FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Borserie it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

Biddleforpresident Not with standing the building they are using could not have closed in 1949, it too 1990's looking, the cell block for sure is too new for the forty's . the ending is just preposterous . Nice of whom ever found the "found footage" to edit all the film. Just a rip off of other films , nothing new here. And the plot ,.well it's bad. There's too many cameras , and how did they get there in a building closed for 60years . Where's all the pigeons ? Rats and other pests that thrive in old buildings,. Where's the years of dirt? Action starts way too far in the movie about an hour,. The so called cop interviews , lose perspective after the end is seen. Why the interview ? Why put blame on him, it's what's inside that your hiding you know this from the start.

Maria Fahlsing Goofs: the heart monitor remains steady regardless of John's emotional state (angry, sad, etc.), whereas his heart should race when angry and be slightly erratic when crying.This movie had potential, but all of that was thrown away with the introduction of Rebecca, the agent from an unknown organization that apparently murders all witnesses to paranormal activity. The organization's function, the agent's job, what was actually happening, why John was murdered, etc. were not explained. In fact, absolutely zero attempt was made to make the ending make any semblance of sense. With the last 5 seconds of the movie, are we actually supposed to assume that the blonde girl is still alive, trapped in the asylum forever until she starves to death?Too many questions were raised, not enough were answered, and there really isn't a resolution. The movie takes a very hard, steep left turn and stops.Very disappointing.

Paul Magne Haakonsen Alright, well first of all I should say that I am not a fan of the "Paranormal Activity" movies, but still have seen them, as it is allegedly ghost movies. And already prior to watching "Paranormal Incident" you already know that this is an attempt to cash in on the success of "Paranormal Activity", and as such, you know that it will be bad, just like "Paranormal Activity".And it was everything I expected! Equally bad, if not worse actually that what they were trying to cash in on. Haven't we soon had enough of these low budget, hand-held and super shaky home videos? I could make something similar with my DV camera and call it "Paranormal Phenomena".The story is about a group of people spending a couple of nights in an old, closed down mental institute, that is allegedly haunted. Some are believers in the paranormal, some aren't, but of course they are in for a night of terror and they are not alone.Nothing new to this storyline, and it was a really weak storyline at that. It had a bad script, even though the actual dialogue wasn't too bad. However, the movie was brought to the screen by some very questionable acting performances, some of which seemed so disinterested in the movie that it was painful to look at.There was nothing scary about this movie at all, just as there wasn't with "Paranormal Activity" (all three of them), and it wasn't much fun to sit through. Then why did I sit through it? Well it was in the odd chance that this movie might actually outdo "Paranormal Activity" and have something that even remotely resembled entertainment.I am a fan of ghost movies, but am getting very fed up with these particular types of movies. It is nothing but shaking hand-held camera action that you could do yourself, just get a couple of friends together, and you are all set. It is an outrage!

Mercury Rapids Browsing the DVD section of my local supermarket today, I came across Paranormal Incident. Reading the cover notes, I thought, ooh, a new found-footage film for my enjoyment. It's a pity that the film turned out to be a little disappointing, despite its ambition. Oh, and the DVD cover erroneously titled the film as 'The' Paranormal Incident. It's just Paranormal Incident. Shame on the UK distributor! What we have is a found-footage film folded into a traditional movie. The sole survivor of a paranormal investigation is being interrogated in his hospital room as we are shown the camcorder and CCTV footage recovered from Odenbrook Sanitarium. Being the sole survivor, John is also the prime suspect in connection with the disappearances of his friends. As he tries to recall what happened, he is shown how the dark forces that prowl Odenbrook picked off his comrades one by one.The main problem with this film is the format. Is it a normal film or is it a found-footage film? The producers are to be commended for trying to take the genre in a new direction (as Eduardo Sanchez has done with the soon-to-be-released Lovely Molly), but the ambition outreaches the filmmakers' ability, it seems. While the acting is decent and the shaky-cam footage is decent, the 'regular' movie segments are quite pointless (and the climax is, frankly, stupid). The director seems to forget how many people there are in a scene from time to time, as there are more hand-held camera shots than people. On a couple of occasions, the 'found-footage' is being filmed by nobody at all, as we see hand-held footage of attacks from a third person perspective when there is supposed to be only one person (and the ghosts/demons/whatevers) in the scene. That bug-bear of found-footage, the pointless musical score, also comes into effect on occasion.That said, there are some good scares, but I felt that they should have simply made a regular found-footage movie without the pointless 'traditional movie' inserts.