I had admittedly low expectations when
I brought home Lovely Molly. While the credentials of being written
and directed by Eduardo
Sánchez, the fellow
responsible for The Blair Witch Project might seem impressive to
some, in all honesty I felt Eduardo's first film a fluke of timing
more than an interesting film in its own right. It did, however,
spawn an interesting if-not unsatisfying habit of horror films, the
“found footage” film that gave Paranormal Activity a chance to
shine.
It must be noted that I absolutely
despise Paranormal Activity and its sequels...
So, like I said, I went into Lovely
Molly with some pretty low expectations, and I think that is exactly
how I could appreciate the film as much as I could.
The film is a pretty basic setup--
Molly (played by newcomer Gretchen
Lodge ) marries-- which we see
in excruciating detail with her clumsy wedding video. This, I admit,
made me worried from the start-- was this going to be another
found-footage film? If so, how would it mark itself as original in an
over-saturated market, even if it is made by the people essentially
responsible for said market? Thankfully, this is just a setup, for
after the wedding, we return to comfortable, cozy, traditional
cinematography.
Call me a traditionalist but I just ...
prefer this style very much.
At any rate, Molly and her new husband
(Johnny
Lewis ) proceed to christen their
marriage in Molly's family home. Now, upon retrospect, after what we
learn of Molly and her family, it seems a bit outrageous that she
flocks to this home, but I suppose one could argue that an inherited
home is cheaper than another one, and the newlyweds would want a
place to... christen.
What do you mean we're out of strawberries?! |
Rather predictably, things start going
wrong for the couple. We learn a bit of the history of Molly's family
from her sister, played by Alexandra
Holden , and we learn that it
wasn't a happy one. This is further hinted at when, after their new
alarm system proceeds to freak out, a cop mentions that he was at the
house a few times, and that it is a good thing Molly doesn't
remember.
We also learn that Molly has a lovely
habit of being a bit of a junkie, which as things start to go bad for
her, she quickly returns to. Heroin seems like such an obviously dumb
choice, both in real life and in film, and here... it's... not much
of a better choice than it would be in real life.
This is where the film starts to get a
bit of a mixed bag for me. While I enjoyed the ambiguity that the
introduction of drugs to the traditional haunting setup brings (“is
it real or is it just a trip?”) it often belittles a lot of what we
see. For example, there is an early 'scare' scene in which Molly
hears some admittedly VERY creepy sounds, runs up to her bedroom,
and... drops the camera, which we see... show a door opening. Then
closing. While the lack of any effect here could make the argument of
“man that heroin is bad for you” compelling, it is, at least with
this setup, a less interesting way of thinking about the events.
This element isn't completely a missed
note, however. Gretchen Lodge's wonderful acting makes the
instability that the drugs bring to the table a hefty one-- and we
certainly worry about poor Molly's sanity the more it becomes obvious
that she's forsaken the concept of being sober.
Indeed, all of the actors deliver
wonderful performances. All are believable in their own special way,
with the husband's delightful awkwardness to Molly's eccentricities,
to the messed up sister, who is just messed up enough to feel real
but not quite enough to be unsympathetic. Even the secondary actors,
which are often in these type of films absolutely atrocious, deliver
on all the notes they should, and not one actor feels fake ... at
all. I am actually thoroughly impressed with the director's ability
in this regard. Even when reacting to bumps in the night, or an
unseen aggressor in a dark hallway, even in moments where the
suspension of disbelief is stretched to a thin membrane, that
membrane, thanks to the believable performances, never pops.
This is probably something you want to get used to... she spends a good portion of the flick naked... I'm not complaining, just warning! |
However, there is something the film
brings up which is an issue I have with modern horror. That is,
notably, the lack of spectacle. There is a tiny bit of spectacle
here-- we do have a traditional horror payoff-- but even that is done
with almost too much subtlety, to the point where it barely
registers. Where films like Insidious have no qualms about showing
you what goes bump in the night, films like Paranormal Activity and
its ilk tend to overemphasize the audience's imagination by slowly...
calmly pulling up on... NOTHING. To a certain degree, this is an
interesting phenomenon-- the lack of spectacle is certainly playing
in the low-budget filmmaker's favour for one thing, but also the fact
that the audiences adore it speaks to the fact that, be as cynical as
you want to be, audiences are still very much interested in watching
films that demand something of them, in this case, to imagine what
all those eerie sounds must be.
And indeed, Lovely Molly's sound design
is... absolutely perfect. Spot-on. I'm not exaggerating when I say
that the first time I heard the cloven smacks against the basement
floor, with the hefty breathing calling out Molly's name, a bit of
goosebumps may have surfaced. It was not necessarily that the moment
was truly scary-- although it managed to be, in my opinion-- but that
the sounds were just so interestingly realistic.
All the creaking, groaning boards in
the house didn't hurt either.
But still, I feel a little bit
underwhelmed by the visual side of things. As per the cinematography,
everything was shot in a very satisfying way in terms of composition
and lighting-- there is even a very notable moment where Molly is
hiding in the closet filming, and her husband walks in and turns on
the light, making himself an odd silhouette for a moment that is
almost intimidating. There are no shots that feel wrong visually, for
what they are showing.
However, what they are showing is a
little too much reality for my tastes. I thoroughly enjoy horror that
takes me to another world, is unafraid to show me monsters.
That isn't to say that there are no
interesting visuals in the film. There are. I quite liked the humming
as Molly takes the camera into the basement, where we see all kinds
of very strange artifacts and symbols. And there is a moment near the
end-- which I shall not spoil-- in which a more traditional horror
pay-off occurs, which absolutely thrilled me to be honest when I saw
it. It hit at a perfect moment in the story.
For all my praise, the film wasn't
perfect by any stretch-- I felt some plot twists were a little
contrived and forced, especially those around the husband, and I felt
the film was also oddly aggressive with its sexual imagery, which
could either be a pro or a con depending on your preferences-- but
for all constructive purposes, the film delivers everything it
promises, even if it doesn't deliver with as much flamboyance and
monstrous imagery as the horror fan might like.
I would have to give the film a 90%. In
all honesty, I feel like everything the film attempts, it delivers--
even if I felt that the film should have attempted more. The
characters we meet are believable and sympathetic (which is very
thankful in a genre littered by cartoon characters), the chemistry
with the cast is undeniable and very real (sometimes a bit
uncomfortably so for those that don't like voyeurism-- again this
could be a pro depending on the audience), and the bumps in the night
prove very, very threatening indeed.
I still can't give it a perfect rating,
because there just wasn't... enough spectacle for my tastes, which
was a bit of a let-down especially since the film was not terribly
shy on the sexual side. This could be a factor of budget-- the film
does wear its budget on its sleeve, and I will never fault a film for
its budget, especially in the horror genre-- but I would have been
more interested in seeing more of the thing that was going bump in
the night rather than just hearing it.
But, I must also admit, that is less a
failure of the movie, and more personal preference. The lack of
spectacle also, to the film's credit, makes the downward spiral of
drugs more visceral, as the insane ramblings of poor Molly cannot be
justified by anything she's seen, though perhaps we could forgive her
knowing what she's heard.
Highly recommended-- although, on a
final note, if I were rating this on a DVD level, I'd fail the
special features. I feel they attempted too much to market it as
another Blair Witch where what made the film interesting to me was
how much it toyed with the audience, knowing they expected a found
footage film and then shifting gears. This doesn't match with the
tone of the film at all, and I was expecting something more along the
lines of interviews with the cast and crew, insightful looks at the
mythology separate from the film... pretending like the film is real
with pseudo-documentaries would work for a found footage film, but
this is not one, so its a bit of a mystery why the special features
are what they are.