Basically, they put on on hold for extended periods of time while asking you to do everything anyone who has even a mild idea of how computers work has already done, likely multiple times by the point they end up having to resort to calling them (i.e. unplugging the computer and waiting thirty seconds and plugging it back in and rebooting; resetting the modem; checking for updates, etc.).
In my case, it was the internet running really slow- it took me a good hour-and-a-half to edit and post my articles, and it had a habit of going particularly slow around 6:30-7pm- but I'm no idiot: I knew if I called for that, they would simply say you can always upgrade to a higher speed, blah blah blah.
Last Wednesday, the spinning blue circle of death made an extended appearance, as per usual, but this time, the internet never resumed and it just got stuck. A network check revealed the internet had dropped out altogether, so this was clearly something else. When it still hadn't come back the next day, I finally broke down and called and reported an outage.
After going through the usual rigmarole, they finally set up an appointment for someone to come out and take a look, and lo and behold, I wasn't crazy: turns out not only were some of the cables waterlogged- the service guy said they didn't look like they'd been upgraded in years, as they used a different kind now- but there was a loose connection outside that someone had clearly knocked loose when servicing someone else.
After replacing the cords and re-establishing the connection, I got my internet back and at the speed it was supposed to be running at in the first place, but hadn't for months. Naturally, no offer to reimburse me for all the time that it was down was forthcoming, but at least I didn't have to pay for the service call and the guy they sent seemed to actually know what he was talking about for once. It is what it is, I guess.
Anyway, hopefully this brings to a close all the trouble I've been having and it won't take as long to edit my articles and post them, thus meaning that you all will get to see them in a timelier manner, and at a quicker rate. We shall see. If this proves to be the case, I may try to increase output, but I'll take a wait-and-see attitude, until such is proved to be the case.
In the meantime, as I mentioned before we were so rudely interrupted, I saw several movies I had never seen over the Thanksgiving break, thanks to a handy-dandy free pay cable preview, and I've seen a few more since the internet was out, so I have plenty of new stuff to review.
Thanks for bearing with me, and keep an eye out for my next franchise review, for the Xmas-themed slasher series, Silent Night, Deadly Night, over the next few weeks, as well as a few more Christmas horror goodies! 😈
Ti West is one of those writer/directors whose work I've enjoyed when I saw it, but I never particularly felt compelled to seek out the way I've done with other filmmakers I'm more of an ardent fan of. When I really dig someone, I make it a point to seek out everything they've done, even if some of it ends up falling by the wayside.
What huge movie fans among us doesn't have a few DVDs or Blu-Rays they haven't quite gotten around to watching just yet? Or movies we've been planning to buy and/or stream but haven't as of yet?
Anyway, I just loved his movie The House of the Devil and quite liked The Innkeepers as well, and was lucky enough to have seen both of them on the big screen at film festivals, where they were both exceptionally well-received by the packed crowds that saw them. The former remains my favorite of West's output to date.
I've also seen his contributions to the anthologies V/H/S and The ABC's of Death, both of which I own, along with the aforementioned movies I saw in theaters. And I saw the episodes of the shows he directed- Scream, Wayward Pines, Outcast and The Exorcist- though I would have seen them regardless of who directed them, as I already watched the shows anyway.
I own The Roost but haven't watched it as of yet, for no particular reason, but I haven't seen, nor do I own his other films, Trigger Man and In a Valley of Violence. I've enjoyed everything I've seen by him, save the wretched Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever, which even he has disowned and went so far as to have his name removed from, citing studio interference and extensive re-shooting and re-editing against his wishes as the reasons. I get it- the movie's just terrible.
Fortunately, that negative experience wasn't enough to sever his relationship with filmmaker Eli Roth, who made the original Cabin Fever and was the one who hired West to do the sequel. Roth also produced this film, and his name is front and center in the credits, but, by all accounts, he gave West full creative control this time around after his negative experience with the former film.
Thankfully, the end results are considerably better than the ones for CF2, though Lord knows, they couldn't get much worse. The Sacrament definitely feels more like a West film than that one, although it has a unique vibe that sets it apart from the rest of his oeuvre that I've seen. Chalk that up mostly to it being a found footage film, which is probably why I put off seeing it until recently- I was a bit burnt out on the much-debated sub-genre.
Fortunately, this one is a great example of how to do found footage right. For one thing, most of the footage is justified, in terms of why the filmmakers keep shooting, even when things get hairy. Sure, there are a few scenes where the camera is put down or held low because things are getting crazy, and they just happen to be put down in such a way as to continue to capture the action, but that's par for the course, I suppose. The point is, it's much more believable here than in a lot of other cases.
