"A mother and her young son release unimaginable horrors from the attic of their rural dream home."
I'm going to address the elephant in the room straight away: "The Disappointments Room" is aptly named. Everyone can now sit back smugly and chuckle, because saying that is about as obvious and predictable as everything else in this ghostie movie.
It's such a shame when a movie like this fails to deliver, especially as everything was in place for it to be good. The North Carolina location is fantastic, Kate Beckinsale in a blonde wig is still as beautiful as ever, and there's even a cat in the story. Unfortunately, "The Disappointments Room" contains nothing which hasn't been done before, or more importantly, done better.
If you can't guess how "The Disappointments Room" is going to go after the first ten minutes, either you haven't seen enough horror movies (which is possibly a good thing) or you haven't realised the formulaic nature of just about every "ghosts and hauntings" movie ever made. You can be sure that director D.J. Caruso and his co-writer Wentworth Miller have seen everything though, and they've thrown as many tropes as they could into this in arguably not the best manner. Having said that, there are some good moments among the unoriginality, but even then, they aren't great.
Acting-wise, it's okay. Kate Beckinsale seems to have become the Belén Rueda of American horror, and will probably continue in the same vein for years to come. She's always technically been a MILF, but now she's playing one as part of the plot, and there's nothing wrong with that. Her supporting cast, because let's keep it real here, don't have much to do or very much screen time, but they are perfectly acceptable. The storytelling is a bit rushed, and it's that element more than any other which makes "The Disappointments Room" into more of a generic product than something you would want in your collection.
Gerald McRaney's role is woefully small but important, but hey, it's not the size but what you do with it, right? Fortunately, a potentially annoying child in the form of Duncan Joiner playing Lucas is also nipped in the bud early on. The latter has an encounter which is so obviously cribbed from "The Shining" that of course it works, and he's not such an irritating little piss afterwards.
"Bones" fans will spot Michaela Conlin for a few seconds with no discernable lines of dialogue, but who cares? She's in it, it's another IMDb credit, and the point of her character is made. For those who might blink and miss it, Lucas Till's character Ben pretty much nails why the rich, middle-aged "yuppies" have moved to the countryside anyway in a buzzkill, quasi "meta-cinema" line which isn't wasted at all. Some slight socio-political commentary there, maybe? On the plus side, maybe not.
If you want to see more original (although still highly formulaic) stories in the "ghosts/haunted house with a mystery" subgenre, you can choose from "The Uninvited" (1944), "The Haunted" (1963), "Don't Be Afraid of the Dark" (1973), "Burnt Offerings" (1976), "The Haunting Passion" (1983), "The Haunting of Seacliff Inn" (1994), "House of the Damned" (1996), "The Others" (2001), "Penny Dreadful" (2005), "The Orphanage" (2007), "The Abandoned" (2015), and literally hundreds if not thousands more. There's even enough of the "architects renovating a building and setting ghosts loose" movies that they have become yet another subgenre in their own right. One that springs to mind from only a couple of years ago, "Altar" (2014), was almost the same story as this but set in a windswept manor in Northern England.
If you're a Kate Beckinsale fan, you'll love her in "The Disappointments Room". If you're a ghost story fan, you'll watch this anyway for completeness. But if you're looking for originality, something like this (or anything recent in the whole horror genre) is not for you.
"A family whose suburban home is haunted by evil forces must come together to rescue their youngest daughter after the apparitions take her captive."
Oh God, here we go with the unnecessary remakes again! 'Tis the season! Not that I'm opposed to every remake. Some of them have been better than the originals, particularly in nearly every case of the Asian horror movies which I once collected.
Yeah, some of those remakes are on the Ghost House Pictures label, the same company who are the producers of this movie, so you'd think that they would know what they were doing by now. You'd be wrong, of course. So very wrong.
Look, I'm sure that you know exactly what I'm going to say about "Poltergeist" before I even write it, so let's cut straight through the chase here.
The remake of "Poltergeist" is complete and utter shite!
Print that on the eventual Blu-ray slipcase!
I don't feel the need to back this up with any reasons. It's already bad enough that I wasted my time and money by watching this soulless piece of crap, and I don't want to torture myself more by writing about it. And no, it has nothing to do with nostalgia.
I've always disliked the original 1982 version because it only has one scene in it which even resembles real poltergeist activity, i.e. the stacking chairs one, and thus even the title of the movie was a bait and switch con job. Fundamentally, the rest of "Poltergeist" is a padded and updated ripoff of the "Little Girl Lost" episode from "The Twilight Zone" TV series anyway.
I can't stand the dope-smoking parents, or the irritating kids, and jump scares don't work on me. On top of that, the smug ghosthunting team and that awful Tangina thing grip my shit. The only two things which I care to remember fondly from the whole ordeal are JoBeth Williams' beautiful shiny legs. That's it.
In my opinion, the original "Poltergeist" is a stupid but fairly harmless, family-friendly Spielberg fantasy in everything but the director's name. I have no idea if Tobe Hooper really directed it or not. I don't care. I simply don't like "Poltergeist". I'm not an American, I don't connect with the suburban situation or the characters, and I have absolutely no nostalgic feelings about it whatsoever. Just waves and waves of bitter disappointment that it isn't actually about poltergeists.
And you know what? I don't like the sequels either.
