It Follows - Doug Reviews 

What if when It finally catches up with her it hands her and condom and says: "Be careful next time" And then walks away

I think the rules are inconsistent because they don't know the rules. They're guessing.

I think in the scene at the lake with the guys on the boat, she actually did pass it on to them. That's why she looked even more frightened when it started coming back after her because they were obviously killed by it. Just like when she passes it on to that guy & it ended up killing him too.

This _always_ happens when you oversell a movie to Doug. Doesn't matter if it's critics overhyping something or if it's simply good word of mouth, Doug never seems to like or enjoy an overhyped movie. Unless he saw it _before_ he heard people raving about it, that is.

The genius of the film is the looming sense of dread and the fact IT could be hours away or standing right next to her " is far scarier than a ball hitting a window. Tall man was the creepiest shit I ever seen though.

My boyfriend said the movie should have been called "It Comes" instead.

This is going to be a long one. Hope someone reads it. First the short spoiler free version: Great movie. Fresh idea. Love the rules. Great music. Some stupid characters, but not that bad compared to other horror films. Few jump scares, like that. *spoiler warning* Don't read this or watch the video above (not at all) if you don't want spoilers. I really liked this movie, and I'll try to explain why, while also commenting on your video. 1. "The big reveal" No, I don't think there was one of those either. That being said, I would hate to know the small details before seeing it. Therefore I urge those I recommend the film to to know as little as possible. Take the first scene. I think it's very interesting, because you want to find out why the girl does not want help, while clearly scared as hell. I also really liked the scene where you learn that other "uninfected" can touch but not see the thing. That made me like the movie so much more, because then you don't have to go into the whole "is she insane?" thing. Very shortly after you learn that it can be damaged. That's one thing I always liked with Jason when I was a kid. To not be sure how much of a beating he could take. Maybe you can kill him with dynamite? Electricity? Lava? It's the same with T-1000... This is why I think your "spoiler free part" is utterly filled with spoilers. 2. "All the symbolism" I did not focus at all on that. I liked the movie for other reasons. 3. "The music" I loved the music. I can agree that those crescendos got a bit annoying, but not as bad as in Interstellar. 4. "Stupid/emotionally disconnected characters" I can agree to some extent, and this is my main issue with this movie. But maybe not for the same reasons. I hated the "sleep on top of car" thing, the "geez, mom why are you trying to break down my locked door in the middle of the night, here let me open it" thing and the "let's get stick my head really close to the pool just to check" part. But lots of other stuff get a pass from me because they are teenagers. For instance, I find it perfectly plausible that they would not confront the guy who gave her the curse appropriately. Teenagers can go either way in such a situation. Often the reactions to big issues get small and vice versa. 5. "The rules" I loved the rules. And I loved that you get them pretty early on so you can start to think what you would do in the same situation. First off, do you even pass it on? That's highly immoral. The kids do, because empathy and morals are not always fully developed with teens. But even the girl has some issues with it. That's what I got from the boat scene. That's why I think it's great that you don't really know if she banged the guys. Maybe she did and they died because they did not believe her. Or maybe she couldn't do it (maybe she even hates that kind of guys, but not enough to send them to a certain death). So what would you do? Become a nomad? Try to kill it? Contact some scientist or the police (you might not want to risk getting locked up in a mental institiution)? 6. "Background shots of people walking that leads to nothing" This is also awesome. I find it super creepy in a way that's the opposite of a jump scare (which I think are cheap and really makes for bad horror, most of the time). Thank you for reading!

Clearly its an artistic reinterpretation of Showgirls... duh

I think the problem is that your were trying to analyze it while watching it. That's never a good idea. Never analyze a movie the first time watching it. Just watch and experience. You were clearly trying to look too deeply into some things, like focusing on house numbers? The movie is an homage to 80's slasher films. It felt like a John Carpenter movie. The setting was purposefully abstract, but the story wasn't. It harkened back to 80's ten slasher films, which always tried to set up rules. This movie did that too, but it definitely didn't set up too many. You still had no idea what It was or where It came from. I loved that. It wasn't necessarily an STD. It could be many things. I choose to believe it represents the inevitability of death and how it doesn't always come when we're ready. That's why the shot at the end was perfect. Them walking, holding hands with someone walking behind them. Was it It? Just a random person? It didn't matter anymore. They were just going to live their lives and not worry about it anymore. That's what her sister's except from Dostoevsky's The Idiot meant.

The funny thing about Rotten tomatoes is that it doesnt show which movies are the best, just which are most universally liked/disliked. It has 95% but I don't know anyone saying it is a masterpiece, but everyone pretty much like it.

Doug...omg. I love you, but you really vex me sometimes. Obviously, she *did* pass it on at the boat. The implication is clearly that she did pass it on, and the thing killed them too. They hold on her *wet cast* for a whole minute, how did you miss that? Plus, it doesn't get shot in the neck. The bullet grazes it's neck. That's not the same thing. Also, it clearly *can* be killed, or at least hurt, because otherwise, why wouldn't it just get into the pool? Lastly, that thing with seeing the monster in the background and "never seeing where that goes"? Come on, Doug. You know better than this. It's called Hitchcockian drama. The suspense isn't in the bomb exploding, but in waiting for it to explode. You're one smart cookie, Doug, and a fantastic human being, so I have no quarrels whatever with you not liking a movie (I love Howls Movie Castle, but your reasons for not liking it are perfectly valid). What I take issue with is when you get obvious facts from the movie wrong.

I'm waiting for the sequel. It Follows 2 : Jersey Shore.

I HATE those fake-out jump scares.

So you can defeat this monster by wearing a condom?

I did hate it a lot when it broke its own rules. When it got in front of that one guy it catches up to, the thing destroys him. When it catches up with the protagonist, it just grabs at her hair? Ok? Did the entity develop some sort of sympathy for her or what?

Watch it again, watch the colors and what them saying, hear the dialogs (even poems in the classroom are important). It's not about sex and diseases, it's about life and death itself, about the end of childhood and the beginning of responsible life. It's about the fear of the borderline between young and adult, just like the borderline of Detroit 8th mile road between the dangerous and safe. Whole movie is stuck somewhere in time, its reality is pretty irrational and surreal. You have to think, not just watch.

It's a coming of age movie, with amazing music, great cinematography, and fairly good acting, that just happens to also include some horror in the mix. That's why this movie is amazing.

Feel like such a badass watching the spoiler section without having seen the movie,

Nobody ever talks about how amazing the music was in this fucking movie... the sound effects. I mean audio gets skipped so often in these reviews. Are theaters just incapable of producing quality sound? The screeching tires after she's left in front of her house.... fucking awesome.

I think in the boat scene what happens is that she passes it on to the boys, but she realizes that It is still after her since those boys were killed.

It's funny how the things you found "distracting" were the very things that worked for me. The scene at the high school with It walking toward them while Jay and Greg were getting info about the boy who passed the thing to her gave me a sense that no matter what they do, It is always there, coming closer. It Follows is like a nightmare. The rules are bendable, scenes don't always "pay off." It has constant dread as a theme. No matter what you do, It is coming for you. I've watched it six times and I notice little things I hadn't seen before. I suggest you see it again.

The music made the movie for me, honestly.

I'm still trying to fathom how in the FUCK this dumb ass movie got such good reviews. 9/10's and critics saying that it's one of the scariest films of this past decade. That is the only reason why I decided to check it out....what a huge waste of time.

The movie is supposed to evoke the feeling of a bad dream, and in that sense the inconsistencies are very purposeful. In a nightmare as soon as you think "I could be in danger now" whatever is chasing you shows up, and whatever you believe will happen does. It Follows is very good at hitting that rhythm, but there's just enough logic that you think it all makes sense as it's happening. And maybe it does. Maybe It can shape change to a non-injured body, but shooting It in the head kills it before that can happen. Maybe the person behind them in the end is just a person after all. It's not really important. It ends on an ambiguous note because that's how dreams often end (same justification for inception), not because it wants to leave you pondering implications for weeks on end.

>Um…yeah, why do people like this? -Why did you liked 'Unfriended' ? ~It's a mystery !~

The problem IS with you, Doug. There's no Sigmund Freud-type metaphors or symbolism. It's meant to replicate the type of terror in a nightmare. You know the rules, but they bend and break. There's no meaning, and there's no consistency except for one thing; fear. Jay can escape the monster, sure, but this monster is ruining her life. She can't sleep, she can't relax, she can't go to school. She's always on the lookout. And that's what the movie trains US, the audience, to do. Always on the lookout. The movie trains you to be ever watchful and to pay attention. The only goal of the movie is to create an experience that replicates the pure terror of a bizarre nightmare. THATS WHY THERES NO TIME PERIOD

I don't understand why people have decided this film is a satire, it absolutely isn't. To me the reason it works is because of it's old fashioned simplicity. It's pointless to approach a film like this and read that deeply into it, it's deliberately been made to feel like an urban legend. The seemingly random design choices just add to this. The characters seem passive most of the time because they are doing the exact thing that teenagers never do in horror; they're acting their age. Can you honestly say that this sleep deprived, traumatized 18 year old girl should be more aggressive? She's never left the city and it's strongly implied that her family is still grieving the loss of her father, for goodness sake.

Hi Doug, I don't understand why everyone thinks this movie is about STD's. It's not. It seemed to me to be about the way in which violent sexual experiences follow you. From this viewpoint I find almost everything about the movie makes excellent sense. 2 cases in point: the manifestation of the phantom tends to be horrifyingly sexual and, much like the protagonist, many victims of sexual abuse try to move on by engaging in more dangerous sexual activity but it tends to be counter-productive, a quick distraction before the horror of the event follows you again. What I loved about the ending was that the protagonist finally comes to realise that, though she can't get rid of her experience of being manipulated into sex and drugged, by sharing the experience with someone who truly cares about her she can put a stop to the endless progression of the curse with each partner taking turns to carry the burden. I thought it was far more mature movie than "STD's are bad... use protection". Presumably a condom wouldn't have stopped this curse. It's a very clever and refreshingly non-judgemental spin on the sex = death formula of slasher movies, and the movie has a lot of fun playing with the conventions of the genre through a non-specific timeline and endless references to other horror films. Even the creature itself is an amalgam of 5 other famous horror movie monsters - the shape-shifting creature from The Thing, the everywhere and nowhere stalker of Halloween, the slow but relentless walk of the zombies in Night Of The Living Dead, the invisible attacker of Nightmare On Elm Street and the sexual grotesqueries of The Exorcist. Love your reviews, and I also love it when I disagree with you... such is the case here. Keep up the good work and thanks for the thoughtful review and for taking the time to read mine (if you actually did!)

So Malcolm went to see it with you... and you DIDN'T have him in the video? That would've been awesome, but oh well

This was a beautifully shot film, with a haunting soundtrack to set the atmosphere perfectly. Never relies on gore (only a few effective quick moments), but this was absolutely brilliant. I could totally understand if it's not for everyone, some people may even hate it, but personally I really enjoyed it.

In case you didn't notice, the monster is mostly people who have died. The main character had a family photo in her house, and the fatherly figure looks to be gone from the story. He's probably dead. He appears at the pool, and clearly doesn't look very much alive like the other characters it posed as. And you have to give these actors credit, seriously. They went to Detroit to film this movie. They even said in interviews it was the most boring placd they've filmed at. I'm not shaming Detroit, but give the actors some credit....

My belief is that the ending was meant to allow the audience to answer the questions for themselves. The key is that the filmmakers job is to fill in enough blanks that the audience can insert their thoughts. Instead, the movie felt vague. The scene at the pool would have made more sense if there had been some explanation to what they were trying to do. My assumption was "electrocution", except it was already clear this creature can't be killed. Stopped possibly, but not killed. So maybe if they had explained their plan to enact on the creature, even as a dumb plan, I would have bought it. The same goes for the ending, which eventually felt disjointed. I understood what they were trying to do, I just didn't understand what it was trying to tell me. The best part of the film was the cinematography and camera work. One of the best looking and most creatively shot films of recent memory. It's the only reason I don't regret seeing this on the big screen

Monster goes only after people who have sex? I'm saved!

