free counter with statistics The Fourth Kind Review | Pajiba - Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People

500x_the-fourth-kind-20091019045603369.jpg
Shoulda Brought Your Multipass, Leeloo


The Fourth Kind / Steven Lloyd Wilson

Film Reviews | November 6, 2009 | Comments (24)


If you start the film with the lead actress standing in front of the camera in a misty forest, introducing herself and then warning that the following film contains actual video and audio footage that “is disturbing,” you better be laying out a great “found footage” horror film or the mother of all gonzo porn. The Fourth Kind is neither.

The film tries to be two things: a “found footage” horror film, and a psychological thriller playing on the fear of no one believing you. The problem is that these two concepts are fundamentally at odds with each other. In order for no one to believe you there cannot be any convincing evidence. “Found footage” is by definition convincing evidence. So either the film has to have shitty found footage or unreasonable characters. This film manages to have both. Yahtzee!

“Found footage” films like The Blair Witch Project or Paranormal Activity can stretch you into a taut and vibrating string of nerves if done right because they do two things. First, they set themselves in surroundings so banal that when you leave the theater, you constantly feel a need to look over your shoulder, check in the closet that night, investigate every little noise. The second thing that they do is to never ever ever break with the fiction that what you are seeing is absolutely genuine footage. The success of “found footage” depends psychologically on the audience getting drawn in and feeling as if what they are seeing is real, regardless of whether they actually are gullible enough to believe so. The instant there’s a break in that feeling, the boundary goes back up between audience and movie and the effectiveness of the spell dissipates.

The Fourth Kind takes a hybrid approach by combining what they claim to be real footage and audio recordings with “reenactments” by actual actors. It’s the same sort of thing they do on the History channel, except with real actors and fake evidence instead of bad actors and real evidence. It just doesn’t work, because the jerking back and forth constantly breaks the suspension of disbelief. The “real” footage is vaguely creepy at times, as is the “reenactment” footage, but the flipping (often within the same scene) just makes you constantly aware that you are watching a movie instead of drawing you into the atmosphere of the film. This is further compounded by the constant use of flashbacks and the wrapping of the overall narrative within an interview. By the end of the film, it unintentionally echoed The Usual Suspects in that you had a feeling that nothing that had been shown actually happened. They really should have taken one route and gone with it. “Found footage” or traditional narrative could have told this story, but combining the two was to the detriment of both.

The shame is that there’s an interesting story of paranoia buried in there. The film is called “The Fourth Kind,” which means that anyone who’s ever watched a movie says to themselves “you mean like a close encounter?” The cat’s out of the bag from the title of the movie what we’re dealing with, so the big reveal shouldn’t just be your run of the mill Gray with an anal probe. To their credit, it’s not. And also to their credit, they never show the shark. The film manages a mishmash of possession, Sumerian, UFOs, abduction, freaky-ass owls, hypnosis, and the Cthulu-esque idea of being driven insane just by remembering the unspeakable horror you witnessed while asleep.

There’s a place in sci-fi horror for an updating of Lovecraft for the alien abduction mythos, but this film simply doesn’t succeed at establishing enough of a tension. The best way to describe it is that it tells a very dark and nihilistic story, but looking back on it, it never really felt particularly dark while watching it. The writing just wasn’t up to the task of taking this film to the next level, every conversation feeling just like it was setting up the pieces in order to be knocked down. The film never takes its time to establish mood and tension, instead bursting right into big weird stuff happening with firm evidence appearing almost immediately with little or no effort.

A constant sense that you could do something smarter or better than the characters is never a good sign and it pervades the film. Without getting into scene by scene nitpicks let’s just toss out the giant obvious one: if I recover repressed memories that aliens are kidnapping and sodomizing my family every night, then I for one am sleeping in a hotel that night, if I ever sleep again.

Meh. I’m going to go dig out some old “X-Files” episodes.

Steven Lloyd Wilson is a hopeless romantic and the last scion of Norse warriors and the forbidden elder gods. His novel, ramblings, and assorted fictions coalesce at www.burningviolin.com. You can email him here.


The Men Who Stare at Goats Review | Lust in Translation



Comments

Leeloo Dallas Buttholepass! Oh yeah, I can keep this up all goddamn day.

Posted by: the_wakeful at November 6, 2009 4:24 PM

Dang! I'd love a really good alien abduction movie. (Fire In The Sky notwithstanding.) The owl in the preview really creeped me out.

Posted by: MM at November 6, 2009 4:51 PM

I love how the average human will draw an alien with those big slanty eyes and the skinny pointy chin. Keep in mind these people are not artists. Ask them to draw a human, and the eyes are too big and slanty, and the chins are too pointy, and oh, they look just like the drawings of the aliens.

Posted by: BWeaves at November 6, 2009 5:44 PM

are you guys planning on reviewing Precious?

Posted by: Stella at November 6, 2009 6:00 PM

It's spelled Cthulhu. Duh, just sound it out. Phonetics, like in school.

You know that when he awakes he's coming after the people who can't spell his name first, don't you?

Posted by: Andrew at November 6, 2009 6:46 PM

It's spelled Cthulhu. Duh, just sound it out. Phonetics, like in school.

You know that when he awakes he's coming after the people who can't spell his name first, don't you?

Posted by: Andrew at November 6, 2009 6:47 PM

And then he's coming after webmasters with no edit function.

