FILLERWEEN 3: OUIJA- ORIGIN OF EVIL

Hello and welcome back to Fillerween 3: Season of the Filler.

Horror movies seem to be doing alright now. For the longest time, I dreaded seeing new horror movie coming out, they looked dull and replied on cheap tactics to get people to easily jump and scream. It seemed the safest bet was watching old films that I already owned. Fortunately, the past three years have surprised me and given me some good films that I do like. True, while there still are some blunders tend to come out that fall back in the cracks of just making a product to make a quick buck, the past couple of years have seen some pretty good horror movies come out and do well. It was this year alone I saw three in the theaters, each one leaving me with some great satisfaction. And one of them came out this month not a week ago.

Which is odd when you hear about a prequel movie being made to, as numerous critics called it, one of the worst movies that came out of 2014. Ouija, released in October, told the story of a group of friends attempting to contact her spirit after her sudden death which may be responsible when playing alone with a Ouija board. As the film progressed, it’s revealed that years before, a young girl accidentally released sinister spirits through another Ouija board, and those same spirits are now after the group of friends as they try to figure out a way to stop them.

I haven’t watched it, but from the reviews and clips I have gotten around to see, it looks and sounds bad. Hokey acting, jump scares constantly popping up on screen, unlikeable characters, it felt like just another forgettable terribly made horror movie. And while it did do financially well, the film was quickly forgotten and it seemed that was it.

Boy were we wrong. With the announcement of another film, this time a prequel that told the origin of what happened prior to the first movie, everyone laughed. Seriously, after how terrible the last one was? And with it set before the first one, it will still end with the fact we know what happens next. Naturally, everyone was dreading the film’s release.

But as the release date got closer, I became interested in the film more and more. I think the breaking point was when I saw a pretty great looking poster design. What caught my eye was in the bottom corner of the poster, it had an old Universal Logo that was made for movies during the 1960s. And when I saw the ads, I noticed it featured the Universal Logo that was made in 1963.

I found it kind of admirable they were reusing those old labels and logos, and it seemed the film was more confidently made as oppose to the first one.

Overview:
In Los Angeles of 1967, Alice Zander (Elizabeth Reaser) lives her life as a fortune teller who stages her séances with the aid of her children Lina (Annalise Basso) and Doris (Lulu Wilson). With her act coming off as a bit stale and more bills piling up, Lina takes notice and brings up to add a new edition to the bit: a Ouija board, a game where people ‘speak’ to spirits after seeing how easily it can scare people. Alice does purchase one, and unknowingly summons one that appears to be her deceased husband. However, the only one who appears to communicate with it is Doris, who with the spirit’s help saves the house from closure and help make the séances more realistic. It doesn’t take long before the spirit turns out to be and possesses Doris, and threatens the wellbeing and lives of Lina, Alice, and others…


This was a good time watching this in the theater. The audience had a good time and responded well with the film, in both the laughs and scares that happened the entire run time.

The film is clever to not have you constantly scared the entire time. The first half of the movie is mostly just meet the characters and seeing how they live their lives. You get to know them, and it’s got some good stuff in it that makes it feel like a regular movie set in the 1960’s. Are there some scares? Yes, but not so you’re terrified. They’re funny scares that make you laugh immediately after you’ve been startled. In fact, the film has some good humor to it, some of it surprisingly dark. There’s one bit where Doris is talking to Mikey, Lina’s boyfriend, and she has this great sinister line that goes on for a long time. It’s just close-ups of her, Mikey, and without any dialogue. It ends with silence, and then she smiles and says “Have a good night”. The entire audience laughed, it was such a great delivery.



So, when do the scares come in? Smartly, at the halfway point. Because while it is a sudden change, it works because it isn’t just “let’s scare the audience at every chance we can”, but it’s done so the scares work their way in more and more as we’re getting to the end of the movie. There are sequences when you’re looking in the living room at night and it’s just focusing on the room. It’s only when you see a silhouette move you’re shocked and realize he was watching the entire time. It makes you unnerved and unsure when the characters are safe from the treat that’s present.

The nicest aspect improved on the other film was the Ouija board itself. This movie focuses a lot on the board and its history during this period. With Lina and her friends playing it to how Alice uses it to trick people, it’s cool to see how it was just considered just a normal board game before it became criticized with being connected to the paranormal and supernatural. I even like how they recreated the beautiful box cover the board came with in the 1950s and used it for the film.

And the board has a lot of sequences when it’s alone. When characters leave the room, the camera focuses on the board and it’s cool how the film uses the game appropriately in the film as oppose to the first one which had little focus.

