Any hopes I had for "Pulse" - the latest American remake of a Japanese horror film - were dashed pretty quickly into the film. After a protracted opening of false scares, the film introduces us to an innocuous, uninteresting group of students at an unnamed Chicago university who start to see strange images flash across their computer screens. And, wouldn't you know it, the apparitions are both PC and Mac compatible. Then, a short time later, kids start disappearing. Like,
a lot of kids. So much so that it's on the news. Not that anyone in the film takes note. The characters, if I can call them that, can't be bothered to generate much of a reaction; even the dramatic suicide of one of their best friends barely registers two scenes later.
The lack of character and suspense in "Pulse" is matched only by its narrative incoherence. The script, co-written by Wes Craven (of all people) and Kiyoshi Kurosawa - on whose 2001 film "Pulse" was based - only makes perfunctory attempts at logic. Characters do exactly what they should to bring the plot to its next point. "Pulse" then falls victim to the typical bad-horror-movie blunder: it has no rules. It's never quite clear what the significance is of the ghostly computer images or why some people are attacked and others aren't. True horror comes from understanding what we're scared of and seeing it play out. In "Pulse" it's just some kind of lazy magic.
Kristen Bell, showing none of the spunk she did in "Veronica Mars" plays the heroine typically assigned to Sarah Michelle Gellar. And
Lost's Ian Somerhalder shows up to wide-eye his way thought another role. "Pulse" is also awash in thankless supporting characters, including Christina Milian as "the best friend" and Ron Rifkin as "the worst psychiatrist ever". Even Brad Dourif puts in an appearance as "Thin Bookish Guy".
None of this, however, can distract from the patently ludicrous goings-on. Eventually, after a very long ninety minutes, the film devolves into utter preposterousness with a would-be apocalyptic denouement meant to evoke the feeling of a far superior film.
Relative newcomer Jim Sonzero directs the film with more style than it deserves, but he can't build up enough momentum to propel it over the gaping plot holes. Why, for example, does ordinary red packing tape provide some degree of safety (it's not made clear to what degree it helps)? Why, if the ghosts are coming through machines, can they power down the electricity? Wouldn't that power down the very machines they need to survive? And why, for the love of god, are the digital images rife with analog static?
Maybe I'm picking one too many nits. Or maybe I couldn't buy the premise of beings traveling via network signals when I couldn't even get cell phone reception in the theater that was showing the film. Regardless, the closest "Pulse" comes to irony is in its title - since that is precisely what this anemic horror attempt is lacking.