I personally enjoyed It Follows very much. I felt like the movie was trying to criticize more than satirize the classic horror genre and by having the movie keep the serious edge on it, the director was attempting to declare how you can make a horror movie without relying on the killer as an icon.

Ok here is my humble opinion about the meaning or what you may have missed in the film. To me the whole story was about a loss of innocence and was almost a coming of age story. The most clear examples of this are at the end when they try and kill the STD (Sexually Transmitted Demon) and they go to the pool area where the one girl had her first kiss and another had her first beer. They go to where they first lost their innocence to kill this thing which you got to think was done for a reason. In that same place when they think they "kill it" the pool fills up with blood slowly which I took to mean the literal coming of age sign for women which is a period. This may be a stretch and once again this is all my opinion and could be completely wrong and just utter bullshit but the ending when the two are holding hands and it is following them I came to the assumption the he represented death is technically biologically speaking motivates our species to have sex and repopulate so I took It to represent death and our biological need to have sex and reproduce and the movie as a whole is a giant coming of age and a loss of childhood and innocence story but I could be completely off and full of shit but this is my dumb opinion.

12:05 - _It Follows_ gives the viewer paranoia, by having people walking in the background. It reflects the paranoia the characters feel. It's beautiful, and one of the reasons I really loved this movie.

11:00. Doug, really? She did pass it on those guys on the boat, the older naked pale guy on the roof was one of the guys she had sex with on that boat, isn't that obvious, come on. This movie is far from perfect but it's one of the best horror movies I have watched in the past 10 years. It's idea is simple and well carried on, it's a horror movie, it's purpose was to scare and make a watcher uncomfortable and the director did a great job on that. If you could not get into the atmosphere of the film and started questioning every scene of the movie, I am sorry to hear that. I had a great time watching it

The scene where the big guy walks through and ducks under the door had to be up there with one of the most intense and freaky scenes I've ever seen in a movie

Elysium was decent, it was just over-hyped Chappie is flawed as fuck for sure, but it has seeds of good, ambitious ideas and the titular character is one of the beat realized characters in a long time

Fun little fact: That beach scene? That was shot literally right across the street from where I was living at the time. It was at Lake Huron. My family was renting an apartment building there. The family who own the apartment allowed the filming crew to park their cars in their driveway.

I would love to hear your thoughts on "The Babadook"! That's a fantastic modern horror film but the last 10-15 minutes left me scratching my head. Don't let that discourage you though! It still has amazing build up and atmosphere and it doesn't rely on jump scares! It's a great movie!

I don't think those were inconstancies. It was a point being made that these teenagers just didn't know what to do. That's why they tried to electrocute it after seeing it get up after being shot, and why Paul shot the girl in the leg. That was a vibe given off by their characters in so many ways. They spent their time sitting around all day cuz they didn't know what the fuck to do.

THIS COMMENT CONTAINS SPOILERS! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED! Yes, this film does have some horror cliches we currently experience in a lot of horror films, but it reminds me a lot of John Carpenter's work. The film builds tension, and I was legitimately scared of it because of the tension. Not seeing so many jump scares was a refreshing change of pace. Also, I can infer this entity is capable of being stopped if the cursed individual it is seeking finds true love, as corny as that sounds. I inferred that from how Jay and Paul seem to be. Paul is this smaller more reserved male character juxtaposed with two alpha-male type characters with Jeff and Greg, and he clearly has strong feelings for Jay, even when he knows she's been with guys like Jeff and Greg. In an act of love, I think, he took on the curse, and one could infer by doing that he may have stopped it. Greg seemed to do the same thing earlier in the film, but it was clear he didn't believe in it but played along to get some action. One could also infer the relationship between Jay and Paul at the end is comparable to Ben and Elaine's at the end of "The Graduate". They're both together at the end with worried looks on their faces. Paul's feelings for Jay are not reciprocated, and when we see the end of this film, there does seem to be something following them. I do like the timeless feel to this film. It could essentially be any time. Granted they do specify where the film is by mentioning 8-mile, but man the decaying areas of Detroit provide some powerful imagery that rings true these days. I think another interesting part of this film is the near nonexistence of parental figures. This is classic horror territory. Kids are dealing with mortality, and neither Mom nor Dad can help. We see it in "Halloween". We see it in "Nightmare on Elm Street", and in that case the parents do try to help but in vain. We see it in so many horror films where teens are the focus, and this one is no exception. And to add to it, the entity takes the form of Jay's father at the sequence by the pool, clearly as a means to further torment her. Plus all of these characters seem to have a sense of being lost. It is quite a frightening thing to be in this world and not knowing where you're going. You're right about its flaws, yes, but it certainly tries to transcend what horror has become as of late and sort of get back to the basics. Say what you want about the synth soundtrack. I certainly enjoyed it. It's yet another aspect of this film that made me think of '70s and '80s horror films like "Halloween" and "The Shining" and "Nightmare on Elm Street". I recommend it to anyone who has a soft spot for horror films from that era.

I feel like in real life this would be terrifying but they didn't do a good job putting that onto the big screen. That one shot of the naked dude on top of the roof made me burst out laughing in the theater. In fact others laughed along with me. The way they took that so seriously like it was supposed to be terrifying generally pisses me off.

This movie could've been terrifying but the forms it took were pretty stupid you always know which one it is. If it were people she knew and it snuck up on her and spoke like the people it's copying that would've been scary instead it's peeing itself for some reason WTF. Doctor Who did a similar story a lot better

The girl who peed her pants was a former victim, the movie was symbolic of people who have dangerous STDs and yet still sleep with other people anyway. The various numbers and symbols were probably easter eggs. The cut-offs were on purpose, the film was trying to induce a sense of emotional fatigue because that's what the characters were feeling. The inconsistent rules were also on purpose, the antagonist likes to toy with it's victims. I'd be willing to bet that the rules get longer, and stranger, with each recitation. This might also be symbolic. All of these statements are opinions and educated guesses.

The thing where she went into the water to swim out to the boys was done very well, We don't know if she passed it on and those guys had been killed, or she did't go through with it. And thats why we seem him on the roof.

Doug is one of my favorite people ever. Just in how intelligent he is when it comes to movies and truly reviewing them. Sure, his comedy routines are what most people know him for, but this is what really makes me keep coming back. Seeing someone that knows what the hell they're talking about on RU-vid is refreshing. Doug, keep on being that screaming, grumpy, awesome, Christmas -loving nostalgia critic character. Because we all love that guy. But please don't ever lose your roots with these knowledgeable, truly great movie reviews. In the immortal words of Christopher Lloyd: "I was frozen today!" Cheers Doug!

So, I watched the movie twice and then watched the commentary. It Follows apparently has levels of depth... 1. STD's 2. Death 3. Adulthood/Childhood 4. homage to classic horror/suspense The guy in the commentary stated that the STD metaphor was the most obvious one, with death being the second layer, but that the adulthood thing is the real point. And they wanted to obscure the era that it was in because this is every era.

It was said that the 'rules' Hugh gives Jay when he pass IT along to her was purely from his observations and experiences only. Remember he said that it was "slow but also smart." So whatever this creature did when it was following Hugh, obviously seemed to adapt to Jay's tactics when she was avoiding it later on. Such as throwing the stuff in the pool and standing on the roof.

I really liked this movie because while it wasn't necessarily scary, it was very suspenseful and eerie (similar to the first paranormal activity). such as when her friends left the room, you don't know whose going to come back. Every person on the screen eventually became suspect

I view the movie as a nightmare where the "rules" don't necessarily make any sense. Characters talk about It and what the entity can do, but these explanations seem more like urban legends than anything else. You never really get a sense of what this thing is other than it will keep following you until it kills you. To me this concept is very interesting and quite scary especially since it can appear as anyone in order to get close to you. Since it has the feel of a nightmare, to me at least, I didn't give too much thought to any rules or exposition about the thing itself. Once I did that I found the movie to be thoroughly enjoyable.

Likes Unfriended but doesn't like this. Yeah, horror pleb.

For me this movie is clearly built up like a dream, a nightmare. All the things that are confusing are very typical for dreams, to start with the more obvious stuff like the not defined time era and season. But also the distracting twists, strange reactions of the characters, the integration of distracting elements and the changing rules are things that I know from my own dreams. Another thing that this movie has in in common with a nightmare is the feeling that it leaves behind. You are confused, don't know what to do with it and you feel like you've been somewhere else. This worked very well with me and that's why I enjoyed the movie a lot. I can understand everyone who has his problems with that but I think the solution is a more unconscious way of following the story and not to overanalyse.

Just watched it. The flick reminded me a lot of Teeth. I enjoyed the music and it felt kind of like nightmare logic as the plot progressed.

@11:00 you know exactly what happens. Rewatch the scene. She's wet, and crying, and her cast is soaking wet. Of course the follower keeps coming because you can only pass it on to 1 person at a time(orgies don't work) and those guys didn't seem like they'd have sex with each other so ultimately, the follower kills the first guy at bat and then moves on. I understand your apprehension with ambiguity, and the movie is inconsistent with his methodology, but remember the rules given, are just from Jeff's survival and what's been passed on to him. No one in the film is an authority. Everything 'known' is conjecture. Remember how 'it always keeps walking". In the pool scene and the house scene where it stands on the roof, it's obvious it walks in direct vectors when it feels like it. It's a demon, it doesn't have to follow rules and if there are rules, the survivors don't know them all, that's part of the scare. The characters are kids, of course they don't make sense lol. Do you remember how stupid people are in their teens early 20s? Being a kid, it's normal to try to figure out rules and inevitably be found wrong. Calling the cops isn't something that kids do, come on man. The movie had hokey moments, but the atmosphere was still great. That's the core of why I enjoyed it. The cinematography and color pallet was well done for me also. My favorite horror movies, a la John Carpenter's The Thing, that paranoia fostered that has you looking for clues, and slight changes in the scene, and how that vigilance pays off for you and the characters, that for me is a zenith in story teling. Beyond that the day night changes, and the ambiguity of time, the dream and nightmare like states, how the follower itself is a sleepwalker almost, it all together added to an almost virgin suicide esque tone at times. I drove around in the rain listening to the sound track, it felt very immersive and something I'll do again. Halloween, Terminator, and the Graduate have better parallels to this film than Cabin in the Woods, with allusions to Slender Man.

best horror film in over 20 years

Actually, as far as the boat scene goes, she does sleep with the older men (not young boys) to escape her grim fate. She assumes that she is safe but we later see one of the old men is standing on her roof, which is the monster. I'm guessing since she didn't explain the rules to the men they were followed and shortly after killed. I agree that some major elements of this film are lacking too much for me to really like it, but the one thing they do right is add an air of creepiness.

Walking out of the theater for this movie, I wasn't quite sure what to make of it. I had no prior knowledge of the acclaim the film had received before watching it, so I had the opportunity to take the film as it was and, in that frame of reference, I felt it was a lukewarm homage that held a number of good ideas close to its chest but was just too inconsistent for me to appreciate it fully. Once I caught wind of the high praise the film had received, I attempted to rationalize away my misgivings and convince myself that I was simply having an off day. Now that I'm listening to Doug's review, I find myself slinking back towards my initial attitude. You're not alone, Doug. From what I've gathered, the film was going for an experience that existed between moments, the mingling between the characters and the meaningful silences spent in waiting for the next "event" to arrive. On top of the themes it threw around concerning sexual discovery and whatnot. Personal note: for this, I feel the most crucial scene was the one in which the drugging took place after the sex, the one with the flower.

