Pontypool: Schlub Up or Die!

People—such as Movie Bob—like to say how the world of cinema has changed and that when viewing a movie poster, you literally had no idea what you were getting into outside of what the. Now, while there certainly isn’t that much that can be done for major motion pictures, I’d disagree with those sorts when it comes to slightly less known motion pictures. Instead of being clueless when going to the movies, viewers will be clueless when picking up a movie from redbox or when looking through suggestions on Netflix or some streaming service. All you have to go on are a little square with some awesome poster art and a little description at the bottom along with a couple of stars indicating total value, not unlike how those of the 80s and nineties had naught but the cover of a VHS and some vague description on the back, just as movie-goers of the 7

You gotta admit, that's a pretty
kickass poster

0s and 60s had a poster and possibly a preview they saw at another movie.

            I bring this up because this is very same mentality I went into “Pontypool” with. Going in, based solely on the poster, I’d be lying if I wasn’t expecting a schlocktacular zombiefest, but what I ended up with—while arguably containing zombies—was a little smarter than that, if not a little nonsensical at the same time.

            So Pontypool. Pontypool opens by introducing us to Grant Mazzy, the smooth DJ who was newly hired to be the voice of the local radio station in the titular town, Ontario, Sydney Brier, his producer, and Laurel-Ann Drummond, her Afghanistan vet assistant. As the day progresses, reports of something very wrong going on in town proper, beginning with a supposed riot at a dentist’s establishment to and ultimately climaxing in reports of “indescribable acts” by the towns people, including picking people up with their teeth and eating them.

If my description hasn’t made it all together clear, this is a very “Lumetian” picture. Chances are you haven’t heard of Sidney Lumet, but you may have heard of—as well as—seen some of the movies he’s made over the years, including both “12 Angry Men” and “Dog Day Afternoon,” films which give us one or two locations but due to things like camera angles, editing, or even the situation of the story, these locations stay dynamic enough to not completely bore the audience. Now, while he certainly wasn’t the first to think of this style of film making—indeed the style itself is arguably the great-great-great-grandchild of Greek style performances, and can still be seen in many a modern play—it is arguably his signature. Now Lumetian style can do a lot of different things for a film, however it is best at giving us the tension between a group of characters in an intensely personal setting. It also, if done well, allows the creators to skirt the classic “show, don’t tell” rule that is so integral to proper story telling. In 12 Angry Men, it allowed for us, the audience, to try and gain what we could from the descriptions given by the jurors. In “Dog Day Afternoon,” it helps to show the relationship between Sonny and the rest of the hostages.

In “Pontypool,” the three being trapped in the radio station really emphasizes the mystery of what’s going on. It’s hard not to be creeped out about what’s going on as reports cannibalism and god knows what else are coming from the poor schlub who liked to pretend he was on the traffic copter when he was just in his van. Meanwhile Mazzy is trying his best to be patient while Brier and Drummond try their best to get a feel for what’s going on. The effect is very Lovecraftian. You, along with the protagonists, aren’t entirely certain of what’s going on, but know full well that it’s bad and that no good can come of it. It’s a bit like a found footage movie, except without the pretentians to go along with it.

As I said earlier, there is a sort of Lovecraftian element to the fact that we're just hearing reports of what's going on as opposed to the team and the audience hearing for themselves. You could argue that this is sheer laziness on director Bruce Mcdonald's part, just as you could argue that leaving the horridness of the beasts up to the audience is laziness in Lovecraftian fiction. I'd argue that sometimes our limitations, and even our laziness, can lead to innovation. When Stan Lee was asked to to make a new superhero team, instead of thinking up some complex origin story, he just said they were mutants and wham, the X-men were born. Movies like Jaws, the first two Aliens movies and the Thing are all the better because of how little we see the titular creatures. What I'm getting at is that I'm giving McDonald a pass for not showing revealing the creatures until the end.

That being said, no movie’s perfect, and Pontypool is no different. The reveal of just what’s going on can range from completely a unique—if not convoluted—take on the zombie apocalypse genre, to completely and utterly convoluted. I’ll give you a hint: it defies even the most basic of understanding of how diseases are spread. My biggest problem is with the way the movie itself reveals just how the zombie apocalypse works. So the trio are all confused as to what’s going on and such and then all of a sudden, some German scientist comes along and just gives us a big old exposition dump about what’s going on. Not only that but the guy’s a caricature of every stupid b-movie scientist around. Now, while I don’t really have a problem with that sort of thing, it sticks out like a sore thumb in a film that’s been building up slow, uneasy tension. It’d be like if you were going through one of the “Grudge” movies and all of a sudden Freddy Krueger comes swaggering along making bad puns and whatnot.

Overall, Pontypool is not a “perfect movie.” But it’s got a genuinely interesting—if not convoluted—premise and some perfectly done execution. If you ever find yourself with some friends who just wanna have a decent time watching some movies, give this sucker a try. It’ll certainly b