For one thing, unlike a lot of found footage movies, this one isn't dealing with the supernatural, which definitely helps matters, in terms of realism. The set-up is basically this: a guy, Patrick (Kentucker Audley, Ain't Them Bodies Saints) whose sister, Caroline (Amy Seimetz, TV's The Girlfriend Experience), has gone to an isolated religious commune to get herself off of drugs contacts her brother to come and visit her.
It just so happens he works for Vice, the magazine-turned-media conglomerate, which some of you might be familiar with- it being a real thing, and not an invention for the film. This naturally adds to the realism, in that he works for a real-life company, not a fictitious one made up for the purposes of the movie, as is the case with a lot of movies that want to avoid getting permission for such things.
When his co-workers, reporter Sam (AJ Bowen, also of House of the Devil) and cameraman Jake (filmmaker Joe Swanberg, Drinking Buddies), get wind of all this, they think it could be a great subject for a documentary, and offer to tag along.
From the jump, things are iffy. A helicopter is arranged by the commune to pick Patrick up, and as the pilot drops them off, he tells them he will be back at a set time the next day and will wait a limited amount of time, then he's out of there. It's clear he's a bit nervous about the whole thing. It turns out he has good reason to be, as when they arrive, they are confronted by armed guards, who are none too happy to see a camera.
Jake kinda-sorta stops filming for a brief amount of time, until the guards get permission from the facility to not only let them in, but film everything as well. It's also clear that the leader wasn't expecting anyone but Patrick, and everyone there is a bit taken aback by these new faces, and the presence of the camera in general.
That said, some of them do agree to be interviewed, as does the commune's leader, known as "Father" (Gene Jones, No Country for Old Men) later on, at a sort of welcoming ceremony/party, complete with food, a live band and dancing.
As things proceed, it becomes clearer and clearer that something is not quite right at the commune, not exactly helped by the nervousness of Caroline, who keeps whisking Patrick off to talk to him alone- for what reason, we don't see, as we stick with Jake, and to a slightly lesser extent, Sam, for pretty much the entire movie.
I won't spoil what comes next, except to say that if it rings some bells for certain viewers as having the potential to be more of a cult than a drug rehab facility, you are not wrong, but you can glean that much from the trailer, obviously.
Others will see clear connections to the events here and the events surrounding real-life religious leader Jim Jones (don't click on the link just yet if you don't want to be spoiled on what happens), which is not a coincidence, as the film is inspired by him and what happened in Jonestown in Guyana back in the late 70's.
The end result works like gangbusters in terms of creepy atmosphere and the way it ratchets up the suspense little by little, keeping you guessing what will happen next- and who will be left standing in the end, if anybody. It's also nice to see a film like this with characters that aren't actively annoying and are mostly pretty likable. In other words, you genuinely care about their respective fates- a seeming rarity in horror films these days.
Adding immeasurably to the proceedings is the central performance by Gene Jones, who is as charismatic as he is creepy, as the commune's beloved "Father." The film's first half is admittedly a slow-burn, but also filled with an intense and mounting sense of dread, which makes what happens in the second half all the more shocking and effective, even if what happens won't surprise history buffs or cult aficionados. (Or people who saw American Horror Story: Cult, for that matter.)
All in all, even if you know the story behind the movie and the obvious source of inspiration, it's still far and away one of the better found footage films I've ever seen, as faint praise as that may seem to some, given the sub-genre's iffy reputation as it stands. The set-up lends itself well to the execution, making for less "yeah, right- like they'd keep filming during THAT" moments than you'd typically get in a movie like this than usual.
It's also cool to see a lot of the gang back together from You're Next, which was one of my fave horror movies from the last decade or so. Incidentally, West himself acted in that film, alongside most of his main cast here, including Seimetz, Swanberg and Bowen. West was also in several of Swanberg's films, often alongside this same core group of actors/filmmakers, so these four clearly believe in paying it forward and back again.
As such, file this one as another win for West for me overall. I know many horror fans are split on West's work- like Roth, some hate him, while others just love him. I'd consider myself somewhere in the middle: the stuff I like by him, I really like, but the stuff I don't is admittedly just terrible.
This film did instill in me an interest in seeing what he gets up to next, however, for whatever that's worth, after several years of mostly doing random TV episodes here and there as of late. That's more than I can say for his other work, as much as I liked House and Innkeepers. This may well be the one he ends up being remembered for, and for that reason, it's at least worth seeing once.
Check it out, but remember to stay away from that Kool-Aid!
Emoji Review: 👨💬👩👋👨❌3🚁💨🗾🙋👪⛺🙌🙏💃👴😆😜👨😨👪😭👴😈💉🍷😱💀👨👨💨🚁💨⛺💣💥
No comments:
Post a Comment