MovieChat Forums > The Nightmare (2015) Discussion > Somebody has to explain to me the low sc...

Somebody has to explain to me the low score

posted 9 years ago by Tin_ear
5 replies | jump to latest

The 5.8 score is baffling. I've seen the other documentaries available on the internet on this subject that people have compared this to, and this one is clearly the best. I don't creep out easily, but this was creepy.

Instead of the obligatory scene where the scientist comes in and wires up the person for meaningless tests as the narrator drones on about how sleep paralysis is a natural phenomenon that you see in every ***king paranormal doc, it's interesting to see the people trying desperately to come to grips with it as they are forced to learn through sci-fi movies what the hell is happening to them. I like how the director can incorporate film as a way to explain human nature and vice versa.

The interesting part is that I don't know whether we are supposed to believe these people are sane or 100% reasonable--I got the distinct impression some of them were probably exaggerating--and I think the film is trying to communicate that. Several of them have claimed to have rejected science and their own beliefs. As a diehard cynic who can stop my own dreams when I sense it is illogical and therefore realize it is only a dream (and know I can't be the only one that can do this), I'm detecting that these supposedly secular people aren't scared toward god, they had those inclinations in them the whole time. As the film touches on, the victims seem to be projecting their most concealed beliefs or fears onto their brain malfunctions to explain them and in the process strengthening their closeted Jesus thoughts or buried supernatural compulsions. The teacher is predictably quick to chime in with the Jungian archetypes. This is all a phenomenon the film is smart enough to allude to without resorting to a talking head to speculate or spell out for us. The documentary isn't just about one thing or facet of psychology. That's the sign of being a good piece of art. Seriously, I must have watched an entirely different movie.

[–] roger_dat 9 years ago

i think people went in expecting a horror movie of sorts and found something they cannot relate to.

I had no idea sleep paralysis was "a thing", for years i been telling my friends about these dreams i couldn't wake up from and about shadow man looking at me, so it came as a surprise that there was a quality documentary about the topic.

PS: i'm pretty sane and can tell you sleep paralysis is pretty real and quite possibly the scariest thing a person's mind can produce

The following statement is true:
The above statement is false.

[–] movie_nazi 8 years ago

Even though you flat out reject having a medical expert in the film I believe this hurt the film. A good documentary explores all points of view on a subject even if it chooses to highlight a specific one. I also feel the film should have delved a bit more historically on the subject. Having people present anecdotal evidence and expressing what they think it may be could be the main theme but it shouldn't have been the only theme. Documentaries are supposed to first and foremost inform so that the viewers come away feeling that they now understand the subject more. Sure, having the creepiness factor for entertainment purposes is important as well but it can't be the only redeeming factor for a documentary.

The Nightmare (2015) - 7 outta 10 stars

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] Tin_ear 8 years ago

I respect your opinion. This is no Thin Blue Line, but you gave it a seven which seems fair. It's the overall 5.9 score that irritates me, especially considering the crap that scores much higher here, and I'm not even necessarily referring to Michael Moore's ham-handed docs, though that is a good example of people wanting glossy entertainment over actual discourse.

[–] movie_nazi 8 years ago

I respect your opinion. This is no Thin Blue Line, but you gave it a seven which seems fair. It's the overall 5.9 score that irritates me, especially considering the crap that scores much higher here, and I'm not even necessarily referring to Michael Moore's ham-handed docs, though that is a good example of people wanting glossy entertainment over actual discourse.

I gave it a seven because despite it's shortcomings I did find the film entertaining and that is a huge factor in any type of film, documentary or not.

What Michael Moore does well is the ability to pull on people emotions and get them to feel what he is feeling even though you could argue that his docs are also very one sided.

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] MyImaginaryAccount 8 years ago

I can kinda see why it has a low rating to some/many people. I understood the documentary because I have a heap of context already knowing what sleep paralysis is and the history of demons reportedly sitting on people and alien abductions, etc. I went in seeing this documentary as another piece to my knowledge of sleep paralysis, but not something that would stand very well on its own without that knowledge. I just finished it and at no point do I remember it even giving the basic definition of sleep paralysis, and it doesn't even mention the term until after it's 26 minutes in, and it's just the interviewee saying she found the term on the internet and was like "Oh my god Mom! It's sleep paralysis! It's a thing!" No explanation. No information. The first 25 minutes is just a series of people telling you about their weird nightmares. It felt like a Reddit thread made into a movie rather than a condensed, informative piece. A documentary obviously shouldn't just be an information dump, but it should be more centered around information than mostly being eight inverviews edited together in an out of order jumble.

That's the second thing. Because who you're hearing from is not linear but jumbled together, it's hard to follow or get attached to one person's story. For example I was hearing about the guy who was stocking up on TVs to battle sleep paralysis and I was wondering "What was his story at the beginning again? What kind of dreams is this one trying to fight?" Half the stories kind of melded together for me instead of being matched to the face of the person telling them.

In general, a lot of people seem to like the "follow someone around in their subjective experience" approach to documentaries. I don't personally, and prefer more research driven works rather than simply watching interviews from one set of people.