Sadly Over-hyped

The first must-see film of the year.

The story-telling is good with flashbacks.The film is both funny and heartbreaking. You smile in a scene and get a soulcrushing revelation in the next.

It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

Seriously how can you hate this movie?Clever, interesting and original The Atticus Insititute gets a thumbs up from me, hats off to writer and director Chris Sparling. Filmed as a mockumentary, it initially revolves around telekinesis and one particularly gifted woman, Judith Winstead. Rya Kihlstedt who plays Judith gives a brilliant and totally believable performance.I really don't want to say much and spoil any of it, I'd just say give it a go.How many noses does a monkey have?

I was not sure what to expect before watching this. I now understand why this is shown on cable more than most POV horror out these days."Was it interesting?" For the most part. Framing it as a legitimate documentary helped it. The dated setting, lack of technology, and inability to see the characters away from the action hurt it some. 2 out of 3"Was it entertaining?" That is it's biggest problem. Little drama beyond emotional storytelling and only a few real good paranormal scenes. 1 out of 3"Was it memorable?" The form of the movie was, but otherwise didn't make too much of an impact. It mostly just trys to stand out among it's sub-genre. 1.5 out of 3Start with 1, 1+2+1+1.5=5.5 I'm rounding up for just using decent actors and good editing. A 6 with these type of movies is definitely above average.

The subject matter is interesting. The movie is very well paced. This (the pacing) is the absolute best thing about this movie. Since it is about research on telekinesis and stuff, it is very smart to pace it slow, so that the viewer gets time to adapt. We don't want to be thrown straight into a fantastical universe, at least not if it is to be realistic. So for that I applaud this movie. The acting is pretty decent for the most part, too. And it being found footage, isn't such a drag as it could have been. It's rather realistically made, some of the time. But then it just never gets really cool. It is a little boring at times, and there is this one CG-blood scene in there that is just horrible. And it is such a short scene, why could they not make sure it looked better!? I will never understand stuff like that.So to sum up, the pacing is good at first, then it gets a little boring, and then it goes down hill. At the end I was kind of happy it was over. Even though it was the opening movie on Frightfest 2015. Bummer.

i really did not understand why people hitting on every little try for producing something different... everyone watched that movie depending on "The Conjuring" so it his own fault.... on other hand it so smart from "Peter Safran" choosing this title.... what you expect to watch ? a monkey jumping with a scary face.... this what a higher production can offer.... i respect the idea of mix up Horror with Science and Authority a new good one.... the director is the writer and not every one is "Christopher Nolan" or "Stanley Kubrick".....it is a good damn movie... watch it not like an usual Horror movie but like a one try to respect your thought... considering it "The Conjuring" goes officially to the state to solve the dilemma