Behind the Mask: The Rise of Leslie Vernon (2006)

Very disappointing...

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

It's more than 9 years since I saw this, the one and only time and let me tell you, I was too harsh with my 6/10 Stars review. This movie not only held up, but quickly shot to one of my now favorite horror movies of all time.Heard a lot of people speak about this again, including my dear friend, Kevin Carr of Fat Guys at the Movies fame, so I thought I would give it another (second) shot in a decade. So sorry it took me this long to revisit it. This movie is amazing and perfect for a Slasher fan like me.Everything worked for it, from the mockumentary first half to the somewhat predictable, albeit satisfying conclusion. Like even ONE of the Myers, Krueger, Chucky or Voorhees movies and you'll LOVE this gem. Here are my original thoughts from February 15, 2009, though I certainly evolved from then...I totally loved the second half as much as the first half and now, I give the whole experience 9/10 Stars:Slashing for Dummies...BEHIND THE MASK: THE RISE OF LESLIE VERNON (3½/5 Stars.) After recently watching the cliché-filled but fun Hatchet and the well, just cliché-filled Friday the 13th reboot, it was great to watch what's (literally, though imaginary) Behind the Mask, in this case, The Rise of Leslie Vernon. The first half of the movie is great: a lot of humor, mentions of the other great slashers (even going as far as stating Freddy, Jason, Michael and Chucky are real life terrors) and an interesting take on how much prep work goes into to stalking and dicing young fools. I loved the homage to the other series on which this is based, including the characters treating the screen legends as heroes, the different names used: Frederick, Jay, Mike, etc and even going as far as to find identical locations to the other films. In addition, I liked the documentary take and the is-it-real-or-not mystery. Unfortunately, comes the second half, and if there was any question or mystery, it's wiped clean and the actual clichés and predictable scenes pop up. Well, yeah, you get all you really need to know/learn from the first half, but I was enjoying myself, finding myself laugh out loud at a few scenes and lines, hoping that it might turn into another April Fool's Day or just continue with the faux pas documentary. I guess they felt a real movie was in order, so the light switch was hit and we fall into familiar (to slasher fans) grounds with a masked man stalking no-nothing young kids. Yet, it's (mostly) original (at least to America,) downright hilarious, a neat trick/twist and a wonderful first half. Typically, the first half of any slasher is the set-up, where we learn the booooring backgrounds of the kids we never end up caring about. Finally, they made the buildup worth the whole package.Additional notes: I realize in any slasher film, it's not wise to look too deep, but I can't help myself. All the way through, I couldn't think of how much the documentary crew would be in trouble - i.e. accessories or at least, not reporting this all to the police. They could've easily been partially blamed for some of the carnage. Also, I liked how the director who seemed to want to thank everyone he's ever met in the credits made sure you read all their names by extending the movie into (again, familiar and predictable territory) the final second of credits. Yes, you see what's coming, but then again, they put a twist on it, a completely different POV. I liked that.

Behind the Mask: Directed by Scott Glosserman and written by Scott Glosserman and David J Stieve.This is a movie that I have heard about for years singing its praises and it peaked my interest. I never took the time to actually watch it. I finally broke down and watched the film. Boy am I glad I did. This is a delight. This is a mockumentary that also works as a legit slasher film. It switches back and forth between the mockumentary and an atmospheric slasher film. This movie is really funny first and foremost. It's funny just all by itself. It's even more funny if you're familiar with horror slasher films. It takes place in a world where Freddy, Jason and Michael Myers are real and operate unhinged from the police. Leslie wants to model himself after them and so he goes about training for his night to make his legend alongside his heroes. A journalism student in an attempt to make a name for herself follows him along with her crew. It takes you through the ropes of him setting up a realistic way of doing slasher scenes. It shows you his mentor.But the movie moves past the jokes and takes you into the slasher world itself. The jovial, fun loving Leslie becomes slasher movie villain Leslie who flips around and has a terrifying demeanor. It plays with convention and it brings a smile to this horror fan's face. I would highly recommend this movie to anyone. Just a good movie to watch and enjoy. I give this film a B.

