Oct. 18, 2010, 4:39 p.m. CST
Oct. 18, 2010, 4:40 p.m. CST
Oct. 18, 2010, 4:41 p.m. CST
Oct. 18, 2010, 4:51 p.m. CST
I admire the marketing ability of the director, but the film itself was awful. I'm ashamed to say that I was actually laughing throughout it - and I'm somebody who hates people laughing at inappropriate moments - but I just couldn't help myself.
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:07 p.m. CST
by Axl Z
Could help this, I've got a feeling it'll be like Blair Witch 2, I hope not, but still..
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:16 p.m. CST
But if you blink for even a millisecond, you will miss it.
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:18 p.m. CST
Last year in SF had a HUGE line. This year it will probably be bigger, yet at the same time I feel that there really isn't much hype for PA2 and it won't do as well as the first one.
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:31 p.m. CST
...is a fascinating phenomenon. Wait in line for days to see The Phantom Menace. Wait in line for days to see Twilight: New Moon / Eclipse. Wait in line for (fill the blank) to see Paranormal Activity 2. I'm endlessly amused by this.
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:37 p.m. CST
Yeah, those don't go together. The first film was a plate full of maggots puked out of Rosanne Barr's twat. Anyone who thought different is a drooling imbecile.
Oct. 18, 2010, 5:39 p.m. CST
Cuz I was all like "Why's he heaping praise on this putrid pile of diarhea?" Now I'm all like "ohhhhhh."
Oct. 18, 2010, 6:07 p.m. CST
if the final scene and/or shot has already been shown in the previews. I am thinking it might involve someone being dragged down into the house's basement, or it will involve the baby. Now, they could really re-use the first movie's final shot and have the baby in the new one give a creepy look at the camera and then do that "attack the camera" move that doesn't make any sense when you think about it. Or, they could have the final scene be the "baby on the street" part from the previews, and someone could run out to the baby and realize the baby isn't actually there...just before getting hit by a car or something. This franchise could very easily run into Final Destination territory. Now, I'll really be tickled if this is the ending: someone is dragged down into the basement, and someone else goes down there, and the camera is on night vision mode. Then, something terrible happens to the person searching the basement, and then the movie ends with a demonic baby face/attack-the-camera shot. This ending rips off the first movie, Quarantine, Blair Witch, etc.
Oct. 18, 2010, 6:22 p.m. CST
...if there is a scene in the movie with someone being dragged through multiple rooms, possibly to the basement......ugh.
Oct. 18, 2010, 8:23 p.m. CST
by Mr. Profit
Part 2. The full trailer was just recently released and it STILL doesn't tell you what the storyline is. <P>Either way, any movie that can have that bitch of a ghost, pull a poor baby out his crib in one scene, then have him crawling out on the street in the next has some balls. <P>I predict 2 will be better than 1 in the eyes of most, but stuck up critics will say something silly like "an overload of scares is excessive compared to the moody chilling atmosphere of part 1".
Oct. 18, 2010, 8:30 p.m. CST
by The Reluctant Austinite
The same way I've seen bands have "fan routed tours based on demand", and then play the same cities they always play regardless of the demand list rankings, the "winning" cities here are all the same cities with the same distribution channels that EVERYTHING screens in. It's a bunch of shit. They just want the usual suspects to get excited about a "special" screening.
Oct. 18, 2010, 8:39 p.m. CST
Same shit, blah blah blah.
Oct. 18, 2010, 8:45 p.m. CST
I demanded it but I'm not wasting a whole day waiting in line. I'll just pay to see it once its released.
Oct. 18, 2010, 9:12 p.m. CST
Reluctant Austinite is right. This film would have never played in any other city for free besides those 20. It's the usual suspects and it really is quite the fucking slap in the face to cities like St. Louis where I live. No matter. They're still having midnight screenings where I'll have to pay but maybe that isn't such a bad thing. The last several press or preview screenings I've gone to have brought in the wrong type of crowd. The audiences have either been completely stone cold and totally unappreciative of what they were seeing (Cloverfield) or they acted like a bunch of drunk fucking rednecks who totally ruined the experience (Let Me In).
Oct. 18, 2010, 9:55 p.m. CST
What they should be doing is convincing people that this is better than the first movie. I think this is the first time I've ever seen that, four days before its release, a movie is still marketing itself entirely on its title. The closest example is "Snakes on a Plane", and even that had a trailer.
Oct. 19, 2010, 12:05 a.m. CST
It was full of utterly implausible behaviour on the part of the two main characters (PUT YOUR OUIJA BOARD FOOTAGE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN! LEAVE THE HOUSE! GO TO A CHURCH! DO NOT KEEP SLEEPING IN THE SAME BED!) but it did have a few terrific sequences.
Oct. 19, 2010, 12:09 a.m. CST
by Rocco Curioso
1.) My ticket money back from the first movie, and 2.) Several choice latenight hours of sucking & fucking Katie Featherstone's magnificent titties.
Oct. 19, 2010, 2:06 a.m. CST
by Dapper Swindler
Oct. 19, 2010, 6:35 a.m. CST
The demon was attached to the girl, right? I never understood why her fella didn't just up and announce "you're on your own, love!" and head to the pub. And if you answer that with "because he loved her", I will stike you in the face as hard I wanted to punch that psychic they brought in. Seriously, how useless was he? He apparently DID have 'the gift' and had an opportunity to prove it to the world and his reponse is "you're on your own, love"?! they clearly got the two male characters confused.
Oct. 19, 2010, 2:37 p.m. CST
Well, sure, fine, whatever, but if I had a demon attached to me, there are many places I'd rather be than on my own in a house with one other person. Firstly, I'd want someone awake while I slept, not sleeping at the same bloody time. Secondly, as the paranormal clearly existed, this would suggest that perhaps God was real, or at least benign spirits, so I'd want priests and/or benign shaman types around me. I wouldn't stick around my home as if I'd got a mild infestation of cockroaches in the basement or something, for fuck's sake.
Oct. 19, 2010, 2:59 p.m. CST
Are they nuts? Btw, just saw this kinda funny spoof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cUakWtga_dc
Oct. 19, 2010, 11:44 p.m. CST
The very next day?
Oct. 20, 2010, 7:05 a.m. CST
I can only assume they didn't want to bring the concept of God into it, hence the use of an "investigator" rather than a priest.