Christopher B Landon (directing his first film for the series, after writing the previous sequels) has a few interesting new scares up his sleeve too, and the film seldom resorts to cheap jumps at any point. ![]() ![]() For the first time in the series, the film never refers to a static camera or CCTV of overnight occurrences, instead relying solely on the handheld exploits of our two protagonists.Īside from provoking more questions than ever about why the characters would still be filming, this successfully adds to the more energetic pace of the sequel. On the plus side, there’s more of the innovation that made Paranormal Activity 3 such a riot. Then again, the bar is so low by this point in the series, it’s not enough to merely be better than part four. The “One” in The Marked Ones is technically an odd number, and the spin-off is definitely a step up from Paranormal Activity 4. The third film improved on Paranormal Activity 2 by bringing in a 1980s horror movie vibe, and conjuring up some of the series’ most inventive and surprising scares. By contrast, the first film remains a master class in deriving tension from absolutely nothing for an extended period, which was somewhat undercut by the huge marketing push. With the earlier sequels having adhered so closely to the formula of a family being spooked out by recordings of their house for about an hour before the third act goes bananas, this film breaks out of that mould, and the paranormal stuff is pretty active throughout.ĭoes that necessarily make for a good film? Well, the rule I’ve personally noticed is kind of inverse to the famous rule about Star Trek movies, in that the even-numbered films tend to be weaker. ![]() Fans who were left cold by the dreary, perfunctory fourth instalment will be pleased to hear that this film has more going on than any of its predecessors.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |