INSIDIOUS (James Wan, Haunted Films, 2010)

The definition of the word insidious is "proceeding in a gradual subtle way, but with harmful effects". In the film INSIDIOUS (James Wan, Haunted Films, 2010), the narrative plays out in the same manner. The only problem is that the film starts so strongly and works so effectively that by the time the third act is reached, the narrative has nothing left and therefore doesn't hold up to it's beginning. So the film strictly follows its namesake, yet the harm done is to the film itself. Narrative content aside, there is some amazing work done within the film, particularly in sound design, cinematography and composition and to me, the single most amazing detail is the production of the film itself. The producers of this film should be recognized in some way for what they accomplished because it is stellar work.

As mentioned, the narrative starts strongly and works exceedingly well with not much going on. Watching the film I almost feel like maybe Wan instructed his actors to play everything subdued and subtle, allowing for his sound design and shot composition to have their effect. And this subtle direction proves to me that a film need not be jammed start to finish with action but rather if you let the imagery do the work, and if you craft your imagery with care and thought, the film will work on numerous levels. The problem lies in the ability to properly keep this subtly going, and by the time the source of horror is revealed, it is almost comical comparatively. Here's the thing though, maybe this is what the filmmaker intended. The point in the film which really started to lose me was the introduction of the psychic mediums. The characters of Specs (Leigh Wannell) and Tucker (Angus Sampson) and their witty banter threw me out of a marvelous tension filled film. They were just a bit too comical. But I must concede that this might have been the writer (Wannell) and directors (Wan) intent.

Now, if their intent was to use sound design effectively enough to create horror without the use of gory imagery then they did so spectacularly. The sound design in this film is used to great effect; it is creepy, tension filled and keeps you in chills throughout. Horror films made today tend to overlook the fact that what is not seen is more powerful and scarier than what is seen and this film proves it. Throughout the film (well, up to the third act) sound is used remarkably and there is no need for ridiculous imagery, although some is used (effectively so). In fact the film is reminiscent to me of one of the great directors as far as the use of sound design is concerned, William Friedkin. Its almost as if the sound becomes another character within the films narrative.

But the best part of this film is the job the producers accomplished. Research afterwards led me to discover the film's budget was $1.5 million and that it has made $90+ million to date. This shows me that a producer can realize some quite simple things, put them to practice and make a tremendous film, one that makes money. Take a simple yet effective story, keep your costs down with a budget that is NOT overly reliant on ridiculous effects, use a minimalist style in regards to cinematography and shot composition and you have a great film. And the way the end of the narrative plays out they have already set things up quite nicely for a sequel. Which will be about a third as good but quite possibly will make twice as much (and which I won't see). That said, check this film out, it is rather good!