Backrooms (15)

Director: Kane Parsons
Screenplay: Will Soodik, Kane Parsons

Starring: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Renate Reinsve, Mark Duplass
Running time: 110 minutes

Cinema

​

Review: Dave Stephens

​

Holy hell! It’s not been a shabby month for original horror, that’s for sure. We’ve had a trio of 4-star films this month, and (*spoiler alert*) here’s another one. The next time someone tells you that original horror is “dead” or that they’re not making really scary films anymore, point them to May 2026. Obsession (currently beating the latest Star Wars entry in daily takings!), Rose of Nevada, and Hokum. Yeah. And as we write this, Deadline reports that this here picture (Backrooms) is essentially going to be A24 studio’s biggest opener with around $90m this weekend. Make good films, and the fans will come in droves. Ahem. Anyway. Although intrinsically linked with YouTuber Kane Parsons (aka Kane Pixels), the idea of Backrooms comes from a creepypasta on 4chan around 2019, suggesting that, just as you can glitch into non-playable areas in video games, the same thing could happen in reality. So, pictures and stories were shared and grew the mythos. But it really exploded as a definable concept (and proliferated the use of the word “liminal”) when Parsons made a short horror film in 2022 called The Backrooms (Found Footage). After going viral, he turned the concept into a wildly popular series of short films, which has led to many video game modders emulating the setup and a huge upturn in recognition. Perhaps inevitably, Hollywood came a-calling and Parsons (still only 20-years old at the time) was given the opportunity to make a feature-length version of Backrooms, being backed by A24 and having it produced by James Wan, Shawn Levy, and Osgood Perkins. Blessed with two excellent leads in the shape of Chiwetel Ejiofor (soon to be seen in Mike Flanagan’s Exorcist film) and Renate Reinsve, the story has jumped from YouTube to cinema, and it seems to be a job well done.

 

A prologue sets the scene, with a POV found-footage slant (indicated as being from 1990 according to the text). The man behind the lens appears to be trapped in a labyrinth of storerooms and is begging for rescue by an outside source. Pursued by an offscreen entity, he seems to meet a grim demise. After the credit screen, we’re introduced to Clark (Ejiofor), who is suffering from depression and in mid-session with his positive-energy therapist, Mary Kline (Reinsve). Clark is a trained architect, estranged from his wife, and running a discount furniture store at a clapped-out retail park. After experiencing some electrical problems, he discovers a barely noticeable strip of artificial light in his basement wall. He stumbles through a “doorway” or portal in the wall, which leads into an infinite number of cream-coloured office rooms, filled with fragments or facsimiles of the “real” world. Unable to convince Mary of his findings (in a wonderfully passive-aggressive exchange, so maddeningly typical of therapy methods), he resolves to return with proof to show her. But as vast and lonely as the “Backrooms” are, you’re never alone in there…

 

There are two hugely positive things to say about Backrooms to start with, aside from the narrative itself and elements of the production. Firstly, it absolutely works as a standalone project. You do not need to know anything about its rich history or to have seen any of Parson’s short films. Sure, you might get some Easter Eggs, understand the concept of the opening a little more, or know who Mark Duplass’s character is working for before he says it. One of the reasons for its impressive opening is that there are a lot of existing fans keen to lap up more of the mythos. We knew next to nothing about any of that, but we still followed every step and revelled in the experience without being confused. The decision to focus on the story from the viewpoints of Clark and Mary helps in this, as they are bewildered “newbies” to the situation and have to adapt to their discoveries, allowing us backroom virgins a get-in to the fun and opening up the potential for growth without stifling the existing lore. Secondly, the final product is a marvellously tight melding of arthouse horror and mainstream scares that avoids any pretension and still allows for boggled-eyed “monsters” and “gotcha” moments. It’s like David Lynch meets Roger Corman. If that seems unlikely, wait until you get a load of the dinnertime sequence and are introduced to the good Cap’n. Arrr!

 

It’s quite telling that Mark Duplass went online a few days ago to publicly state that neither he nor any of the previously mentioned producers had a hand in directing Backrooms. In a typically arse-about-internet way, this was almost a compliment as people apparently had a problem believing that Parsons could go from YouTuber to an accomplished director of a $10m budget film. But the rumours are bullshit, and this is an incredibly assured and innovative expansion for Backrooms. It probably helps that he is so comfortable with the subject matter, but the deftness of touch and cinematic flourishes he brings her are top-notch. From using cheap graphic tools in the original shorts, these vast and eerie sets were built for real and ended up scaring some of the actual cast! And it plays into that universal fear of the unknown, which becomes compelling every time Clark or Mary interlopes on its boundaries. There’s no mistake that during the POV sequences, the camera jitters nervously and peers around corners and behind itself, just like in a game, as that’s the main focus of tension. Small hints at malevolent occupants shred the nerves as the characters become frantic in finding safe routes or areas.

 

It helps that Ejiofor and Reinsve are so damned good as the leads. The narrative is essentially a two-pronged character study on these people and the effect their experience has on them (and the Backrooms). Each one comes with a lot of baggage. Ejiofor’s Clark is embittered and lonely, suppressing some anger management and addiction issues. Mary has a tragic childhood and peddles easy junk psychology on the TV, despite being well aware that it doesn’t necessarily work and that she is a living example of that. Parsons manages to convey all that with some realistic interactions between the pair (where the dialogue crackles at times) and also with some flashback/dream montages (which sounds hoary and cliched, but it’s not). However, it’s when they react to their freaky surroundings (and other things) that these actors really sell the situation. It’s hard to fault their WTF?! faces and quirky reactions as they experience abnormal terror in their surroundings. This also allows for the more metaphysical and esoteric aspects to be underlined. It’s hinted that this “space” is almost sentient and remembers elements of the people and situations it encounters. Hence, people therein are almost running through their own minds and meeting dangers of their own making. Watch out for plenty of familiar objects and an extremely chilling final shot that bears this out.

 

It’s easy to get caught up in all the Freudian nuances about “being your own worst enemy” and “making your own monsters”. But this is just as effective as a straightforward sci-fi thriller, and you don’t need to think about it to that depth if you don’t want to. Suffice to say, there are some cracking sequences of high tension, such as the moment involving a slanting corridor and a climbing rope (always pull the rope up after yourself!!), Clark’s first foray into the Rooms with offscreen stalking, and the Escher-skewed chase sequence that would be hilarious if it wasn’t so bloody terrifying! You would think a film that lasts nearly two hours, has a minimal cast, and involves characters walking through endless beige rooms would stretch your patience. It doesn’t. It sails by, and the pace barely slackens at any point. It does become a little more genre-oriented and prone to tropes towards the end, but that is entirely forgivable given what it provides and how we get there. Slight finger-wag for the “closing walls” image that’s used for the poster and the trailer, though, as that is very misleading as to what it actually represents in the film.

 

Suffice to say, we were sceptical that this film would be so good and valid as a singular experience. Do not be put off by the metaphysical mumbo-jumbo and discussions of the human psyche that will invariably go with articles about this film. It’s just a damned good, well-made, nicely acted, visually striking, icily scary movie at the end of the day. Love the short films? Sure. You’ll probably love this too. But you don’t need to do the research. It works as it is. There are some mature discussions and big ideas, along with the “Aaargh-something’s-chasing-me” thrills. Best of all, you aren’t spoon-fed explanations and origins, although they’re sort of there if you want them. You’ll be teased and scared enough to be satisfied by that final shot, but you won’t have all the answers, and you’ll have questions to ponder over. We’ll leave you with one of ours, that’ll only make sense once you’ve seen the film. How the hell did he figure out that he could eat them??!