The Last Exorcism- 4.5/5

Horror has always been one of my favorite genres. I love a good scary movie. Sadly, the term ‘good scary movie’ is usually an oxymoron that ranks among ‘Microsoft Works’, and ‘employed English major.’ Fortunately, for every oxymoron, there are exceptions. Microsoft made the Xbox (shut up, it makes my analogy work), Dave Barry can stand as an example to English majors everywhere, and Daniel Stamm made The Last Exorcism. In a word, this movie was fantastic. It was a coming together of styles and techniques that are frequently used, but rarely used well.
For the first time in recent memory, it feels like a director finally took Alfred Hitchcock’s saying, “There is no terror in the bang, only in the anticipation of it” to heart. This movie was terrifying, but not graphic. There were few bangs, but a great deal of anticipation. We live in a world where directors and producers have come to rely on computer generated monsters and absurd amounts of gore in the making of horror movies. The genre requires neither, and The Last Exorcism is proof of that. It was refreshing to see a movie that didn’t feel the need to try to scare me with effects.
Most mockumentary style films not only gain no benefit from the style, but often would be better movies if they were told as traditional narratives. This wasn’t the case with The Last Exorcism. The developers used the style to their full advantage, and allowed the audience to see things from multiple points of view that would have been difficult, if not impossible, with another style.
Casting largely unknown actors is another practice that isn’t new. It’s a game of Russian Roulette that rarely works for the film as a whole. Fortunately for The Last Exorcism, it’s a practice that worked this time. The lack of recognizable faces led to a much greater sense of realism and immersion.
The last thing that made this film truly fantastic was its ending. Most movies end in a way that is either predictable, or in some way breaks promises that were made to the audience earlier in the movie. The Last Exorcism was one that did neither. The ending of this movie was surprising, but at the same time fulfilled all of their promises to the audience, and made good on all the foreshadowing.
This was a superb movie. It was scary, well made, thought out, and the prefect blend of familiar and unpredictable. I give it a score of 4.5 out of 5, and command that you go see it in the theater. Today.

The American, 2.5/5

I walked into the theater to see The American yesterday with high hopes. The combination of George Clooney and the promise of a smart thriller was enough to lure me to the theater expecting to be dazzled. Perhaps my high expectations led to my severe disappointment when the film finally ended. I wanted to like this one. I really did. I spent the first half of the movie formulating the beginnings of positive reviews in my head, and conjuring up the high praise that I felt sure to give. It was about halfway through the movie however that I realized that this was more than just a slow start. The movie was just slow. It started slow, it continued slow, and had one of the most underwhelming and anti-climatic endings I’ve seen in a long time. But being slow isn’t necessarily a bad thing, and the other ways in which this film failed quite honestly astounded me.
One of the key failures made by most movies is a failure to develop characters beyond basic archetypes. This wasn’t the case with The American. George Clooney and company did a fantastic job of fleshing out their characters, and I felt connected to the main character in a way that I rarely do in movies anymore. The failure lay elsewhere.
The film also contained a strong sense of realism. While I’ve never known any assassins or underground gunsmiths, I’d imagine that Clooney comes as close to real as one can in a movie. I also appreciated the fact that somewhere, someone taught the cast how to handle their prop guns in at least a semi-correct manner. Few things in a movie can annoy me as much as a character that’s supposed to be a professional handling their firearm in a manner that would result in a shot to their own foot. I also find it irritating when firearms are a key topic in the film, and the writer clearly has no idea what they’re talking about. That wasn’t a problem here either.
The film was beautifully shot. Anton Corbijn and his cinematographer deserve a great deal of credit for making excellent use of on location shooting. The scenery was beautiful, and the locations were well chosen.
After praising the good elements of the film, I have to stop for a moment and remind myself that I didn’t like it, and here’s why. There wasn’t a meaningful story. By meaningful story, I really mean any story at all. The film spent all of its time showing the audience what happened, and virtually no time explaining why. The filmmakers tried to be subtle with their references to the protagonist’s past, and they ended up being too vague.
I left the theater thinking: ‘that was a beautiful and well made film, but why did I spend my time and money to watch it?’ That sentiment leads me to give The American a score of 2.5/5, and the recommendation that you wait for the Redbox if you plan to see it.