Hellring

I think it deserves 5 stars and (in my opinion) it’s not at all predictable as a movie.

I really enjoyed it, and the "ending" is very predictable. The point is that, in my opinion, the director intentionally made it so that it wouldn't be a surprise. But those are just opinions...

The fact is that in my eyes it was quite predictable, and while many loved it and appreciated the metaphor behind it, to me that ending said little, in fact I found it simplistic. Then again, de gustibus :)

He may be a great YouTuber, but when it comes to cinema, he knows just enough; he's no genius...

I didn't say it's a phenomenon... but I like it.

Sorry, which other directors would you have seen at the Kent cinema? Also, I'm sorry, but if the strengths of Babadook are about creating tension, you and horror don't quite know each other well enough. Laszlo (or however it's spelled) is a bit of a hack as far as I'm concerned, but he is informed about what's out there, and in the end, that counts for something in a world where what's available far exceeds what's watchable; for example, without him I would have never seen that cabin in the woods. Sure: that cabin in the woods won't be Maudisson, but even in mainstream cinema, it has become necessary to have a counselor with a bit of taste. One last thing: since this is such a foregone conclusion, and it’s obvious to everyone, could you write it down for me properly? Let me explain: what makes the ending of the film so predictable and what are the "clues" that make it indeed predictable? Thanks.

A counselor with a touch of taste*

The cinema of Kent is cinema like many others, going about without trying to invent anything extraordinary: the film bears the influence of Hitchcock, Bava, Lynch, Kubrick, Burton, Polanski, European cinema, and dozens of others, so for me, on a directorial level, we are in the realm of the norm and citation (which, however, is positive if the names you draw from are those). The film then creates tension; I don't understand why I shouldn't know horror if I say that The Babadook knows how to create tension, especially since the film isn't even a horror. Then the final twist is foreshadowed from the moment we learn about the husband's death, and the fact that she is the only one to see certain things (see the scene at the police station and others). Her repressed subconscious comes out thanks to her son, that is, the "cause" of her husband's death. For me, The Babadook is a film that knows how to rework, in its own way, the great lessons of the masters, which can also be original and works; I don't doubt any of that. The fact is that FOR ME it's not the ancestral semi-masterpiece that many talk about, but a "genre" film that transcends the genre itself without knowing how to rework its coordinates. The ending didn't say much (and gave little) to me, perhaps because I expected a better film overall since I've read various reviews online (including yours) that perhaps created too many expectations for the final result. In fact, I decided to let some time pass and watch it again later to see if it can convey something else to me. I simply think differently from you; I don't see this film as memorable, that's all. Regards :)

Ah, okay, if by plot twist you mean that Babadook is about guilt, then yes, it makes sense that it's foreshadowed. Honestly, what hit me hard, though, was seeing in black and white, without a doubt, that: "You won't overcome this. Ever. But you'll be okay, don't worry." Which, I might repeat, is the strongest message I've ever received from a film in my whole life (and I’ve seen a lot of movies...).

Regarding the horror/tension aspect, yes: the film is a horror (there’s darkness hiding random things from the viewer's sight, there’s malignant paranormal activity, there’s the drone in the soundtrack, and the characters are scared and stressed the entire time; I swear, trust me: it’s horror. And no, it creates very little tension compared to what the genre market has to offer. It doesn’t even aim to create tension; it’s all about referencing the cinema of the past, and fear, the tension, you create with newness—if you’ve already seen it, it’s not scary. But I believe that wanting to frighten the viewer was the last of the director's concerns.

Another thing I may have already mentioned: is there any work in the history of, not just cinema, but art in general, where a mother disillusioned with her child not only is the protagonist but also a positive character? It’s a serious question; I can’t think of anything, but maybe (and probably) something exists.

Honestly, I don't know if there's a movie like this; this could even be the first, but that doesn't change the fact that I still see it as an ordinary film. I mean, it didn't convey to me what it conveyed to others; maybe it's my limitation, just as I don't agree with those who labeled it simply as junk, including many not just online but also among my friends. The blame is also on you, nes; I was expecting a memorable movie :)

Damn, it's memorable!