"Poltergeist II: The Other Side" (1986) seems like an inferior ripoff of John G. Jones' genuinely terrifying "The Amityville Horror Part II" (1982) novel to me, and "Poltergeist III" (1988) is nothing but a badly made final cash grab which isn't worth piss. Back in the day, I only got through that mess of a movie because I didn't want to completely waste the VHS rental fee. It then turned into a waste both of money and part of my life. Fuck that movie too!
As for this "Poltergeist" remake. I've said all that I want to. If you need further validation, I recommend that you read round the other independent reviewers rather than the "big name" sites carrying those enormous "Poltergeist" advertisements. We all feel much the same way. There's probably nothing different on any of the free blogs which I wouldn't have said about "Poltergeist" myself if I even gave two shits about it, but the most condemnation that the shill sites will dare to write is "Well, it's not bad for a remake..." Fuck that noise!
Just watch the IMDb score drop over the weekend as more people find out the truth for themselves. It's only on 5.8 now! The comments on the official Facebook page are hilariously illuminating too. "Poltergeist is bad, it's really bad. It's "A Nightmare on Elm Street" remake bad! It's too modern, truncated, the ending is rushed, the acting/characterisation is horrible, there's no chemistry, no emotion, it isn't scary... Oh, you nearly got me there. No, I'm not doing this anymore. No more negativity!!! I'm outta here!
If you're really that desperate for a "Poltergeist" remake, try "Grave Secrets: The Legacy of Hilltop Drive" (1992) or "Insidious" (2010) instead. I haven't reviewed them either.
"The ghost of a teenager who died years ago reaches out to the land of the living in order to save someone from suffering her same fate."
Remember Vincenzo Natali the director of "Cube" (1997) and "Splice" (2009)? Well, he's back with a supernatural mystery which is available via VOD just in time for Hallowe'en. Don't get too excited, though, because "Haunter" tries to be more cerebral than scary and fails at being either.
The biggest problem is that "Haunter" is another typically Canadian remix of over half a dozen already extremely well known movies and at least two recent TV shows.
The first things I thought of when I started watching it were "Groundhog Day" (1993), "The Lovely Bones" (2009), "Voices" (1973), and "Lady in White" (1988), but there are also some quite blatant borrowings from "The Others" (2001), "Marchlands", and "American Horror Story". Throw in a few tiny homages to "The Collector" (1965), "The Matrix" (1999), and even "Dark Skies" (2013), and you have your movie.
If the wind changes, you'll stay like that. Oh wait...
As "Haunter" is essentially a ghost story, there are bound to be some formulaic similarities to previous ghost stories, but that's still no excuse for all the cloning. It's laziness for the most part, although it's dangerously close to plagiarism in others. I've only read parts of "The Lovely Bones" novel and have never seen Peter Jackson's movie adaptation, but if I can see the resemblances, I'm sure Alice Sebold will!
I'm not saying that "Haunter" isn't fairly enjoyable or well made. The cinematography borders on beautiful, and atmospherically, it's not a million miles away from Spanish thrillers such as "The Orphanage" (2007) or several of the more "girlie" Asian horrors. The acting is competent too, apart from Abigail Breslin who only has one big-eyed expression and is prone to sighing, gasping, and breathing heavily to compensate. Consequently, there are more close-ups than are strictly necessary, but that's a minor niggle.
The three time periods of 1985, the present day, and the late 1950s look the part as far as I can tell. As somebody who has no idea what Ontario looked like in the main 1985 time zone, I assume that kids were into much the same things as I was, but I'm a bit dubious about the Atari games console or Siousxie and the Banshees still being popular in the mid-80s rather than 3 or 4 years before. I've always imagined Canada as being a few years behind everyone else, so maybe it's spot on. My Canadian readers will have to let me know.
Overall, "Haunter" is a decent but very predictable PG-13 ghost story with no scares, no swearing or nudity, and very little violence. It's an upgrade for teenage fans of "Goosebumps" or "Are You Afraid of the Dark", but it's far too kiddified if you're an adult. I'll give it an extra point because it held my interest to the end.
"A couple facing marital problems after losing their child finds their life together further complicated by a mysterious visitor."
Very slow and filmed using a handheld camera by someone obviously afflicted with Parkinson's disease, "Static" is a predictable hybrid of "The Strangers" (2008) and "Voices" (1973).
Apart from Sarah Shahi being absolutely gorgeous, that's all you really need to know unless you want the twist spoiled. The clue is in the gas masks not actually being gas masks, but if you look closely at the DVD artwork, you'll probably realise that for yourself.
As you would expect from a cast including Milo Ventimiglia, Sarah Shahi, Sarah Paxton, and a cameo from William Mapother (aka Ethan from "Lost"), the acting is okay. It's TV movie quality acting, of course, but there's nothing wrong with that. It's competent enough for what it is. It's just a pity that the ending is so unoriginal, and there aren't any scares.
"A year after their son goes missing, a family moves to Crickley Hall. When supernatural events begin to take place, Eve feels the house is somehow connected to her lost son."
It's been so long since I read James Herbert's 2006 novel which the BBC adapted for this lacklustre Hallowe'en TV offering that I almost forgot what a derivative crock of shit it was. I'm not going to say that Herbie plagiarised "The Devil's Backbone" (2001), but he was clearly influenced by it before "Britishing-up" the story. If he says otherwise, I'll find it very difficult to believe him. It wouldn't be the first time that James Herbert sailed too close to the wind as his famous lawsuit over "The Spear" will confirm. His "Sepulchre" is hardly a million miles away from Clive Barker's "The Damnation Game" as far I remember either.