I think the whole movie is supposed to be a dream... or a nightmare really. I know that's kind of a cop out but to me, the odd outfits and props from different times and overall strangeness really works. I think the monster and the other occurrences between characters in the film are a mix of things that a person in late teen-hood would be anxious and afraid of, and therefore have nightmares about

I think you need to bear a few things in mind: 1) Why set such a high bar for yourself in the first place? It sounds like you begrudgingly saw the film, and had insanely high expectations. That's a tough hurdle to jump for any film and then resulted in a barrage of nitpicking on your part to convince yourself it's a bad film. 2) Your review has tons of spoilers, yet you pretend it doesn't until about 20 minutes in (when you tell people to leave if they don't want it ruined). Way too many things given away already at that point. You need to go into a movie knowing nothing about it, yet excited to see it. 3) You are focusing on so many small details in the film, you are missing the big picture. Since when is a horror film (even a great one) supposed to make any kind of logical sense? In Halloween, they give some hocus pocus explanation about why Michael Myers is invincible. Did you take that literally, too? Horror movies are meant to scare - period. The method is irrelevant. I can completely enjoy Paranormal Activity without believing in ghosts or spirits. Have you heard of the suspension of disbelief? 4) The music is one of the best scores to any horror movie. Ever. It was at this point that I realized you can't possibly even believe what you are saying. It's like your worst enemy liked the film, and you had to find as many reasons possible to convince yourself it's bad. That's not a fair and balanced review! 5) This film is an homage to all the great horror films. It's a tip of the hat to Jason, Freddy, Mike Myers, etc. Maybe that's why you had items from different time period in the film -- because the film is supposed to be timeless. It's supposed to be simple, yet effective, just like all those films were. In sum, you should have had less pressure to hate the film upon your first viewing. I think your critique is just intellectual snobbery, and that you had made your mind up well before you sat in the theater seat. You were searching for the holy grail of explanations when the film never pretended to have one in the first place. It's no real wonder you didn't like it!

I haven't seen it, but when my friends recommend it to me they say it's because of the monster. It's not something that already has a word like "oh it's a demon!" or "oh it's a vampire!" It's a whole new concept, even if it's not pulled off perfectly.

It seems your comprehension when watching movies is really shallow. It follows is a great tribute to horror films and what it really should be. Granted that it is indeed overhyped but the score, the cinematography, and the atmosphere is great. I bet you would love Unfriended and Anabelle!

Fascinating. Doug liked Unfriended, but doesn't like It Follows. Meanwhile, Brad Jones is sort of the opposite. Wait, Doug, you don't understand why people try and keep a movie's premise secret from others? You do know it's polite not to spoil movies for others, right?

it was a good movie but these are some fair criticisms

I never felt like there were any noticeable inconsistencies. The girl who died at the beginning should be confusing UNTIL Greg gets killed. I was like, "Oh! the girl at the beginning was probably put into missionary position and fucked to death by this super being which could've broke her legs upwards." Very disturbing imagery. Also, the guy who first passes it to the main character and anyone else who is a victim of this thing probably understands this feeling of despair and understands the lengths that people would go to in order to survive so it makes sense that maybe the main charcter would rather try to learn from him rather than put him in jail. I mean, what would that accomplish when you have a succubus hunting you every second of your life? I think the movie does lose some impact when fighting the creature gets so physical and well, real. But I never thought it was inconsistent. I mean the movie NEVER tells you straight up what can kill this thing, or if it's even dead by the end. It's too vague and mysterious of a creature to really be inconsistent there. I love this movie because it encompasses the desperation of living a dead end life where your physically stuck in your home town. You're too young to begin your own life and old enough to feel like your wasting precious time in a decrepit decaying city (Detroit being a perfect setting lol). So his creature that follows you embodies this tension and stress you feel. If you stay in one place too long, you die. If you just shove your problem onto others, it's only putting a bandage on the real problem and won't give you peace of mind anyway so there's no use in trying to escape it that way. The only way to maybe survive (and this I feel is the ultimate message of the ending) is to partner up with someone that understands what you're going through and can help you and just watch each other's backs for the rest of your lives. Your life will never be truly peaceful if this thing hunts you even once, and you are doomed to be uncomfortable or dead for ever onwards. I think that that is truly terrifying. Maybe this'll inspire some of you critics to give this movie some of love I think it deserves.

Was Doug out in the lobby getting popcorn when they had the scene where after he drops her off at the house, they call the cops and take her to the hospital?

I'm most annoyed by the characters' collective irrationality. This movie is done by the time all of the rules are set up. Any thinking group of young adults would have this STG resolved in fifteen minutes of film, and in the following or some similar fashion: 1.) Everyone fucks an infected so-and-so in a sequence so that all can all see the creature and know its plan of attack. 2.) They dig a really deep hole. 3.) They push the creature into that hole. 4.) They fill that hole with molten lead, concrete, or whatever. The lesson I got from this movie was this: Being a moron can kill you.

Thank you for mentioning Gremlins. I really want to pick apart the "rules" of this movie like they did in Gremlins 2. What if the person it's following decides to go overseas? Does it start swimming or walking along the bottom of the ocean to get to them? Does it stow away on a boat or plane or something? What happens if the chain of people it follows gets severed? For example, say that it passes from person A to person B to person C, but person B accidentally dies before it gets to kill person C. Normally after killing person C it would go after person B, but since person B is already dead does it automatically go after person A, or does it get confused trying to find person B? It wouldn't really have any way of knowing person B was already dead. Also, who would have been the first person to get it? I have this funny image in my head of it following some really old guy in a walker and they're going at pretty much the same pace...

Most of the cliches were intentional. Its to go with the whole 80s style. Ambiguous time era, running away in high heels, having sex leading to death, parents disappearing, fake out jumpscares, main character acting idiotic at points etc You can say that self awareness doesn't excuse it, but I think you can at least admit its not as bad than if it wasn't intentional.

I think the problem here is that this film got overhyped. Since you were hearing how great it was, you were looking for something extremely innovative when, to be honest, it isn't really there. I think the most innovative thing in It Follows is something you actually complained about where a lot of times the tension will build with no payoff. Personally, I thought that was great. Like how that scene in the school showed how the characters can be in immediate danger and never even realize it. I loved that. I think It Follows was trying to be a very good traditional horror movie, not a fresh new take on the horror genre like Cabin in the Woods. So in that sense, I feel that It Follows achieved its goals even more than Cabin in the Woods *in my opinion*. Also, the scene with the guys on the boat implied that she went out there to have sex with at least one of them and pass it on. The fact that it comes back doesn't mean that she didn't have sex with them, it means that it already killed them and made its way back to her. This is similar to the end of the movie where they aren't sure if they've killed it or not so Jay passes it on to Paul and then it's implied that he passed it on to the prostitutes that you see him drive past, just in case it isn't actually dead. And at the end you see someone walking behind them and you're left to guess whether it was still following them or if that was just some random person walking down the street. It also sounds like you were looking in all the wrong places. Like you don't even mention in the review that it took on the form of her late father during the pool scene which it's possible that you might not have noticed. Knowing that's her father makes that a much more powerful scene. In fact, most of the people that it looks like are people that appear in other places during the film which makes it fun to try and figure out who it is each time that it makes an appearance.

-The scene with the boat was supposed to show that she DID pass it on to the three guys in the boat, but it's implied they all died because it came back to her. -I think Doug is confusing the fact that it's an indie film with the idea that just because it's an indie film it was going to be artsy.

I did like this film. I liked how everything has a purpose, I really did like the creepy imagery and the way the entity in the film worked. I saw a lot of people didn't like it because the film left a lot to interpretation. It did not explain everything, and I think that is something people need to accept. Not everything is going to be explained to you all the time. You have to some times make up your own conclusions. I just thought I'd point that out, since I found a lot of people saying it. Though I will agree that perhaps this entity does have too many rules. But the creepiness of the character was enough for me to not mind those that much. I think we learn about the weaknesses of the entity with the characters, we learn that it is a physical entity and that perhaps it has a weakness to water.

I get people arguing that trying to electrocute It was pointless because it could've been killed but, you know, maybe they thought that electrocution would kill it. Some mythical entities can only be killed by certain things. Legends say vampire can only be killed by sunlight, a wooden stake, or garlic. So I could see why maybe they thought that maybe electrocution would work when shooting wouldn't. Plus, they are basically kids. They are trying anything they can think of. Sure, they are kind of naive and don't think everything through but it's not bad writing, it's how kids are.

So the monster is like Slender man.

Honestly, I really enjoyed this movie, but from a casual viewer POV. I just wanted to see a good horror movie that doesn't rely on jumpscares, and that's exactly what I got, an enjoyable experience that kept me on edge and kept me guessing. Then again, I'm not looking deep into movies, I just eighter like em or I don't.

You are entitled to your opinion but I just hate that people dislike a movie just because a lot of people praise it. The truth of the matter is that this movie was really refreshing for a horror movie. It kept your anxiety levels high and you really didn't know what to expect. It had character development and it didn't "victim blame" the main character for the situation. You claim that it didn't explain enough and the rules were just "silly" Well Hello....its a horror movie, of course the premise is silly but it was well executed and very artistic. For you to claim that symbolic scenes the director created weren't intentional is actually very insulting. I think that for a low budget film it was well shot. You just like to scream that everything is pretentious just to hate a film. Which is the reason I like Adam from YMS on RU-vid. He praised and appreciated that it was a great horror movie regardless of flaws and unexplained origin.

A good film doesn't rely on a plot twist alone to make it good. I knew what I was getting into with Cabin in the Woods and I still liked it. I'm not surprised at all by It Follows' twist, it was kind of implied in the trailer, but I'll still probably see it.

I agree with you Doug (as always)...

I liked the movie. I'm not saying it's a master piece, but I enjoyed it quite a bit over a bunch of other recent horror movies. One thing you criticized a lot that I didn't find important was the time period it occurred in. The one girl's compact e-reader type gadget in no way affected the story. The TV sets and shows had no effect either. They could have been watching something recent with LED TVs, but it doesn't change the events. If that drew you out, then you were focusing on the wrong aspects. Also, there weren't that many rules. 1) Pass it on. It follows who ever was most recently "marked." If the person you gave it to dies, then it's back to you and if you die before passing it, it goes to whoever was before you. 2) It is always chasing after your. (Doesn't have to be specifically walking. It's just slow. So crawling, climbing, and swimming however poorly makes sense. Otherwise this "monster" would be laughably thwarted.) 3) Only the people it is chasing see it. Which makes sense that you still see it after passing it because if it kills the person you gave it to, then its focus is you. So you're still a target, just lower on the list. Those are the rules. Not complicated and not many. I also noticed, it's a physical entity. Meaning, barriers can block it. It can't phase through walls or doors or teleport to your location. However, it's only visible to its targets. It can be hit, however, it obviously doesn't feel pain and it quite strong. Since it isn't immaterial or intangible, it makes sense that it can be affected by people who can't see it. You said that the way it kills isn't consistent, but after you see how it kills the neighbor boy(or what it does thereafter), it makes a lot of sense the way the female in the beginning dies. If you noticed, her upper body is barely touched or damaged. Her legs, on the other hand, have been shattered. Say for instance, like she was trying to keep her legs closed, but something forcibly and with intense strength, separated them. How it kills, I'm not certain, but it obviously has to do with something sexual. I figured this out immediately after recovering from the visual of that scene when it kills the neighbor. I'm surprised you missed that connection. I do agree that I didn't understand at the end why they were trying to kill it when earlier her attempt failed. I assume it's because they think they just didn't kill it hard enough earlier, so electrocuting it to death with multiple electronic devices and a large pool seems like a decent idea. After all, no one, including the guy who passed it to her, don't know much about this creature. The "build ups that lead to nothing" felt like reminders that even when they're trying to find information or discussing what to do, it is still pursuing her. Somewhere, it is coming straight for her unless she passes it on. The jumps scares weren't even that huge, but fit the tense atmosphere, in my opinion, because of the fact that always after she gets marked, it is coming after her in the distance. Honestly, I thought this movie was pretty simple. I just thought it was a tense horror film playing on the fear of your sexual choices having terrifying, life changing consequences.

Woah, hairline on Lebron James status.

Doug, I have an interpretation as to what this is about. The main girl and the skinny nerdy friend (the boy who accidentally shot the girl at the pool) are in love with each other. You see her shoot the monster in the head in the pool, you see the pool fill with blood but the scene stops. I think the monster came back to life again but they didn't show it. The next scene, the girl and this boy are in the basement having sex. Even though the two of them know there's this horrible curse, they give into their own feelings for each other anyway not being afraid of the consequences anymore. The ending shows the two walking down the street, the monster obviously following them, but they pay no mind to it. In very plain terms, I feel this movie is saying live life to the fullest and don't dwell on the risks. I think this is what the main girl learns in the end.

The whole movie is about kids growing up.

Well I don't necessarily think this film is genius, one aspect of it that really clicked with me was the "boogeyman" aspect of the film. The best examples I can think of are the T-1000 from terminator 2 or the nemesis from Resident evil 3. This unstoppable, relentless force that you can only try your best to escape. You can't reason with it, you can't kill it, and it will never stop trying to hunt you down & kill you. It's literally a sword over your head that's inevitably going to drop & you can only delay it in vain. To me the scariest aspect of a malicious force that seeks to do you harm is perseverance.

Cabin in the woods was a comedy?

I haven't seen the film, but damn does Doug speak his mind and opinion well. Kudos, man.

I don't really think that they were trying to be abstract and artsy. I think they were just trying to make a horror film. They just had a message in it about innocence and growing up. It's like A Nightmare on Elm Street which dealt with adolescence and yet it was still just a slasher movie. So I think Doug viewed it wrong.

Completely agree with Doug on this one 100%

This "Follower" seems very similar to the Rakshasa, at least how it was depicted in Kolchak: the night stalker, where it would take the form of whoever you trust the most in order to get close to you before killing you. It also bears resemblance to the Baldanders (the Soon-another) of German folklore, which is also known to constantly change forms.

What I really loved about it is the fact that it can't teleport. While it has some scenes where is shows up out of nowhere, it's not like with a Jason movie. If you would put yourself in a slasher movie, the biggest problem would be the teleporting. He walks slow but he can just appear right behind you (even though Halloween or Friday The 13th never actually acknowledge it, its clearly happening) Here, this doesn't really happen (except that one time where I guess it sorta happens, but not really since you can technically explain it) and that makes it even more scary. You know you can get away from it, but you also know it will eventually catch up to you. As Yahtzee said: "there is a certain freedom in hopelessness because things can't get 101% fucked" With every other slasher movie, I keep thinking "they should just fight because running doesn't work" but here, running is a viable option, it's just temporary. Plus, when you pass it on, you will always wonder if the person you passed it on to is still alive, since they confirm that once that happens, you become the target again. Finally, I still don't know if "it" refers to the walkers or to the curse. You see, I was under the impression that there are multiple creatures that are drawn to this 'curse' and that 'it' refers to the curse and not the creatures. But everyone else sees it as one creature that can shape-shift.

This is the effect of overhyping a movie. The less you know about a great movie going into it, almost always, you'll enjoy it more. Also, don't compare any movie to a David Lynch film, because already you've set yourself up for failure. Comparing Lynch to everyone else is like comparing dreams to reality, and almost always people will prefer one over the other, so comparing them almost always leads back to Lynch. I don't know, see Blue Velvet and tell me how you feel after that.

Well, seeing as I felt it was pretty easy to guess the spoiler from the trailers, I'm not sure I see why people are making a fuss out of it. I wish in cases like this people would just tell me rather than building it up. The tight-lipped Cabin in the Woods cult just about ruined the movie for me. I kept waiting for the shocking revelation, and it just never came. Every time something happened I found myself wondering, is this it? Is this the moment? That sequence near the end was amazing, yes, but it was amazing in how well it was done, not in it's shock value, so was it the other much less interesting thing that people were talking about? I still don't know.

Doug, with respect, I think that you've missed the point of this film. As others have described in the comments section, there are no inconsistencies regarding the 'monster rules'. Even if there were, that wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing - it would just add to the overall emotional tone of alienation, despair and lack of rational recourse (exemplified by the complete absence of authority figures) that pervades the whole film. Cabin in the Woods is a pastiche. It's not worth comparing Cabin with It Follows as they are completely different kinds of films. I disagree with you regarding the element of parody in It Follows. I don't think there is any parody and It Follows, unlike Cabin, has little humour, self-consciousness or genre awareness. It's not self-referential at all. Its tools are psychological horror, characterisation and creating an atmosphere. There are also themes of hopelessness and lostness, lack of authority, the challenges of growing up etc... The 'monster' symbolism is left very open to interpretation, but personally I would say that the monster represents the embodiment of Time - time is inescapable, you can avoid it but you can never get away from it and it will eventually catch up with you. This fits in nicely with the themes of growing up, fear in the face of adult independence and responsibilities, fear of sexuality and intimacy.

It's John Carpenter's version of Terminator, with the soundtrack of The Entity

OKAY! YES! I think we mostly agree on horror films. I felt the same way about it Follows as you did. I left the movie wondering why people would even like it. I also saw Unfriended and saw a film aiming for something new. It follows looks back to the past but Unfriended I believe goes for something more.

I was thinking the monster is extinction. That we try to postpone it by reproducing, but that it is always inevitable.

At around 11:10 when you say "You know she didn't pass it on since it came back", when I watched I took it to mean she did but now they're dead so it's come back. In desperation she wanted to pass the curse along but probably didn't tell them what was going on, maybe figuring that they'd just be horny boys and pass the ball around like boys can, but it still comes back so then there's the realization: "I can't be completely free of this." That's how I saw that. Another question I had, being in my generation, does "It" consider homosexual sex legitimate to passing the curse along?

I'm one of the 95% who liked this movie, so I guess I'm one of the sheeple. ;) In answer to the questions Doug asked. Well they can kinda be answered with a starting point of "It" is death. It marches slowly towards you, it doesn't tire, or feel and it doesn't care. All of the actions done by the main character, kinda make sense from this perspecive. I mean, yeah you know that you can't stop or kill death, but when it's breathing down your neck you don't think like that, you just run from it, or try to stop it, but you'll always fail. I found it kinda interesting that when Jay (the main character) is "infected" by It, she kinda goes through the (extended) Kubler Ross Model of grief, Shock at first she's paralysed, both literally and metaphorically when she is shown It for the first time. Denial, she goes to school and hides from what happened, then when she is faced with it she runs home and locks her doors, more hiding It from herself than the other way round. Anger, after It walks into her room Jay escapes and runs to the swings where she has convinces her friends to believe her, she then visits her ex boyfriends home, this part of the movie is where she has the largest outpouring of emotion she vents her visible fear and anger in this part. Bargaining, they all track down the guy who gave it to her and the main question in this part of the movie is "How do we stop it" and even though the guy tells them, "You can't, you can only pass it on." (only delay it) they go out, get the gun, try to kill it (they fail) and then Jay tries to get away from it, but she crashes and in that scene we can see it approaching her. Then the final act of bargaining is passing it on to Greg, this of course doesn't work. This is when Jay visits the beach (I kinda interpreted this scene as her considering swimming to the boat and attempting to sail away from It but... eh Doug's works too) where she considers one last attept at escaping it,but then just gives up. All of Jay's attempts to find a way out are in vain. This of course leads to... Depression. Jay is faced with the outcome of It (pretty fucking seriously) when she sees It rape and kill Greg. After this scene Jay just locks herself in her room. She still puts up defences (having friends stay with her, putting a chair infront of the door) but they're half-hearted, she knows her friends are useless against it, she knows it could simply break down the door, but she doesn't care. Then Paul turns up with his idea and this pulls us into... Testing. Jay tries to find one more solution to It, a solution which in her mind seems realistic, there's a degree of overkill to the plan, it's obvious what the plan will end in but everyone is just too wrapped up in the goal to realise it. We also kinda see that Jay is straddling the Depression and Testing stages in the early part of this scene when she sees It on the roof of here house but doesn't mention it to anyone. The plan doesn't work and so the testing stage ends and then the final stage... Acceptance. Jay finds a way to move on, as does Paul, they decide to share the fate and we never know how this ends. It doesn't matter in the context of the journey . It's kinda like the ending to The Sopranos, does it matter if they die there, killed by It, or die in a hospital bed 60 years later of cancer or old age, It is death and It will still get them. As for the other things, the kinda mixed time periods reminded me of a production of "Medea" I went to see which kinda had the same thing, language was the translation of the original greek, the house on the set looked like a 1950's pre-fab house, the clothing styles ranged from 50's to modern day and one character gives a couple of 3ds's as a gift, whilst another character is using an Ipad. I think in both "Medea" and "It Follows" the directors were trying to give us the idea that the theme is something inherant to mankind and no matter what time we're in it's always there. The bit at the begining with the girls death being pretty violent (leg thing) and Gregs death being not so violent, I thought that was because the girl tried to fight It off and It just kinda forced itself onto her and... yeah... it's not a pretty mental image. As for the fact that it had so many rules, as far as I remember the only rules that were actually like pushed upon the characters and the audience were It can't be stopped. It only moves at walking speed. It's easy to outrun, but it's smart and it will corner you, so don't go anywhere with only one exit. And It can look like anyone. Everything else was just kinda shown to the audience, not forced upon you. But I think the rules being like the only solid things in the movie kinda works with the death interpretation, we live in a chaotic world where nothing is really set in stone for long so the only thing we can really be sure will happen in our life, is death. Oh and the scenes where you see It, but the characters don't really register It and nothing really comes from the scene, I kinda think that's meant to show that even if they don't realise it, their death can just be a few steps away from them. The soundtrack I really like mostly because it just creeps me out, it's opressive and tense and it makes it feel like something really bad is about to happen, and if it doesn't, cool, I'm kinda sick of having the stock "feeling normal, build tension with sountrack and scary noise, jumpscare, repeat" we've been getting for years with the Paranormal Activities and Insidious and blah blah Generico Mc Scaredypants... The score growing and making me more tense and then just cutting away, it didn't relieve the tension, I was still freaked out when the next scene started, and most of the way through the scene, because the movie never made you feel safe, or feel like there was a cooldown period. The threat was always there and it was always kinda close. Basically the reason I like this movie is because it creeped me out, I hesitated before turning out the lights before bed, I made sure my door was locked, I jumped when a friend knocked on my door. It stuck with me for a while. So that's why I liked it, because it's the only movie in cinemas for about 4 years that actually scared me. A suggestion I heard for the kinda difference between people liking it and not is that the largest audience for horror movies is women between the ages of 19-25-ish and "It Follows" was definately aiming for that group so... I dunno. Horror is the most difficult genre to review because it's one of the most subjective. What scares you varies as much as what you find funny. I don't know. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it like all of you have been saying. I just looked back over this and I genuinely didn't mean to write this much. I'm so sorry to anyone who actually reads this bizzare comment on a month old video. Sorry.

Yes! Thank you for reviewing this! I was watching this movie and just criticizing it the entire way through. The music was obnoxious. I hated having no idea what time this took place. Some of the camera work gave me a headache and it was just a mess. It just left me with 'The hell was that? This is 95%?!'

Warning, spoilers. Duh. If I had to pick one thing that this film was "about" in terms of its symbolism, I'd have to go with the loss of innocence. Especially considering the sub-plot of the main character and the younger boy who's infatuated with her. She's running from this thing, terrified of its creeping inevitability and despairing of how her life will never be the same, but all he wants is to take it from her, to meet it head on and take responsibility. They try to fight it, to kill it, but eventually they are forced to accept that they'll have to live with it. He'll have to watch to make sure it never comes back for him, and she'll have to live with the fact that she's given him this dangerous problem that could easily kill him. Neither of them will ever be truly innocent again. (Also, remember the swimming pool. Not one review I've seen has mentioned the damn swimming pool!) But also it's just a really fun movie in my opinion. I think it plays around with having a message, but it's almost too busy just reveling in its own creepy atmosphere and it's slick style, both of which it has in spades. I enjoyed it for that alone.