you probably don't care about spoilers for a movie that's 43 years old (which, of course, is a way of saying that spoilers shall follow)
• Franchise antagonist Jason Voorhees, one of the most famous slasher villains of all time, and one of the most prolific by body count, only appears in this movie for about 10 seconds as a child, and it might be debatable if he even appears at all. Instead, the killer is Jason's mother, Pamela Voorhees. Not seen on camera for the majority of the movie, when Betsy Palmer finally shows up as Pamela, she gives us a fantastically campy performance (pun unintended), while still being chillingly unnerving, especially when we see the closeups of her face and her imitations of her son's voice
• Hell of a way for Pamela to go, too, when things come to a head
• Before Pamela shows up, since we can't actually see her during the kill scenes, the deaths are most effective due to the pretty impressive gore effects. These were provided by the legendary Tom Savini, whom I have mentioned in these reviews before - he worked with George Romero on Dawn of the Dead and Day of the Dead
• The best death scene was probably Kevin Bacon getting an arrow through the throat. This was only Kevin Bacon's fourth movie, by the way, and perhaps because of this he gets knocked off pretty early. He also doesn't make much of an impression, unless you count a particular shot of him in a speedo. If you know, you know
• Even though I've seen this before, a few times, I didn't know going into it what I would score it on the Thrill Scale. Early in the movie the score was sitting pretty low, but it did gradually tick higher as the movie went on. Despite this, I am definitely of the opinion that Halloween is miles better than Friday the 13th (being two slasher movies cut from the same cloth). If you have the opposite view and think that Friday the 13th is the superior movie, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this
• I kept wondering why I considered Halloween to be better, and I came up with two possible explanations: firstly, Halloween absolutely benefits from Jamie Lee Curtis's lead performance as Laurie Strode, and Friday the 13th doesn't have any characters who even come close to that level of relatability or personality. Secondly, the obscuring of Pamela Voorhees as a killer leads to an unexpected antagonist, and there are some effective first-person shots from Pamela's perspective, but to be unable to see who's doing the killing does lessen the impact, at least for me
• And, now that we've restarted the Friday the 13th rotation, there's a pretty good chance that I'll keep up the movie review tradition and keep reviewing each movie in the series as the day comes along. So for now we shall say farewell to Pamela Voorhees, but next time we'll properly say hello to Jason, although still perhaps not how most people picture him; he doesn't get his hockey mask until movie number 3. See you next September, Jason with a bag on his head!