In fairness, the classic "ghost story with children in it" pattern goes back even before "The Haunting" (1963) or "The Innocents" (1961); both of which have influenced every ghost story ever since. With so many supernatural movies in such a short space of time including "The Others" (2001), "Saint Ange" (2004), "Fragile" (2005), "The Orphanage" (2007), the TV series "Marchlands" (2011), and the even more recent "The Awakening" (2011), it's pretty obvious that there would be some similarities.
Given the basic premise, I'd be foolish not to throw in "The Dark" (2005) and "Half Light" (2006) as more of the same unimaginative cloning from the last decade although "The Haunting of Julia" (1977) and "The Changeling" (1981) also dealt with the "bereavement and haunting" formula long before them. There's just nothing new when it comes to ghost stories.
If you look further into the "six degrees of separation" style connections around "The Secret of Crickley Hall" as a TV miniseries, it's far more amusing where they lead. Director Joe Ahearne is most famous for "This Life" which I'm sure I've mentioned on this blog before as being the series which gave Andrew Lincoln of "The Walking Dead" fame his big break. In between the two, Andrew Lincoln was in "Afterlife" (2006) where he played a bereaved father who had lost his son and teamed up with a psychic played by Lesley Sharp. That series was written by Stephen Volk who wrote "The Awakening" (2011). Although there's no real connection, Lesley Sharp was in an episode of "Doctor Who" and so was Tom Ellis who stars in "The Secret of Crickley Hall". They weren't in the same episode or even the episodes of "Doctor Who" which were written by Joe Ahearne, but you can still smell the BBC nepotism a mile away.
Tom Ellis as Gabe.
Just to complicate matters even more, James Herbert's "Haunted" was originally a screenplay which was rejected as a BBC miniseries, Stephen Volk wrote the BBC's infamous "Ghostwatch" (1992), and Lesley Sharp recently appeared in "Whistle and I'll Come to You" (2010) - another BBC ghost story. If you also look at Tom Ellis' list of acting credits on the IMDb, he's a definite BBC regular and also appeared in "The Fades" - the axed supernatural drama from 2010. It doesn't take a genius to work out that all these people know each other or of each other to some extent. How many generic ghost stories were passed between the writers and the decision makers at the BBC is another matter though. There are too many coincidences for there not to be some collusion along the way. And people say that Hollywood is shady!
Conspiracy theories aside, it will always look like Herbert copied Volk who then copied Herbert back before Ahearne was brought into the shenanigans. The rivalry and borrowing by all three writers is probably more noticeable than any of them realise themselves.
After all this rambling, the main problem with "The Secret of Crickley Hall" is that it's an overlong story which can be condensed into one or two sentences. Basically, there's a wartime orphanage/home for evacuees where the sadistic governor kills a little boy by circumcising him so severely that he cuts his pecker off in the process. The governor covers up the crime during a flood and ends up as a ghost along with all the children he abused. In the present day, a family whose son was kidnapped a year ago go to live in the former orphanage, and all the ghosties get riled up to solve two mysteries in one.
Give or take a couple of even more sordid details, that's "The Secret of Crickley Hall" in a nutshell (pardon the pun). Indeed, it could be retitled, "The Legend of the Mutilated Peepee" since that's the big secret. I don't care that this is a spoiler because I can pretty much guarantee that you won't see the little "Jewish" boy get mutilated or "The Secret of Crickley Hall" turn into "The Jew Who Bled To Death". Oh, no, the politically correct BBC won't dare risk upsetting anybody with that. The last time they were brave enough to be controversial in a drama was when Dennis Potter was still alive. Curiously, they don't seem to care about overpaid Jonathan Ross or Jeremy Clarkson flapping their insulting gums though.
As a miniseries, "The Secret of Crickley Hall" tones down the really disgusting stuff to such an extent that the barebones story is boring beyond belief. The book was short of scares anyway, but the brutality, paedophilia and incest which covered its weaknesses are scarcely touched upon in this pussified TV adaptation. I remember when the BBC used to have more balls. Honestly, "The Secret of Crickley Hall" makes me ashamed to be a British horror fan. What the Hell has happened to Britain since I've been away? What happened to all the gritty dramas?
Olivia Cooke as Nancy.
The characters in "The Secret of Crickley Hall" are merely stereotypical ciphers to move on the uninspired plot anyway, but the deadpan delivery of the actors in this miniseries is reprehensible. Olivia Cooke is the worst culprit. Although she's very pretty, and looks young enough to be in the orphanage as one of the orphans rather than their teacher, her monotone voice can't be disguised by cutely letting one glycerine tear run down her cheek. Could she act as if she cared even less? Can she act though? Probably not since she has to be all of 16 years old.
As for Tom Ellis (a.k.a. Dr Oliver from "Eastenders"), he's a little bit better as the sceptical Gabe Caleigh even though his taste in women must have gone on the wonk for him to end up with Suranne Jones (the mouthy one from "Coronation Street") as his onscreen wife. Okay, so a higher power miscast them together, but that's not how those of us with an unwilling suspension of disbelief view such a lack of chemistry or realism. All you want to say is, "He could have done so much better!" At least neither of them has mispronounced the word "us" as "uzzz" yet despite playing Northerners.
There's some bizarre thing about little fingers and a psychic link which makes absolutely no sense either. There doesn't even appear to be anything odd about Suranne Jones' hands in close-up so I have no idea what that's all about. Either it's a poor effect, bad camerawork, something that seemed more important in the script than it really was, or just feeble execution to match every other part of this travesty. It's hard to tell amidst the conflation and censorship. The psychic link homages "The Shining", of course, as does Tom Ellis' bad "Here's Johnny!" impression. I don't think he even tried to do any better. I can't blame him.
