The Dirties (Canada 2013: Dir Matt Johnson)

We truly live in meta times. Canadian movie The Dirties is the product of director/producer/co-writer Matt Johnson (who also plays the 'lead' in the film), whose inspiration seems not only to be the real life high school shooting incidents of recent times, but equally importantly cinema itself (or more precisely the process of making film, where scenes can be cued and reviewed at will for endless and isolated exploration, and key lines of dialogue can be played again and again until they assume some kind of truth). The Dirties is constructed, not seamlessly, but with the various parts knocking together, tethered by movie references, memories of Columbine style reportage, slacker comedy set scenes, and an almost random indie band soundtrack. It's a film that, like its lead character, is created and defined while we watch it being pieced together, and where the underlying truth of what we're seeing is only fully realised in the film's final few minutes.

The Dirties centres around two film obsessed high school students, Matt and Owen, who because of their 'otherness' are subjected to relentless bullying by a gang called The Dirties. Matt and Owen's physical response to the actions of the gang is for the most part completely passive, but they vent their frustration with their predicament by creating a film called 'The Dirties', which shows them seeking violent revenge on the gang, mediated almost entirely via scenes from Hollywood films like The Usual Suspects (1995) and Pulp Fiction (1994). In this there is also a direct comparison to Joshua Oppenheimer's devastating The Act of Killing (2012). That their film is pieced together within the film we're watching, showing an imagined response to bulllying contrasting with their real handling of the issue, is the heart of The Dirties, as Matt grows to realise via the film he's making, that the real way to escape his miserable situation is for life to imitate art.

The film pulls off the cinematic trick of showing the audience the human side of Matt and Owen, eliciting our sympathy with their plight and our anger at their treatment, feelings which remain with us even in the film's closing scenes. Matt in particular is a true oddball and the real bullying target. His obsession with revenge alienates him from Owen while at the same time making him an increasingly fascinating character for viewers. The film they produce and show to their disinterested class is an odd unfocused mess, if amusingly made (there's a nod to the Steve Martin vehicle Bowfinger (1999) in a moment where they surreptitiously film one of their female classmates voicing a line of dialogue that they need for a scene). The ambitions of their film show how far apart they are from the rest of the school in terms of artistic vision, but the inability of both class and teacher to understand what's on screen only seems to exacerbate the bullying.

The increasing darkness and seeming inevitability of the film's final section is brilliantly nuanced in a scene where Matt, viewed rendering the closing credit sequence of his movie (which of course become the end titles of the film we're watching), turns to the camera and explains that, because of what he's about to do, someone else will need to finish the edit - they do by the way, and the closing credits are brilliant. That Matt only finally seems strong with a gun in his hand, walking the corridors of his school with a motivation which only he and the viewing audience understand, is arguably The Dirties most meta and devastating moment.

The Last Exorcism Part II (US 2013: Dir Ed Gass-Donnelly)

We’ve all got used to movie franchises working in planned trilogies or quadrilogies, where viewers are aware that they will have to watch three or four films in order to experience the whole story. In the first film the audience is typically introduced to all the main characters, then the second is usually a bridging story which acts more as a vehicle to get the audience to the exciting denouement rather than a film in its own right. This is a relatively modern phenomenon, driven in part by the cynicism of big movie companies and also by the appetite and ability of modern viewing audiences to cope with long, relatively complex story arcs. Some of these middle films are more successful than others, but what they all benefit from is a great degree of calculated planning so that the story is eked out with just enough content to keep viewers from being bored, and likely to come back for the next, more thrilling episode.

The Last Exorcism Part II however is an example of a linking movie that develops a story never intended to continue beyond the first instalment. The original The Last Exorcism (2010) was a passable if uneven film which I actually liked better on second viewing at home rather than my first experience at the cinema. It contained a now fashionable ambiguous ending which didn’t seem to hint at a sequel. However a sequel is what we have, and one which includes an ending that clearly decides it now wants to be a franchise.

TLE II has all the hallmarks of the typical link movie. It continues at the point where the first movie left off; not much happens – Nell Sweetzer, the possessed girl from The Last Exorcism, is gradually reintroduced to teenage society only to face, er, re-possession; and is altogether a bit of a slow burner with a reasonably rousing last reel. In fact it feels just like a link movie - treading water before we get to the good stuff, but you have to pay more money to see that. It also doesn’t make a lot of sense, but for me its biggest problem is the central character of Nell, played by Ashley Bell. In the first film Bell’s portrayal of the troubled Nell was one of its strongest elements. You could see why she had been chosen for the role, with her piercing dark eyes, her ability to look like an old soul in a young body, and her impressive bodily contortions, reminding viewers of a similar role played by Jennifer Carpenter in The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005). Bell’s vulnerability was a good contrast to the brash exuberance of the first movie’s fake exorcist Cotton Marcus, and her gradual possession was effective and carefully handled - amazing in a film produced by Eli Roth. In TLE II Bell takes centre stage, but her character is too wishy washy to make any impact – she also fails to convince as a seventeen year old (Bell was actually 27 at the time of making the movie). The first two thirds of the film are so lacking in pace that the viewer is left drumming their fingers waiting for Nell to transform from the vapid girl-next-door to kick ass demon, but unfortunately when she does the scenes are clumsily staged and lacking in horror.

TLE II abandons the ‘shaky cam’ approach of the first film (and who exactly was operating the camera in much of The Last Exorcism?) for a more languid style, but with too many forced ‘jump’ moments. In fairness the film looks good and the relatively new on the scene Ed Gass-Donnelly directs confidently (Variety Magazine tipped him as one of 2011’s ’10 Directors to watch’ but TLE II is his only full length movie since 2010). But looking back on this film, one has to question why it was made? It isn't a three picture franchise, it feels like a director chancing his arm and hoping to be asked back to the party for another go, except the movie is such a slog viewers are unlikely to come back for TLE III. Modern filmmaking, huh? 

Paranormal Diaries: Clophill (UK 2013: Dir Michael Bartlett and Kevin Gates)

A surprise sellout at 2013 Frightfest, Paranormal Diaries: Clophill - which has to be the worst title of any film released last year and which if it's all right with you I'll precis to PD:C from here on in - is a significant departure from Michael Bartlett and Kevin Gates's previous two films. The sellout was probably attributed to the quality of their last film, Zombie Diaries 2 (2011), which was such an improvement on their first outing The Zombie Diaries (2006) that it felt like the product of different filmmakers: possibly punters expected more of the same.

But Bartlett and Gates have chosen to take a bit of a left turn with PD:C. They have retained the 'found footage' approach but have structured their latest as a mockumentary, combining elements of The Blair Witch Project (1999) and the Most Haunted TV show (minus annoying camp psychic). Bartlett and Gates play themselves, and Clophill, an actual village in Bedfordshire, is used as the real life location for the filming. The setup has a team of ghost hunters and filmmakers exploring a ruined church in Clophill, which has a history of strange occurrences, ghostly visitations and black magic rituals, and hoping to capture some of the supernatural activity on camera.

The film builds interestingly at the start with different 'experts' telling the story of the ruined church and reported goings on. However, once on site, PD:C becomes extremely ploddy with endless footage of walking round and round the church, and using night vision shots that build up no suspense, and give no real feel of anything being properly investigated. At 88 or so minutes this film is just way too long for the subject matter. The lack of tension is also partly to do with the location - while the church itself retains an element of dilapidated spookiness, it's in a not particularly deserted part of Bedfordshire and it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the imperilled ghost hunters could hot foot it 500 yards or so to the A6 if they felt a bit lost. There's a silly sub story involving a family with a small child, which is presumably an attempt to give some variety to the documentary scenes, but just feels tacked on.

Where PD:C does differ from the TV programmes from which it takes its inspiration is in actually delivering a ghostly 'money shot' as well as some more corporeal sightings. But by then I didn't care one iota. Bartlett and Gates do know how to put a film together, but PD: C is a complete misfire - they'll have to try much harder next time.

Outpost 11 (UK 2012: Dir Anthony Woodley)

There are so many elements involved in making a film that, when pulled together as a finished product, can mean the difference between success and tragedy, sometimes just by a small margin. Films can have a great story with uninteresting visuals, or be badly acted but great to look at, or filmed in locations which almost but don’t quite compensate for the lack of depth or emotion in the script. But when a film’s basis is three people trapped in a small drab room quietly (and not so quietly) going bonkers for 91 minutes, all the elements have to work very hard to compensate for such a thin premise.

Outpost 11 locates itself in alternative 1955 in the midst of a new Hundred Years War, where a small team of soldiers occupies a remote listening post intercepting military messages, and looking after a large wheezing contraption called The Omega Machine. If I have made this sound in any way interesting, then forgive me. The soldiers bicker and fuss in a strictly Waiting for Godot manner, and gradually begin to lose their grip on reality after possible exposure to a psychotropic drug released by the enemy, hallucinating some joke shop rubber beasts and an astonishingly primitive stop frame animated spider.

Rarely have I seen a film that gets everything so wrong. The script is clichéd and leaden, the almost one room set depressing and totally uninteresting, and the acting flat and completely uninvolving. Any desire of the director to make something cinematically different is defeated by realising that you’ve seen the various elements deployed more successfully in any number of other films – the most obvious and consistent visual reference seemed to be David Cronenberg’s film The Naked Lunch, a movie which is itself problematic in terms of bizarre visuals coupled with impenetrable narrative. Outpost 11 drags itself agonisingly to the end of its hour and a half with no satisfying resolution, or chin stroking final shot that would at least cause the viewer to rethink what they’ve seen (a popular ploy when making movies whose meaning is hard to fathom).

Outpost 11 is a truly hideous film. I detected no spark of talent in Anthony Woodley’s direction that would make me seek out any of his subsequent output. Please avoid this movie unless you are a steampunk completist or thought that the animation of Morph in Tony Hart’s TV shows was brain warping.

Frightfest 2013 - well a day of it anyway...

So to Frightfest. Twenty five years ago if you'd have suggested to me that London could potentially host a weekend of horror, sci-fi and fantasy movies in a major West End cinema and repeat the event annually rather than as a one off financial car crash, I'd have laughed in your face and asked what was showing at the Scala. The success of Frightfest is testament both to the gradual mainstreaming of this genre of film (everyone's got some goth in them these days it seems) and some consistently bloody hard work by a fairly small group of people in making the festival work year on year.

2013 was the first time I'd actually bought a day pass - I normally tend to go to several films over the weekend and pay individually, but the increasing disappointment of early sell outs of many of the screenings I'd planned to catch at previous events drove me to upgrade this year. I had an idea that my lack of staying power couldn't justify buying a full festival pass and based on my stamina yesterday I was right. Now I'm no stranger to numbing my arse in the name of cinema, but there's something about 21st century horror at the moment that gives diminishing returns en masse. One day and five films was fine - the prospect of 25 (including the dreaded 11pm slots) was too much for me.

So, time to shut up and tell you what I saw:

THE DYATLOV PASS INCIDENT (USA 2013: Dir Renny Harlin). BLAIR WITCH PROJECT on ice is a fair summary of the first two thirds of this faux 'found footage' movie - faux not least because at various points there's clearly no character member who either could or would be able to maintain shooting the footage we see. A group of twenty somethings (mainly UK actors sporting dodgy US accents) find themselves deep in the heart of the Ural Mountains investigating - and, yes, video documenting - the truth behind reports of a group of Russian hikers who went missing fifty odd years previously. Based on a real life and unresolved incident, which arguably makes subsequent events in rather poor taste, TDPI's awkward merging of horror and sci fi with some straight out action sequences felt decidedly clumsy, and the increasingly implausible X File-y elements in the last third reminded me of a group of kids making up a game as they go along. "and then we were stuck in the snow, and then we found a door" etc etc. I'm a sucker for any film with real snow in it, but TDPI's charms failed to thaw me.


DAYLIGHT (USA 2012: Dir David McCracken). An actual FF film this time, and a very impressive one too, although for most of its running time it's pretty difficult to work out what exactly is happening. The story involves a team of Child Protection Service workers investigating (satanic?) abuse incidents in the town of Daylight, Indiana. The early scenes detail a series of interviews which set it up as a more po faced The Last Exorcism, but as the film unfolds the hold on reality starts to loosen, and the audience isn't really sure what they're seeing, when it's supposed to be happening or who it's supposed to be happening to. The trend towards non linear narrative in genre films is very welcome but the messing with time (and space?) in Daylight combined with the glitchy wonky sound/video footage (if you close your eyes at time you'd swear it sounds like Aphex Twin in his drill 'n' bass years) left the Frightfest audience open mouthed and scratchy of head by the end. I'd love to see this again, but I'm not sure I'd understand it any better.

SADIK 2 (France 2013: Dir Robin Eintringer). "There's no Sadik 1"
announced Alan Jones at the start of this "although why becomes apparent in the film". Yes, and no danger of the audience not missing why, as Sadik 2 sets its stall out as clearly as Daylight didn't. A sort of Scream parody about a group of friends who rent a house in the country, one of whom is a horror film fan who has lined up a VCR fest (yes, the films he's brought are all on tape, ha ha, knowing mockery etc). Lots of Scream like post modern film analysis ensues, but in the basement, unbeknown to our bickering friends upstairs, is a real film crew about to make a film of their own...Clumsy and puerile with a script that raised only a few titters, I was more interested in the Director and one of the actors in the film, who were present at the première screening of their minimum opus. They kept looking around to gauge audience reaction to the 'cleverness' of Sadik 2 and the eventual rather rubbish gore, thereby missing seeing a number of the audience taking the opportunity to quietly leave mid film.

HAUNTER (USA 2013: Dir Vincenzo Natali) I really liked this old fashioned fantasy chiller. It's pretty gore/scare free (if it gets a 15 cert I'll be shocked) and as such some of the FF audience didn't like it. While it is a bit overlong, its Groundhog Day/Pan's Labyrinth/The Others/A Nightmare on Elm St. mashup  - about a young girl seemingly living the same day over and over again who gradually discovers the reason why - was beautifully handled, well acted and had real emotional impact in its closing scenes. Possibly the full force of the film was slightly dulled by a rather over complicated layering of timelines, but it's difficult to give too much of the plot away without spoiling it (something the FF guidebook seemed to have no problems with). A solid fantasy that unfolds its story very effectively. Recommended.

V/H/S 2 (USA 2013: Dir various). When the sequel to a film is described as 'ramped up' on the original, I tend to think it can only mean trouble. V/H/S 2 was a movie made for Frightfest. Gore, nudity, deafening soundtrack, suicide, micro edits, it all went down a storm, each segment getting a round of applause. And I didn't like it I'm afraid. I thought V/H/S was patchy but good, and in places very good, a clever updating of the portmanteau films of yesteryear. V/H/S 2 uses exactly the same framing device as the first movie, and the 'films' watched are arguably more focussed (no pun intended) than the first film. They're also much more extreme, particularly the Gareth Evans story "Safe Haven" which is a really hard watch. Arguably the best was the creative take on zombies, "A Ride in the Park" which had some great laugh out loud moments, but as in all portmanteau films, the total did not equal the sum of its parts, and for all the editing wizardry and general nowness of the thing, both V/H/S films are unlikely to age well or function as anything more than an advert for a decent VCR head cleaner. Press the eject and give me the tape now is my advice.

So there we are - that was my day out. A big thanks to my Festival partner Tara for making it more fun than it may have been entirely on my own. Now I'm off for a lie down.