IT FOLLOWS is a good, not great, movie. I appreciated how it patterned itself on Carpenter's HALLOWEEN with a dash of THE RING and an overlay of Cronenberg's early 'body horror' films. And, it even winks at the audience about those homages with characters watching TUBE TV sets with rabbit ears etc. The story is about a disease that is passed on by sexual partners and the only 'cure' is to pass it to someone else.

Stylistically, it's fine, but the last act of the film is unsatisfying. The themes, though potent, never really come together. Still, it's worth seeing as a respite from all the torture porn and shrill shock-cut movies that usually pass for 'horror films' these days.

Well, that depends what you think the story and themes are about.  If you see it as about the disease and classic "sex leads to death", sure, I can see it being unsatisfying.  But I saw it as more about what happens after - Jay being traumatized as a victim of a sex crime, having this horrific weight upon her that nobody else can see or understand, but having friends who will help and support her anyway and do what they can to share the load.  I thought it was pretty great the first time through and liked it even more the second.

     It borrows/steals from the movies mentioned by Tony (except for the Cronenberg, & this movie is much better than the ones he made), but he forgot one: that pool scene is right out of the original Cat People.
     It has the cleverest idea for a horror movie Ive seen in many years: the idea that, no matter what, you cant ever escape this thing thats been passed onto you.  You might be able to put it off for a while, but it's coming back; just a matter of time.  I also like the fact that they dont try to explain what it is, or where it came from, or why it's doing what it's doing: it's just a given.  Very, very clever.
     It's marred by its low budget, & it struck me that idea wasnt fully fleshed out, but it still gets the creep going, & good for it.

SPOILERS: Best idea and delivery for a preternatural or supernatural force in some time.  Yes, the film borrows from many sources but more as a tribute than a rip-off. The unreasoning, inhuman force that is virtually indestructible and completely unreasoning is given new life in this movie. The director does quite a bit with the limited budget.  I don't think that the film is simply about disease. As I think about it, it speaks more to me about facing an inevitable future (death), resigning yourself to the fact that you can resist it for a time but that, sooner or later, it will get you and that the best that you can hope for is to find the right person to accompany you on the ride. I am happy that they did not try to explain the origins of the force and the reasons for its' attacks. These explanations are seldom satisfying.  I don't necessarily need to hear about the Old Ones or ancient Sumerian curses.  The end is a bit jarring and did feel a bit unsatisfying at first but the longer I considered the ending, the more I liked it.  Above all else, a horror film should deliver the chills on the concept as well as the scares and this delivers on both counts. 

Actually, we all seem to see eye to eye on the very end of IT FOLLOWS. It's those who outright dislike the movie who look at it as a simple stalk and kill horror flick.
My issue with the last act of the movie is that it simply isn't as strong, nor as powerful as the first 2/3. Compare IT FOLLOWS to its acknowledged 'inspirations' (if this were music, this would be more of a slam dunk case than 'Blurred Lines'!), it comes up short:

While it evokes the Body Horror of Cronenberg and creates a certain quesiness, it never punches you in the gut the way the best of the Canadian Director's work does.

The ending has a nice grace note, but it never really tackles the morality of passing on the 'disease' to another person in any strong way, as the ending of RINGU did. Or, the way in which the townsfolk in the first NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET shared culpability for what happened to create Freddy.

And, on a simple elemental level, Carpenter's HALLOWEEN has a drive and momentum that IT FOLLOWS' last act doesn't come close to re-creating. Obviously, Michael Myers doesn't have nearly the symbolic value as the 'disease' does in the newer movie, but, as a 'Horror Film' it picks up the tension as it goes along. IT FOLLOWS slacks as it stumbles towards it's conclusion. Part of it, is that there is a certain inevitability to how it will 'conclude', yet Director David R. Mitchell tries hard to follow the template of a typical 'horror ending', complete with the big pool 'climax'. (but, the savvy viewer should know that it's all much ado about very little). It also makes the (seemingly certain) idea of a sequel even more pointless than usual: It Follows Again? It Follows Yet Again? It's Still Following?

Like I originally wrote, IT FOLLOWS is a major cut above the usual horror flick. Go see it if you are into the genre.

Just following the font inflation meme here.......  : ;)


Jay Seaver wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2015 at 7:02pm:

Well, that depends what you think the story and themes are about.  If you see it as about the disease and classic "sex leads to death", sure, I can see it being unsatisfying.  But I saw it as more about what happens after - Jay being traumatized as a victim of a sex crime, having this horrific weight upon her that nobody else can see or understand, but having friends who will help and support her anyway and do what they can to share the load.  I thought it was pretty great the first time through and liked it even more the second.