Connect with us

Editorials

[Editorial] Outlast 2’s Vague and Frustrating Story is Actually its Hidden Strength

Published

on

Outlast 2 was created to make you feel like a rat in a maze, without any knowledge of what’s on the outside. When stripped of context like this, it’s genuinely difficult to discern if that statement is meant as praise or as criticism, because either option is entirely plausible.   

On the one hand, an overbearing sense of disorientation is integral to great survival-horror, as the genre thrives upon disempowering its players. Yet at the same time, vowing to make your audience feel like a bewildered rodent is hardly the most enticing pitch in the world. Nor does it really scream ‘“Fun’’, which is ostensibly the core appeal of any video-game.

The ‘’Rat in a Maze’’ quote is intriguing for precisely this reason, because it did not come from a journalist or a reviewer. Instead, it can be attributed to Outlast 2’s very own PR team. That’s right, Red Barrel Studio intentionally likened their product to an inhumane science-experiment and then tried to use that off-putting comparison as a legitimate selling point!

They really pushed the idea too, insisting at every juncture that the game was going to be a distressing ordeal for everyone concerned. Among other things, their marketing promised that we’d experience: dizzying confusion; crippling isolation; and even a sudden onset of incontinence! Golly! Where do we sign up?

Normally you’d have to take these promotional gambits with a pinch of salt. But in this case there’s no hyperbole to account for. Outlast 2 will absolutely make you feel like a rat-in-a-maze, what with its unfathomable lore, perplexing storytelling and confounding ending. Make no mistake, however, this lack of clarity is not a failing on the game’s part. On the contrary, it was a very conscious decision and a genius one to boot.

As with classics like Silent Hill 2 or Bloodborne, the fact that the player can never be 100% sure of what is going on here really adds to the immersion, putting you directly in the shoes of your clueless protagonist. For a quick summary, Outlast 2 pits you against Temple Gate, a zealous community that is ruled with an iron fist by one Sullivan Knoth. A former radio preacher, this devout Christian allegedly intercepted the voice of God over his broadcasting equipment and was inspired to produce a deranged trilogy-capper for the bible.

His resultant gospel is weirdly fixated on reproductive organs, ejaculate and anything else that is remotely associated with fornication. Oh, and it also endorses infanticide and genital mutilation as a means of curbing sin. So you know, typical light reading!

Suffice it to say, Knoth is a tad unhinged and has somehow convinced his flock that he is the ‘’New Ezekiel’’, a divine prophet capable of derailing Armageddon and slaying the Antichrist. To accomplish this, he intends to rape all his female parishioners (irrespective of their age), in the hope that he will inseminate one of them with the Archfiend’s progeny and then kill it whilst it’s still a defenseless newborn.

Exacerbating things even further, you soon begin to wonder if maybe he’s onto something with all this end-of-the-world business. After all, you too are being plagued with the same haunting visions as everyone else, witnessing hordes of locusts, demons and other apocalyptic omens.

Believe it or not, that synopsis is heavily simplified and omits some of the more cryptic aspects of the plot – like the jarring reality shifts, the splinter faction of devil-worshiping ‘’Heretics’’ and the part about your wife’s Immaculate Conception. Still, the fact that this story is so hard to condense speaks volumes about the commendable ambition that the developers channeled into this one. They could have easily settled for something more straightforward and conventional, but thankfully chose to aim a little higher and crafted an intricate narrative that is suitably enigmatic and challenging.

On that note, Outlast 2 frequently demands that the audience read-between-the-lines and puzzle things out for themselves. It’s reminiscent of the Dark Souls approach to storytelling,  wherein clunky exposition dumps and intrusive cut-scenes are jettisoned in favor of more subtle methods. For example, several key details here are relegated to collectible documents, some of which are integral to your overall understanding of events and character motivations.

With that in mind, if you don’t take the time to rigorously scour every corner of the game world and investigate levels properly, then you’ll be denied vital pieces of information. In fact, if you neglect to read one very specific letter, then you’ll miss a major plot twist that completely alters your interpretation of the ending. So much can be gleaned from this particular document (including explanations for plot-holes, closure for lingering questions and clarification about whether there’s a supernatural element at play) that it’s basically the most important MacGuffin in the entire game.

To conceal such massive implications within an optional extra is an unbelievably ballsy move. But it makes perfect sense, because without delving into spoiler territory (it’s a joy to uncover all of this stuff for yourself) the twist only works if the characters themselves remain completely ignorant of it. You see, Outlast 2 is all about what happens when people try to impose meaning onto that which they cannot comprehend.

In order to fully articulate this theme, the game deliberately thrusts you into a baffling situation, making you question what you’re seeing. Therefore, an obvious explanation cannot be delivered without undermining the whole point of the story. Moreover, the choice to hide answers within collectibles allows Red Barrel to discreetly supply intel to more vigilant players, whilst still preserving the sense of mystery for everyone else.

Alas, whilst this secret depth was certainly rewarding for those who did cotton on to it, the intricacies slipped past most gamers, who accordingly lambasted Outlast 2 for not having enough substance and for failing to provide a satisfying conclusion. It’s a shame that the game’s reputation has been forever damaged by this hasty judgment because it really does deserve more recognition for its daring creative choices.

Specifically, it ought to be praised for its bold decision to withhold narrative exposition from the player, unless they go looking for it. Then again, that’s the risk the team took when they decided to make their story so ambiguous all for the sake of immersion.

It may have been too subtle for its own but it cannot be denied that Outlast 2 succeeded in what it initially set out to achieve. Over the course of its obtuse campaign, you really do come to identify with the protagonist. Indeed, you are truly a ‘rat in a maze’.

Opinionated, Verbose and Generally Pedantic. Loves Horror in all of its forms.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading