Review of Pontypool (2009) by Andrew S — 28 Jul 2009

Something is very wrong in Pontypool, Ontario, but don't worry because we've got the media to carry us through the troubled times. The voice of the media comes in the form of the wonderful Stephen McHattie as Grant Mazzy, a former shock jock aging disgracefully and relegated to breakfast show host. McHattie has one of those great actorly voices, the man has a voice you can listen to for hours, which is helpful because he will be carrying the film on the soundwaves of his pitch perfect, gravelled tones.

The film presents what could be considered a zombie outbreak in a format reminiscient of Orson welles' War of the Worlds radio broadcast, we hear the information (and perhaps disinformation?) via television, phonelines and the radiowaves. Words must convey the imagery and the drama, and it does so with great potency, as powerfully as it could have been had it been seen from a big budget staging. Rarely do we see the carnage and that works in it's favour presenting a paranoid, claustrophobic atmosphere that more than compensates for any budgetary constraints that keep the horror under-represented.

Much like Deadgirl, Pontypool is a horror movie about ideas above violence and the idea is an interesting one. The virus is spread through language. The English language is a virus. The infected find themselves struggling with words, then thoughtlessly repeating other people's phrases, words now robbed of context through no real understanding of their meaning. As if the words were being uttered for the first time. Reduced to babble, the infected turn savage. The effect of hearing the infected echo words is remarkably effective in it's creepiness.

It could be argued that language has always been a virus, the day we learned to speak was the day we learned to hate, to lie, to fight. The problem is the conceit is not fully explored or cohesively realized, are they stating that the understanding of words, the exchange of language, is dangerous? Or is it that the loss of that understanding is dangerous? Both are valid interpretations of the impact communication can have on us as a society. It seems to send mixed signals in this regard, but perhaps that is in keeping with it's exploration of information and disinformation via the media. They certainly posit the idea that the media can hinder epidemics with rash reportage without considering the implications of their words. Repeat viewings may yield a more concrete opinion on this, but it works regardless of which side of the coin it lands upon.

McHattie is fantastic throughout, he sways between a detached bemusement off-air and sly, manic energy in his radio personna. He comes alive when the On-Air light goes red and the epidemic gives him a new lease of life from his boring, small potatoes gig. He is the primary focus of the entire film and his marvellous voice lends every update with a greater gravity than a visual interpretation could have managed. It's very in keeping with the film's central concept that all vital information would be processed entirely through language. A particularly haunting sequence recounts the casualties, depicting entirely through McHattie's on-air obituary and a montage of black & white profile shots of all of the victims. We never see their deaths, but the words convey the toll and the horror with incredible effectiveness.

Intermittently paranoid, creepy, thrilling and funny. A meatier exploration of it's theme would have been helpful but it works entirely on it's own terms and is a truly great, original horror film.