And then people who double post.

Posted by: Andrew at November 6, 2009 6:49 PM

Are you dream about something? Want to find a verified quality partner? Well, join (Sugarloves-com) the best club for seeking sugardaddy/babe!

Posted by: Mightylittletiger at November 6, 2009 8:51 PM

Next he's coming for people who don't even check Wikipedia:

Cthulhu has also been spelled as Tulu, Clulu, Clooloo, Cthulu, Cighulu, Cathulu, Kathulu, Kutulu, Q’thulu, Ktulu, Kthulhut, Kulhu, Kutunluu, Cuitiliú, Thu Thu,[3] and in many other ways.

:-D

Posted by: max at November 6, 2009 9:25 PM

No, I think Cthulhu's first order of business is coming after spambots!!!

(Unless you use the reasoning that Cthulhu is evil, and spambots are evil, thus they are allies. But spambots are made of spam, and therefore delicious! Cthulhu should totally eat them first.)

Posted by: MM at November 6, 2009 9:41 PM

So Multi-PASS? As in Pass on this piece of shit like I plan on passing on The Box? No problem. I'll be over here in my cave contemplating how to kill my neighbor and sleep with his wife.

Posted by: DeistBrawler at November 6, 2009 9:42 PM

It's also been spelled Sulu. Tentacle faced George Takei is coming for you all.

Posted by: laredo at November 7, 2009 1:13 AM

Deistbrawler:
You might want to tap that first. Make sure it is worth killing for. You know, cause it would be embarrassing as hell to kill the dude, just to find yourself the proud owner of a lousy lay.

Posted by: Lindsey with an 'e' at November 7, 2009 3:02 AM

"No, I think Cthulhu's first order of business is coming after spambots!!! "

Unless Cthulhu IS THE SPAMBOT!!!!

Posted by: Lindsey with an 'e' at November 7, 2009 3:04 AM

Lindsey with an 'e' will you marry me?

Posted by: DeistBrawler at November 7, 2009 3:48 AM

Eh, I'm more interested in "The Box", since I'm old enough to remember the Twilight Zone reboot episode ("Button Button") on which its based, and it had a fantastic twist at the end.

Of course that would mean I would have to watch a 2 hour movie just to see a twist I already know is coming, or to find out they came up with a different twist, which will likely not work, and leave me feeling robbed. So I guess I really don't have any interest in seeing The Box. But I'm still more interested in it than this movie.

Posted by: Irving Washington at November 7, 2009 9:17 AM

Get in line, Deist, my friend.

Posted by: , (TCFKAB) at November 7, 2009 12:06 PM

"The Box" is clearly a movie no higher than Wikipedia-The-Plot worthy, with middling reviews and Cameron "I can detach my jaw and swallow a water buffalo whole" Diaz.

But hey, it's your ten bucks.

On a side, has anyone "LEELOO DALLAS MULTIPASS!"-ed this movie yet as I instructed in the previous comments section of the last post about this movie?

Posted by: D-Day at November 7, 2009 1:27 PM

aahhh people... when whill they end??

Posted by: bee boop at November 7, 2009 10:47 PM

Who cares!!! My boyfriend also agrees with me. He is 10 years older than me, lol. We met online at age-gap club -- http://AgelessOnly.COM/. Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.

Posted by: Kyra at November 8, 2009 5:51 AM

I never had any intention of seeing this movie, because it's just not my thing. Good, bad, mediocre - doesn't matter - I just can't handle the scary stuff.

But dang if that was not a fascinating review. I think your insight about found footage vs. whatever it's called - paranoid thrillers - is really dead on. Imagine if Rosemary's Baby had interspliced found footage of Satan worshippers doing various Satan-y things. Terrible.

It makes me much more interested in reading about thrillers and horror in general. Still won't watch them, though. Not even Let the Right One In.

Posted by: marya at November 8, 2009 8:40 AM

Reading this review just made me think of a TV show that was on years ago, at the height of X-Files-Fever, about alien conspiracies. From memory it was a period piece. I want to say it was called 'Dark Skies', but I might be wrong.

Quickly! To the imdb!

YES! It's Dark Skies! I didn't just make it up! AND THE GUY IN IT IS THE GUY FROM 'NOW AND AGAIN'!

Now, the real question: Was it as awesome as I remember, or was I just really easily impressed as a kid?

Posted by: Daniel Hall at November 8, 2009 7:01 PM

the box SUUUUUUUUUUUUCKED.

you're welcome.

Posted by: gp at November 9, 2009 12:53 AM

Excellent review (the "Yahtzee!" comment in particular made me laugh). I was wondering from seeing the trailer how they merged the found footage with the "regular" acting bits--apparently, not very well. Time to dig out those VHS tapes of the X-Files if I want to get my alien freak on.

Thanks for the heads up, gp, although the suckage was fairly obvious from the trailer. "We're already living paycheck to paycheck!" In our grand two story fully-decked-out for Christmas house. And our expensive clothes and fancy haircuts. "We have to save your son or your wife will die!" If the son needs saving, do you really need added incentive to do it? "How will she die?" "They're gonna kill her!" Well, DUH. If the chick was going to die from natural causes, you couldn't very well predict it. Stupid!

Posted by: DeadBessie at November 9, 2009 9:25 AM





Post a comment

 (required)

 (required)


Preview of your comment: