Film Review: It Follows

It Follows (David Robert Mitchell, 2014)

There's an unspoken rule in horror films (unspoken in any film except Scream) that if a character engages in any form of sexual behaviour, they will surely die. Puritanical as this may seem, I like to think that it's simply horror writers having a bit of fun and producers throwing some sex in to get the box office up. It Follows takes this concept and makes it literal: by sleeping with a 'carrier', protagonist Jay (Maika Monroe) becomes the target of an unstoppable 'Follower' (replacing the current target, who passes it on through sex), visible only to her and taking on various guises as it attempts to reach and mutilate her.

There are obvious parables here and several ways of reading the film. I'll get these out the way so we can all relax... The Follower could be read as an STI; a manifestation of HIV or AIDS, passed on from one carrier to the next and killing one after the other. This seems a little obvious to me for a film which is clearly very intelligent and respects its audience. It could also be read the the Follower represents the loss of innocence; engaging in sexual behaviour effectively ends your childhood, marking you out as mortal, and draws you inexorably towards death (or draws death inexorably towards you). There are several literary passages in the film on the subject of mortality, and it is interesting to note that adults and authority figures are largely absent or marginalised throughout. With this in mind, you can easily read the film as expressing anxieties about first sexual encounters, first loves and the pain that can come with them.

One one hand, it can be seen as a conservative viewpoint; that having sex, breaking some unspoken code of morality, will ultimately result in your death. However the film dashes this logic with the rule that the Follower can be passed on to another person by sleeping with them. In this sense, promiscuity is rewarded, turning the horror film rule mentioned earlier on its head.  Either way you read it, it's a great idea.

After all that interpretive nonsense, you'll be pleased to know that the film is really good. I would almost put it up there with The Babadook, In Fear and You're Next as a modern great horror, although suffering from the logical problems that affect almost all horrors.  Director Mitchell has crafted a unique look for a horror, his washed out palette closer in tone to indie drama than slasher movie. The cinematography is striking; shots mounted from cars and a chair to which Jay is tied are unusual and unsettling; mixtures of extremely deep and shallow focus are used to draw our eye around the frame where you don't necessarily want it to go; Mitchell also has a tendency to linger on details, showing patience in a genre where many directors would settle for music video-style staccato editing. He has an eye for a shot, too: some of the swimming pool scene in particular is hauntingly (pun intended) beautiful. There are some quite brilliant moments where he focuses on the background of a shot to draw your eye, sometimes at nothing, to creating a paranoid atmosphere and the sense that something is always there, even if it isn't.

There are some bold choices which give It Follows a distinctive look. It's set in an ambiguous time: while one character uses a Kindle-style tablet, another watches a crappy old television (perched on top of another crappy old television); a cinema date shows a man playing an organ before the film; none of the usual technology you would associate with teenagers in horror films is present. It has an odd 80s tone, echoed in the soundtrack, costumes and promotional poster. The film appears to be set in a post-recession Michigan, although this is not explained. There are constant images of urban decay. Boarded up houses and derelict buildings serve as backdrops, settings and refuges; everything of the 'grown up' world is failed and broken. This could be for a number of reasons: a warning against the perils of growing up and losing innocence, therefore warning against sex; or a declaration that the adults fucked it up and hope, life even, lies in youth. It may just be a cool, distinctive look, but in a film where everything else feels so deliberate, I doubt it. For example, conspicuous by their absence for most of the film are the characters' parents, and there is good reason for this.

It isn't perfect by a long stretch: given the established rules that only some characters can see the Follower, shots where the other characters interact with 'nothing' tend to look silly. These shots are over quickly and don't spoil much but are jarring a in a film where a natural tone has been prevalent. There are a few truly awful examples of visual effects as well (a storm, blood swirling in water). I also found the climactic swimming pool scene quite disappointing and something of a 'horror movie logical jump'; why they jumped to the conclusion that the Follower could be stopped by swimming pool electrocution is anyone's guess.

It's admirable to trust your audience, to let them make their own conclusions, but when this is done too much the result can be frustrating. So when a character drives past some prostitutes, are we to assume that he's slept with one to give her the Follower? He drives past them and doesn't stop, and it would seem out of character for him, but are we being led to this conclusion? There are also ill-defined physical rules for the Follower; for example where did it go from the swimming pool? Although I liked the ambiguity of the final shot (what was that in the background?), after too much ambiguity it felt like Mitchell had moved away from trust and into the realms of just fucking with you, which is ironic considering the content of the film... (sorry). These are quite minor quibbles and won't spoil a superficial watch but may leave you a little unsatisfied at the end (ok, enough with the sex jokes, Adam).

I was impressed by It Follows for the most part. Admirably, it doesn't rely on jump scares to be effective and will therefore stand up to repeat viewings. It's well thought out with a brilliant postmodern concept and distinctive production design. The director knows what he's doing and is daring enough to make this closer in tone to Noah Baumbach than James Wan. This is a unique indie-horror experience, although one that probably won't get you laid.