Suranne Jones as Eve.
Poor old David Warner has been wheeled out for this thing too as the old guy who used to be a young guy and knows everything. I've forgotten the name of that trope, but, yes, it's yet another familiar one. It's nice to see David Warner in something again, and he's the best actor in "The Secret of Crickley Hall" anyway. Not to take anything away from Donald Sumpter who has been in absolutely everything over the years, but he's not much cop (pardon another pun since he was in "The Bill") as a paranormal investigator. If he has more than four lines in the final episode, I will be shocked.
It's no surprise that both veteran actors have also been in "Doctor Who" recently. "The Secret of Crickley Hall" could even be "Former Doctor Who Actors Do Ghosties" if you want to be a real bitch about it. I suppose it makes a change from "Eastenders Does Ghosties" which has already been done to death.
I have no idea why the setting was changed from Devon to "oop North" except that occasionally the BBC vainly attempts to make Southerners believe that anywhere above Watford isn't full of Neanderthals who eat their own young. It's probably part of the same equal opportunities nonsense at the BBC which has forced every gay and racial minority actor into "Doctor Who" and "Eastenders" over the years. Yes, all six of them have been assured work by the same hypocritical company which allegedly turned a blind eye to Jimmy Saville interfering with little kids for over 40 years. Following that scandal, no wonder the BBC started to get cold feet about airing "The Secret of Crickley Hall". The ironic reminders in the subject matter are uncomfortably close to home, and there aren't any black or gay characters to redress the balance.
Susan Lynch as Lili.
The BBC missed a golden opportunity to replace the psychic with a Jamaican or Indian, but at least they've stayed truer to the book there. They couldn't use anyone Scottish either without reminding everyone of their stupid decision to axe "Sea of Souls". Knowing that Susan Lynch, who plays Lili Peel, fills the "minority" quotient by being Irish somewhat amused me. I bet someone at some point wanted Lesley Sharp for the role except that would have really given away how similar the present day part of "The Secret of Crickley Hall" is to "Afterlife". I still noticed though.
Since I'm writing this after seeing only two episodes, I can't say if the final one will improve anything. I missed "The Secret of Crickley Hall" when it was shown on BBC America (on October 28th) so I've had to follow the postponed UK schedule. I'm sure that the story won't change that much from the novel unless gay aliens fly in and abduct everybody or something comes out of left field like that. You can never tell what will happen with BBC TV adaptations of horror books as "The Haunted Airman" or any of M.R. James' ghost stories over the years can attest to. If it was a Stephen King adaptation, we would all be waiting for another giant spider so be thankful that this is James Herbert. Herbie just likes to destroy everything at the end so be prepared to see your licence fee wasted on some half-arsed flooding effects or explosions.
With the story taking place in two time periods, the most interesting parts seem to happen in World War II. Whether or not that continues, we will just have to wait and see. "The Secret of Crickley Hall" concludes tomorrow.
"Supposedly based partially on a true story, a woman is tormented and sexually molested by an invisible demon."
We're on the vinegar strokes now with only two days left until Hallowe'en (although it's really three if you include the final daytime) so here's another supernatural '80s classic to get you in the mood.
Unlike most '80s movies which I've reviewed, I didn't see "The Entity" when it first came out. I'd heard about it and seen the advertisements for it in the newspaper, but it didn't really appeal to me. I think it must have been overshadowed by "Poltergeist" which had similar subject matter, and I made the wrong decision by only seeing the latter theatrically. I don't think I even saw "The Entity" for the first time until the mid-1990s when it was shown on TV.
I've made up for youthful lack of judgement now that I've seen "The Entity" half a dozen times since (including rewatching it only a couple of hours ago), but I have to say that I've never found it particularly scary. The trouble is that I enjoy "The Entity" far more as a means to ogle Barbara Hershey than for any reason. I'm sure I'm not alone in this as the exploitation aspects of "The Entity", and the manipulation of Barbara Hershey's fun bits with jets of air to resemble fingers, are likely to induce even more lecherousness from a modern audience.
Let's be honest here, most people who went to see "The Entity" at the cinema also only did so because they wanted to see Barbara Hershey naked. I can't blame them for it because she was very sexy back then. Although she's started to look as scary as Karen Black nowadays, there was something very attractive about Barbara Hershey in her prime which had very little to do with her otherwise average looks. Depending on the angle and the lighting, Barbara Hershey can appear 10 years younger or 10 years older in "The Entity" which makes her appeal a large range of the horny male population although not without some obvious confusion being caused for MILF fanatics.
Of course, Barbara Hershey used her gifts to full advantage in her role as Carla Moran with facial expressions which either make her look like a vulnerable little girl or an empowered warrior princess depending on the scene. I'm still not sure how much of Barbara Hershey's performance in "The Entity" is actually good acting rather than just the fact that I fancy her, but I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not going to write a thorough review of "The Entity" since it's over two hours long (some would say overlong), and I'm sure you are very familiar with it anyway. I will just say that I never realised until fairly recently that "The Entity" was directed by the same Sidney J. Furie who directed "Doctor Blood's Coffin" and "The Ipcress File" (1965). Neither of them are particularly great movies, but both have a cult following especially by me.
I'm sure you also know that "The Entity" was based on the book of the same name by Frank DeFelitta which, in turn, was based on the true story of Doris Bither. Obviously, quite a few dramatic liberties were taken in both the novel and the movie, but the story itself is certainly very scary if it's really true. If you want to know more, Google is your friend.
"The Entity" adds a few suggestions about incestuous thoughts and their manifestation into poltergeist activity which have no part of the "true story", but they work fairly well dramatically despite being a red herring. Just look at the way Carla touches her son as she's talking to him at the beginning of the film as it's all very icky. Is the boy's later broken arm a metaphorical warning against Oedipal masturbation? Probably not, but I'm sure somebody would think so.
90% of the male characters in "The Entity" aren't very likeable and they all represent "types". I would love to see someone write an article on the subject. Maybe I'll write one eventually since it's on my list of things to do along with one about the relationships in "Stir of Echoes". Suffice it to say that Ron Silver comes across as a bit creepy as the psychiatrist Phil Sneiderman, and Alex Rocco as Jerry Anderson (nothing to do with the late creator of "Thunderbirds") is very sketchy too.
Although I have no problem with recommending "The Entity" to all lovers of the supernatural and paranormal, it isn't without some massive flaws. Not only are the blue, lightning-like, electrical effects (as also used in "Prom Night II") quite dated, but the thumping guitar chords and drums whenever anything spooky happens gets annoying pretty fast. The last 20 minutes are way too far-fetched and do their best to ruin the atmosphere of the rest of the film plus there's no real resolution at the end. Listen carefully to the last words the entity itself speaks for a quick chuckle.
For an '80s "horror" movie, "The Entity" can seem far more like a '70s exploitation flick in places if you are in the right (or wrong) frame of mind. I'm not sure how polarising the experience will be if you watch it in company so be prepared to watch this on your own as a kind of guilty pleasure. If you want to have the willies put up you or just want to see Barbara Hershey get several invisible willies put up her, "The Entity" is the film for you.
"A tour guide at a notorious haunted house gets more than she bargained for during an unauthorized ghost-hunting session with friends."
As someone who gave up on ever seeing anything good come from "The Asylum" a very long time ago, I was in two minds about hiring "The Haunting of Whaley House". On one hand, it had a couple of my internet friends in it, but on the other, the closest "The Asylum" ever came to making a decent horror movie was "Paranormal Entity" (2009), and that has been turning on up in those pitiful Echo Bridge DVD compilations ever since. I wanted it to be okay, but I feared the worst.
I'd never heard of the Whaley House in San Diego or any of the true ghost stories surrounding it so, of course, I Googled it. Although the Wikipedia article was a bit brief, I also found another one from the Los Angeles Times which was obviously the inspiration for part of this film. Trust me, it's better if you read both these articles after watching "The Haunting of Whaley House" rather than before.
Apart from "Coolduder" (Shawn C. Phillips) who had a couple of amusing minutes at the start, and, of course, the very recognisable Maria Olsen who played yet another creepy character, I didn't know the names of anyone else in the cast. The truth is, I don't think many of them had ever been in a movie before, and it showed. The acting was inconsistent at best (and non-existent most of the time), but it was never so completely horrible that I wanted to stop watching. Against my normally better judgement, I actually found "The Haunting of Whaley House" to be quite enjoyable for a B (or even C) grade horror movie.
Although Stephanie Greco was the only one who stood out in a very good way, it wasn't just because she was the prettiest. Compared to the other cast members, she could definitely act a bit too. I sort of liked all of the actors/characters really apart from the psychic, Keith Drummond (Howard McNair), who got on my nerves at times with his "ITV agony aunt" style of speaking.
One major flaw in the whole production was that it started off too light and schizophrenically alternated between trying to be a serious ghost story and a comedy from then on. "The Haunting of Whaley House" needed to be one thing or the other as, despite some creepy moments, it was a bit of a failure as far as scares were concerned. It had a very '80s feel to it at times, but that wasn't necessarily a good thing especially if, like me, you don't think much of most '80s horror movies in the first place.
The set design for the Whaley House was very well done, and I have a feeling that was where most of the estimated $115,000 budget went since none of this was filmed in the real Whaley House. I'd also guess that a lot of time went into the make-up effects which were above average for this kind of thing too. The ghosts really were quite terrifying to look at during the far too few occasions when they were seen.
Overall, I was very entertained by "The Haunting of Whaley House". Even though I'd rate it as well below average when compared to a classic haunted house movie such as "The Haunting" (1963), I liked how it cleverly worked all of the true Whaley House ghost stories into its plot, and so it gets a recommendation from me.
"A team of parapsychologists try to figure out a strange phenomenon occurring in an apartment building."
Since I'm in request mode this week, I decided to watch "Apartment 143" so that I could reply to someone who asked about it in a Facebook group that I belong to. As with most faux found footage movies, I pretty much hated its lack of originality immediately, and it really didn't get any better for me as the story progressed.
If you imagine a found footage version of "The Haunting" (1963), but change the location to someone's boring and sparsely furnished American apartment, you have the setting for this absolute turd of a movie. Then just downgrade the number of paranormal researchers to three and make them completely unlikeable and you almost have this film in its entirety minus, of course, the equally unlikeable family of three whose haunting was being investigated.
From just reading through the titles of a lot of blog posts rather than skimming the reviews themselves, I've noticed that a lot of reviewers have compared "Apartment 143" to the "Paranormal Activity" series. For me, it was more like an even cheaper ripoff of "Ghostwatch" (1992) but without the TV show background. In fact, that's the problem with "Apartment 143". It was like so many other movies in the same subgenre that it was more noticeable for what it lacked than for what it tried to add. As someone put it on another blog, "it had way too much of nothing going on".
Everything about "Apartment 143" was predictable including the two good effects and the lame twist at the end. I honestly sat here timing the final jump scare and it was almost exactly to the second the same as the long pause before the voting results on the "X Factor". For those of you who are unfamiliar with that annoyance, basically, my expectations had already peaked and turned to boredom before the punchline was delivered.
I suppose they tried to make this into more of a poltergeist movie than a real haunting with the clichéd scientific explanation which was delivered by the professor character in one go rather than let the shocking revelation build-up naturally from the story itself. I very nearly fell for it though and started to think that it was kind of neat to actually have a poltergeist story since even Steven Spielberg didn't manage to do that properly. Unfortunately, they just had to go and ruin it all with even more heavy-handedness.
As the camerawork was nearly all done with handheld shakycams, I had to give it 0 out 10 for that element. Call me old-fashioned, but I do actually like to see what is happening on screen without wanting to vomit up my dinner. There was even a scene with a strobe light effect which really hurt my eyes and would probably cause an epileptic seizure for anyone susceptible to such things.
The ten minutes of screaming and destruction which happened twenty minutes from the end was so loud that it hurt my delicate little ears, and forced me to turn the volume right down. I probably should have kept the sound off and left "Apartment 143" at that point because the rest of the movie wasn't much more than a badly tacked-on epilogue anyway.
Guess where "Apartment 143" is going? That's right, it's another one for "The Dungeon". There was nothing in this which hadn't been done better at least fifty times before.
"Dr. Markway, doing research to prove the existence of ghosts, investigates Hill House, a large, eerie mansion with a lurid history of violent death and insanity."
Based on the novel, "The Haunting of Hill House" by Shirley Jackson, this Robert Wise film is still the quintessential ghost story. With its atmospheric black and white cinematography, it has all the elements you need to make a ghostie film scary apart from one thing - there are no onscreen ghosts! Everything is done with camera angles and noises plus a lot of tension.
I first heard about "The Haunting" when the horror author James Herbert gave it as his favourite movie during a BBC documentary in the early '90s. It had never been shown on television, wasn't available on video cassette, and had pretty much been forgotten about. Suffice it to say that the demand for the movie increased enormously once James Herbert talked about it, but it was still a few years before it did finally appear on VHS in the UK.
I'm not sure what year it was when I saw "The Haunting" for the first time but I would guess that it was close to the end of the '90s. I already knew what it was about by then, but I wasn't disappointed. I found it to be very character driven and got caught up in the story even though the dialogue was very dated and often embarrassing to listen to.
The worst culprit was Russ Tamblyn's character who, as a former musical star of some kind, came across as a little bit too "hip" and didn't seem to be acting at all for most of his role. Nearly every word he spoke made me cringe. Maybe he was meant to since, in fairness, every character was intentionally a stereotype anyway.
The four stereotypes presented, from sceptical professor to frustrated psychic spinster, have been used over and over in every "team investigates a haunted house" film ever since. With hindsight, that alone should have made "The Haunting" a classic. Their reactions to the various supernatural phenomena absolutely guaranteed it.
There are very few movies which actually scare me and, unfortunately, "The Haunting" was more of a curiosity (like old "Twilight Zone" episodes) rather than something which I could truly call terrifying. I've tried watching it alone, in the dark, with the wind and rain rattling the windows, but I've never been able to conjure up the magic that must have been there for the original theatrical audiences. If you haven't seen a lot of horror movies, however, it may still work for you.
I've recommended "The Haunting" before to people who have children who they want to initiate into the horror genre since it has nothing gory in it or anything too adult which would need a lot of embarrassing explanation. Apart from Claire Bloom's character, Theo, having very mildly hinted-at lesbian tendencies (which I'm still not entirely sure about), I would still say that "The Haunting" was suitable for all ages. There's nothing sexual, no swear words, no violence, no big scary monsters; in fact, it barely qualifies as a horror movie at all when compared to what we have today.
If you find it scary, "The Haunting" may be all the proof that you'll ever need to win an argument that a horror movie doesn't need to have buckets of blood or people being tortured to have an emotional effect on you. "The Haunting" was a success because it was all about what you couldn't see. It's a shame that most of us no longer have the imagination to appreciate it.
"After the death of her daughter, Julia Lofting, a wealthy housewife, moves to London to re-start her life. All seems well until she is haunted by the sadness of losing her own child and the ghosts of other children."
Also known as "Full Circle" for no apparent reason, this was another VHS movie which I watched during my internet downtime, although, of course, it's available to watch in half a dozen different places on YouTube. I've posted one of those sources above since you won't find this on DVD except as a bootleg.
Even for someone who likes ghostie movies as much as I do, this was quite a struggle to get through. Although the story started off being similar to "Half Light" (2006), it soon got quite confusing and plodded along quite depressingly. It also reminded me of "Don't Look Now" (1973) and "The Dark" (2005), but only at the most superficial level of having the loss of a child at the beginning.
There was nothing very original about "The Haunting of Julia" even for the time other than it being really mean-spirited in the truest and most pun-filled sense of the word. The ghost in this was out to kill people for apparently no reason at all. If you can find any motivation for why the spirit was so vengeful, feel free to leave a comment below and tell me because I must have missed it.
The scares were genuinely scary, the atmosphere was very morbid, but the mystery of why things were happening eventually turned out to be too contrived for its own good, and I really didn't like the downbeat ending.
What interested me the most about the film was seeing a lot of actors who I'd almost forgotten about. Keir Dullea (from "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Black Christmas"), Tom Conti (who was recently in "The Dark Knight Rises"), and Anna Wing (from "Eastenders") were all in this. Even Peter Sallis and Nigel Havers turned up in bit parts. None of the bigger characters had much time on screen which was probably a good thing since they were very alienating and easily dislikeable.
I'm tempted to say that my main problem was that the story was so centred on Mia Farrow who I've never found that appealing. Big fans of her work would probably say that her performance here was only slightly short of excellent. She could definitely act, but, because her character came across as nervous, neurotic and socially awkward, I didn't think it was any different to the role she played in "Rosemary's Baby" (1968) which irritated me as well.
Based on a novel by Peter Straub, "The Haunting of Julia" was little more than a vehicle for Mia Farrow to play the same character that she did in every other movie that I've ever seen her in except even more miserably.
I'll probably get hated for this, but I can't rate "The Haunting of Julia" any higher than average.
"In 1921, England is overwhelmed by the loss and grief of World War I. Hoax exposer Florence Cathcart visits a boarding school to explain sightings of a child ghost. Everything she believes unravels as the 'missing' begin to show themselves."
"The Awakening" is the last ghostie film for this month and one which has taken nearly a year since its UK release for me to see. It was worth the wait.
Although it's very similar to "The Others", "Saint Ange" and "The Orphanage", it's different enough from all those to merit a place in the "The Vault". Yes, it really is that good.
At first, I thought that "The Awakening" was going to be no more than average. For obvious reasons, it has that made-for-TV look about it which the BBC does so well with supernatural dramas, even if none of them are ever all that scary. Stephen Volk wrote the screenplay, and since he's known for "Ghostwatch" and ITV's "Afterlife" TV series, I was a bit worried that everything would be PG-13 and a little bit "safe", if you know what I mean.
As an R-rated movie, "The Awakening" certainly goes into a few places which I didn't expect it to, and it's a lot more adult in terms of a more cerebral storyline. I'd still say that it's basically a PG-13 with a couple of moments of adult padding overall though. If I was to compare "The Awakening" to one of the later James Herbert novels rather than "Haunted" (which you may know was originally a BBC screenplay before becoming a book or a movie) then you'll also be able to spot both its strengths and its weaknesses.
There's certainly a creepy atmosphere to "The Awakening" which builds and then falls away again almost as quickly as the jump scares. Hardcore horror fans wouldn't be particularly frightened by this story, but it's definitely not something for little kids to watch. Some of the scenes are quite traumatic and of such a very adult nature that you'd have a lot of explaining to do. I only mention the latter because there really are some parents who are stupid enough to let children watch R-rated horror movies even though their little cherubs aren't legally old enough to buy them or understand what they are seeing.
What made this story work for me was the absolutely fantastic acting. Dominic West and Rebecca Hall have some great chemistry together which I'll say more about in a moment. Even Tom, the little boy played by Isaac Hempstead Wright, is good and not at all annoying like most British kids with posh accents are in this kind of movie.
I don't know anything about Rebecca Hall because I don't think that I've ever seen her in anything else. Trust me, if I had then I would have remembered it. She's beautiful and is completely credible in her role as a sceptical ghosthunter. The more I looked at her, the more I wanted to see of her. I wasn't disappointed either as she does get nude for a moment and it's everything that I expected it to be. She delivers on the tease, it isn't gratuitous, and, yes, I was very appreciative.
For those who wouldn't be impressed by such things, Dominic West provides some eyecandy for the ladies. I'm sure that he'll always be most famous for his role as Det. James McNulty in "The Wire" TV series, but he's back to his more Classical roots here. I thoroughly enjoyed seeing a real actor actually act again.
I'd already guessed that there'd be a some kind of love story going on in this along with the scares. Rebecca Hall's Florence Cathcart is possibly too attractive and too young for Dominic West's character, but their relationship works. I think this is due to Florence Cathcart initially appearing to be a lot more mature than she really is. Both characters are damaged goods who need each other to heal although naysayers might argue that their relationship is unromantic, rushed and slightly too modern. The thing is, from documentaries that I've seen, I know that the 1920s were a lot sexier than we think.
The period setting is very well done but a little bit sparse. The bleakness is intentional, but I have no idea what Britain actually looked like in 1920s, and I couldn't tell if this was set in the '20s, '30s, or even the '40s really. I expect a lot of research went into it, so I'll just have to accept that everyone got it right.
The only negative thing which I have to say about "The Awakening" is that for a moment near the end, it's a little bit confusing. I know what was intended, but I don't think it was paced correctly. You'll see what I mean should you choose to watch this yourself anyway.
While "The Awakening" is stylistically similar to several ghost stories from the last 10 years, the journey doesn't take the same well worn path as the others (no pun intended). The double-twist ending is not only different but much happier. If you are feeling jaded by the lack of intelligent ghost stories, I highly recommend this movie.
"During the final days at the Yankee Pedlar Inn, two employees determined to reveal the hotel's haunted past begin to experience disturbing events as old guests check in for a stay."
I'm sure you'll all be glad to know that I'm back to the horror movies now. Unfortunately, the first one I've decided to review this week is Ti West's "The Innkeepers" since it's still among the overpriced new releases in Wal-mart. You've probably been thinking about buying it or at least waiting for the price to drop so I'm here to save you some money.
