Spooky stuff here!!!


Yeah, it was spooky. It had some pretty creepy parts. Just like the other movies, we see the camera pick up the hair-raising parts. It tried, but it didn't do the first film any justice. It's just Paranormal Activity, and the failed mimics. Still waiting for that X-rated horror movie. I ain't talking about sexual content in a horror movie. I am talking a movie so shocking, so scary, that it NEEDS an X rating. There are some scary movies over the years that deserved an R rating. We need one better, and scarier!

reply

I'd love to see that too. But studios are afraid of the NC-17 or X ratings because it won't make as much money as R rated. But I agree with you. I wanna see some really terrifying *beep* up *beep* Serbian film and Salo are some really disturbing movies but more so for sexual content. I want so scary and disturbing horror that really terrifies me.

reply

They said when The Exorcist was released in 1973, people in theatres were crying, people were walking out very freaked out about what the little girl was going through. The "spider walk" scene (the bloody one!) woulda sent them over the edge if it woulda been included in the final cut. Wow! I wanna see a modern day horror movie with the same reaction from the viewing audience. It is time to make something so horrific and shocking, you will need counseling to get a good night's sleep!

reply

This film had a few marginally interesting segments because we see much more here than in the other "Paranormal Activity" films, but ultimately it felt predictable and mundane. 6/10 stars from me.

Regarding X-rated horror, the MPAA pretty much allows any level of violence in an R-rated film these days – and there's already quite a bit of violence in PG-13 films, but X is a self-assigned rating, so if anything, the MPAA would rate a film NC-17 if it felt the content was beyond R.

reply