The nods to movies at that time are great. From the use of the old Universal logo at the beginning, little references are made to ghost movies of the 1960s to the more demonic supernatural films of the 1970s. So nods like something found in the cellar being a nod to Psycho and Doris acting in a way it comes off as Damien from 1976’s The Omen, are done cleverly so it’ll be new for audiences of today who haven’t seen those older films. They even recreate imagery from other horror movies, such as the iconic shot of Father Merrin standing outside the house in The Exorcist.

And the film even went to an extent to reference older horror movie directors like Tod Browning, who directed Universal’s Dracula in 1931. The filmmakers were not screwing around with this film.

So are there areas the film doesn’t work? Sadly, yes. I hate the marketing for flat out showing certain sequences in the film, such as Doris getting possessed. How horrifying would that be had you not seen it in the trailer and saw it in the theater? Everyone would have been freaked out by that, but no, let’s show it in nearly all the ads.

While the scares are well done, there are still jump cuts present. Not a lot, thank god, but a few that are irritating, especially when the director is succeeding in getting you involved in the story and setting up great atmosphere.

The spirit design, while looking passable, looks off when CGI is added onto it. The reason to me is it looks odd when you have a movie trying to set itself in the 1960s so much you almost accept it, only to ruin the illusion when they use a modern filmmaking technique that you know was not around at that time. It stands out like a sore thumb.


There was an odd thing with the ending that I found off, but that’s mostly due to the fact it was done to connect to the first movie. Not because it doesn’t make sense if you didn’t see the first movie, but more on the line if you watch the previous movie after this one things are set up differently here that don’t add up in the 2014 movie. So, certain character motivations are not as they were when in the other film.

Cast:
Annalise Basso as Lina Zander- I like Annalise Basso in the movie. She does come off as a good person, who’s job, while is a scam, is also a way for people to let go of grief they have with the passing of their loved ones. She has good chemistry with the other girls, so much so you buy they are an actual family.

Elizabeth Reaser as Alice Zander- Elizabeth Reaser is an actress that I haven’t seen in a lot of films, but she does have the talent to be in bigger films. She has some great acting sequences when under threat by the spirts in the house, and does have some genuine reactions like a sequence when her mouth vanishes.

Lulu Wilson as Doris Zander- This kid is going places. Not only does Lulu Wilson come off as a sweet, innocent nice kid, you’re horrified by her when she gets possessed and just appears in rooms suddenly. So many people flipped out when people would be talking and she was just suddenly there. She also delivers some great written dialogue, one being a sequence with Parker Mack.


Henry Thomas as Father Tom- I wasn’t sure who this was at first, but when I did realize who Henry Thomas was, I was stunned. It’s Elliot from E.T! And, wow, he’s great in the movie. He’s got this way to warm up to you that you automatically like his character…That might be because, well, he was Elliot in E.T., but because he does have some great charisma and is giving a good performance.


Parker Mack as Mikey- Parker Mack does a good job with the role given. He’s essentially just ‘the boyfriend’ but to his credit he does add some bits here and there it comes off more genuine than scripted.

Production:
I feel happy that the director, Mike Flanagan, made the movie he wanted to. He could not only direct but write and edit the film in a way so what he wanted to end up on screen got to be just that.

The film is shot in eyepopping gorgeous color. It looks beautiful, everything giving off such great look as oppose to the bland colorless look of the 2014 film. The best use I feel was the end credits, which were a nice nod to the opening credits of that period.

Here’s a fun nod I noticed. Throughout the film, there would appear what looked like a burn in the film on the right-hand side of the screen. The burn, which if you saw Fight Club, is referred to as a cue mark or cigarette burn, as a way for the projectionist to line up films when movies were shot on different reels. So, when a scene had to be swapped, it was a cue to swap the film for the next shot.

What made me laugh was they added it in post due to film being made digitally now, so cue marks are no longer heavily seen except in older theaters that still use that technique. It makes it feel like this could have been made during this era of time.

And to add to that, the film added a title card that looked like one from the 1960s. Not one where it’s the logo on a black screen, but the title card placed during a sequence happening in the film. It was pretty awesome they took the time to add these little additions in the film to give it an old feel to it.

Final Conclusion:
Do NOT watch the first one. Just watch this one. It’s a confidently made movie with a lot of nods and homages to older films yet does it so it doesn’t feel like it way just copying it. Ouija: Origin of Evil is a delightful scary experience that will leave you satisfied and scared at the same time.  

Final Rating: 3.75/5

NEXT TIME:
TUNE IN MONDAY TO FIND OUT...