Two viewings in one week and lots of contemplating later, I still can't decide what to think of – and how to rate – "Behind the Mask: the Rise of Leslie Vernon"... One thing is for certain, namely this definitely isn't my favorite kind of movie in any way. I don't like "mockumentaries" or "found footage" movies (with the exception of two or three titles) and I most certainly don't like wannabe clever movies that spoof the horror genre (and slashers in particular). They think of themselves as ingenious and witty, but in reality they are just pretentious and disrespectful towards all their colleagues in the film industry. The main reason why I postponed my viewing of "Behind the Mask" for nearly 10 years is because I read that this film was sort of like a crossover between "C'est Arrivé Près de chez Vous" ("Man Bites Dog") and Wes Craven's "Scream". To me "Man Bites Dog" is a sacred and unsurpassable classic, although I might be a little bit biased because I'm from Belgium and this is the only genuine cult monument we ever brought forward, but "Scream" is a vastly overrated and snobbish film. The comparisons are justified, though. Like in "Man Bites Dog", a psychopathic killer allows for a student film crew to follow him around and shoot a documentary about his evil activities, and like in "Scream", the screenplay clarifies several 'rules-of-the-game' as well as terms & trademarks and it magnifies the genre's biggest clichés and stereotypes. Normally I would really dislike both styles, but strangely enough I tolerated the narrative style of "Behind the Mask" and even gradually grew to appreciate it more and more. The story takes place in a world where notorious horror franchises, like the massacre at Camp Crystal Lake by Jason Vorhees and the Halloween murder sprees by Michael Myers, are supposedly real. Three young film students, led by the nervous and insecure Taylor Gentry, receive permission from an aspiring mass murderer to follow him around as he makes the preparations for the upcoming bloodbath; which is apparently something that maniac killers must do in order to be successful. The soon-to-be slasher icon thought about everything: he invented a tragic background story/urban legend, chose an abandoned farmhouse location for the killings to take place, carefully scouted a group of victims including the surviving "final girl" and drew out a detailed scenario with the exact chronological order and places for his victims to die. Leslie even receives an unexpected pleasant surprise when it turns out that he has an "ahab"; which is a good guy – like Sam Loomis - following him around. Taylor and her friends cheerfully register everything on camera, but then it's time for the actual murders to take place… Will they remain at Leslie's side and stomach his atrocities? Will the walk away with a troubled consciousness or will they try and prevent the massacre from happening now that they know the rules? As indicated before already, I seriously don't like horror film makers that depreciate the genre by pointing out all of its clichés and shortcomings. It made me hate Wes Craven and his films "Scream" and particularly "New Nightmare". But for some reason the horror background information and clarifications that we receive in "Behind the Mask" don't come across as pretentious or satirical at all. They are even very respectful and shine new light on traditional horror franchises. Don't you think for one second that Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers were impulsive and brainless lunatics that just wandered around swinging knives or machetes… They needed a detailed plan of action, sufficient time to hide the bodies at strategic places and a great physical condition in order to keep up with their running victims whilst they are walking! Most horror spoofs aren't funny and (unintentionally?) ridicule the genre, whereas writer/director Scott Glosserman's script doesn't even try to be funny and even makes you think a little deeper about horror franchises and/or characters you probably never thought about before. Also very meaningful is the character of Eugene, who in fact represents various random (and often nameless) movie maniacs that predate Michael Myers and basically remained "supportive" characters throughout the whole film. There are some truly great signs of intelligence, expertise and respect in "Behind the Mask" and the narrative style is also fairly unique since it switches from a mockumentary into a (more or less) genuine & old-fashioned slasher in the third act. Glosserman was even slick enough to inject a couple of refreshing and inventive plot twists during the expanded finale, and admirably debunks a couple of ancient clichés (what if the supposed virgin doesn't turn out to be a virgin at all?). Fact remains, unfortunately, that the first hour is very talkative, slightly hectic and even rather boring. Horror fanatics expecting a straightforward bloodbath, complete with sleazy images and nasty make-up effects, will definitely be turned down and might not even make it towards the more exhilarating last half hour. Good performances from protagonist Nathan Baesel and the rest of the fairly unknown cast and, hey, any movie that features the song "Psycho Killer" by Talking Heads during the end credits receives an additional point from me.

Hard to place this film in category. The best, I think, would be thriller, but this is a very different beast to other movies in the category. It is NOT really a slasher movie, nor a parody of one. It all starts with a young female journalist coming to a small town to report and document the birth of a legendary serial killer myth. The killer explains to her how he chooses his victim, how he plans and sets the stage for the whole sadistic game and how he executes it in his attempt to become the successor of Meyers, Kruger and Vorhees.In a way, the movie reminded me of Cabin in the Woods with the way it explains elements from most slashers. It's monumentally funny to see a very likable character, all nervous and excited and making tremendous professional effort to be the best in "the business".Now I can't spoil the movie by telling you too much about the film, but enough to say that I found the main character to be a very promising actor and the film having a high quality that I didn't expect. Not many movies today make the effort to create an ingenious script that uses hints and clues that are left for the viewer to also figure out. This one did.Too bad the marketing for the movie was not to the level of its quality. I wish I had known about it sooner. I highly recommend it.