The Grudge 2

Well, exams are over for 2006. I can finally breath a long overdue sigh of relief and begin my three months of professional bumming. I have some extra hours lined up at Video Ezy but only enough to pay my bills so expect to see more regular updates as I sit at home with no money heh. Anyway, on to the topic.

I hadn't originally planned on seeing The Grudge 2 today. I went down to the cinema with the intention of seeing Scorsese's latest - The Departed (a remake of the chinese crime thriller Infernal Affairs) but upon learning that it was at blockbuster pricing and therefore I couldn't use my six dollar discount card I opted for the aforementioned. I kind of regretted buying a ticket straight after though, especially considering I had only just been warned off the movie by a friend of mine. His thoughts can be viewed here. I decided to throw caution to the wind and go watch it anyway.

So, how was it you say? In short - A dire remake and sequel that hurls yet another kick in the balls to a genre which is rapidly losing any originality it had left. Movies like Saw come out and wow people with their original storylines and intense psychological mindgames but then become diluted by Hollywood's desire to capitalise on anything that shows even a hint of originality, cue Saw 2, Saw 3 and the just announced Saw 4. Does anyone seriously think that a fourth Saw movie is going to have one ounce of the smarts and freshness that made Saw so succesful in the first place? Or that a second Grudge movie is going to find any interesting new material that wasn't already covered in the pretty mediocre original? Under the current production system - not a shitshow in hell. The sad thing is though is that these movies continue to make money and only encourage Hollywood to keep piling them out on its production line. Kids continue to go see these movies based on their slick advertising campaigns and flashy myspace pages. It irks me to no end. Hell, I went to see it too so I guess I can't be too pissed off at them.

I think there are two major problems with the movie. The first is the three different storylines driving the plot which seem to come and go with no apparent connectivity until right at the very end of the movie. We have three schoolgirls who go to the haunted house of the first movie to pull a prank on one of the unpopular girls at the school, with predictable results. Then there is the family in Chicago who have to deal with the problems of step-moms while there is some seriously creepy stuff going on in one of the neighbouring apartments. And finally we have Audrey Davis (Amber Tamblyn) and a journalist who are in Tokyo investigating the reasons behind her sister Karen's death (Sarah Michelle Gellar), who was the principle character in the first movie. They don't exactly lend themselves to an interweaving storyline. As the movie progresses the film constantly cuts between the storylines without any narrative or artistic motivation. Five minutes of one storyline then 15 of another followed by 3 or 4 of the third one then back again. All the changes between locations and storylines were increasingly pissing me off at the films lack of focus. And when I was just about ready to scream at the screen the director closes the film with a rapid montage that is meant to satisfy the chaotic mess that has gone before it. Sorry mate, it doesn't work like that. Inteweaving narratives can work amazingly. Crash, Traffic, and to a lesser extent Syriana, are all excellent examples. However none of them are horrors.

The other major problem is that essentially, the film relies on the same type of horror the whole way through the movie, and it hasn't really changed from the first movie either. Ok sure jump-cuts and fast edits of creepy looking kids will make you jump the first few times you see them but it quickly becomes tiresome. Even the best sound design can't help lengthen the scare factor of these creepy kids. The law of deminishing returns applies big time to this movie. I imagine I wasn't alone in my dissapointment at the films reluctance to explore other scare tactics than the ones established in the first film. It isn't hard to pick when the creepy kids are going to emerge after the first few minutes. Showers, mirrors, dark rooms, scenes with only one character on screen all scream 'here comes another pasty kid with black overlong hair making croaky cat hissing noises'. After about twenty minutes the joke is up. The Grudge 2 is a one trick pony.

There are other problems with the movie - way too long is spent trying to flesh out the backstory of the curse, too many characters get thrown to the wayside in the balancing (hah!) act of the different storylines and the stupid sidetrack to Kayako's mother. But to be honest I really don't want to waste my time writing about them when the other two points have already gotten my feelings across.

The best horror movies are ones that don't try and balance interconnecting storylines. They focus on individual characters or a small group trapped in one place, forced to deal with increasingly complex psychological issues and the ever present threat of the unknown. I am thinking of films like Saw, Hard Candy and The Descent. While Saw has sold out Hard Candy and The Descent are beacons of hope for the horror genre, showing that it is still possible to find some originality in this abused genre. I just hope like hell that Hollywood doesn't end up abusing these two either.

Final Verdict: 4/10. If you liked the first one you will find the second one passable, even if it doesn't have one inkling of originality. To be honest if you want to watch a good horror movie your only option at the moment is to go to the video store as there is nothing of note playing a the cinemas. Wait till Hard Candy comes out on the 23rd November. Don't waste your money on this one.