I'll give Ti West some credit in that he keeps trying to make a good horror movie and creates some really good characters. The trouble is that he still isn't very good at delivering anything scary.
When I reviewed his overrated "The House of the Devil" (2009), I mentioned that I really didn't have much interest in watching "The Innkeepers". I changed my mind. Now that such things as dollar DVD rentals exist, there wasn't any good reason why I shouldn't watch it.
For three-quarters of "The Innkeepers", Sara Paxton and Pat Healy were very entertaining as a nerdy couple of hotel clerks. I liked their characters, was enjoying the unrequited love which was becoming more obvious as the story went on, and the occasional ghostie moment kept my interest.
The camerawork was very good, the production values were excellent, and the movie looked as if it had a much larger budget than I imagine that it really did. I assume that it was filmed inside a real hotel rather than on some studio sets. If it wasn't then I'm impressed. It felt real enough to me.
There were only a few things which I really disliked and most of those involved Kelly McGillis who turned up as an alcoholic psychic and made the ending very predictable for anyone who has ever seen "Penny Dreadful" (2005). I know a lot of people wouldn't have acknowledged the twist that was coming so I won't dwell on it, but it ruined the movie for me.
Actually, just seeing the once uber hot Kelly McGillis as she is now made me feel sad. I know we're all getting older, but I barely recognised her. I didn't recognise her at all in "Stake Land" (2010) when I watched it around this time last year either.
Fortunately, for those of us who prefer to see some tender young flesh in horror movies, Sara Paxton wasn't disappointing. She may not be the greatest actress in the world, and she looks a lot like Macaulay Culkin from certain angles, but she has fantastic legs. When her character, Claire, got scared by a ghostie and ran out of a hotel room in nothing but a t-shirt, I was pleased.
In fact, Sara Paxton really made this movie a lot more enjoyable than it should have been. Claire was so naive and oblivious to Luke revealing how he felt about her that I felt bad for both of them. Okay, so Pat Healy (who played Luke) may have been a little bit too old for her in the creepy way that only Americans and Brits feel about such things, but I thought their relationship was kind of sweet and it made the end of the movie even more tragic.
As for the scares, I'll admit that they worked, but there weren't enough of them. Most of the horror occurred during the denouement and was ruined by being far too rushed. This messed-up pacing is really becoming a trademark of Ti West and it's a shame. I don't know if he just doesn't notice when he's making a movie or whether the budget forces his hand, but, either way, it doesn't lead to a satisfying experience.
Although I don't recommend "The Innkeepers" as a full-price purchase, if you love ghost stories as much as I do, it's certainly worth renting. It's badly flawed, and if you watch it with someone who doesn't have much of a brain for such things, you'll probably end up being asked all sorts of stupid questions about the ending. You'll probably have quite a few questions about it yourself. Watch the epilogue very closely though and you'll get a nice surprise.
For those of you who are familiar with Robert Wise's "The Haunting", it will be no surprise for you to learn that "The Legend of Hell House" was little more than a 70s remake of the same story. Even the title was similar to Shirley Jackson's "The Haunting of Hill House" (which of course was the novel that "The Haunting" was based on). Some might call it plagiarism but I'd rather think of "The Legend of Hell House" as writer Richard Matheson's homage to a work of fiction which has inspired every director of a ghostie film ever since.
In this case, director John Hough, who is better known for his TV work and Hammer's "Twins of Evil" (1971), set the story during the week before Christmas in a fog enshrouded Blenheim Palace. No New England "Hill House" here but the birthplace of former Prime Minister Winston Churchill no less. Changing the location was largely due to APC moving the whole production to England hence also the cast of British actors rather than Americans. Yes, Roddy McDowell, who plays psychic Benjamin Fischer, was British in spite of being a staple of American TV for over three decades. Interestingly, the other psychic played by the gorgeous Pamela Franklin was actually born in Japan, Clive Revill was a New Zealander and Gayle Hunnicutt was born in Texas. Even Michael Gough who goes uncredited as Ernest Balasco was born in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. It's funny what you find from a bit of Googling when writing a review. Perhaps this movie isn't quite so full of British actors after all.
One thing "The Legend of Hell House" is full of, though, is atmosphere. It's so intense that you could almost cut it with a knife although at just over an hour and a half long the claustrophobia of the apparent five room set does tend to get a little bit wearying after a while. Every ghost story cliché is used but this was before we even started to think of them as clichés. For the most part, it's all very original in spite of the aforementioned homage to "The Haunting".
There's hardly any gore in this apart from one important scene featuring Pamela Franklin but there are a couple of sexy moments. Gayle Hunnicutt's attempted seduction of Roddy McDowell is the most memorable for me but, without spoiling it for anyone, Pamela Franklin is the real star of the naughty bits here. Just think along the same lines as "The Entity" and you'll figure out exactly what happens to her in this film.
Possession and psychic abilities play a much bigger part in the story than I would have liked especially if you try to think of this as a true haunted house genre movie. The ending really felt like a bit of a letdown considering Roddy's speech about all the horrors (including rape, torture, and even cannibalism) which supposedly occurred in the house during its former occupancy. Like most films of this time a lot more is implied than actually occurs on screen so you just have to use your imagination and dig Roddy McDowell's performance instead.
All the acting is first class in fact with the characters being a lot less annoying and dated than the ones in "The Haunting". Clive Revill as scientist Lionel Barrett was overly stubborn to the extent that he almost became another Dr Frankenstein with his ardour to prove his techniques correct (with similarly disastrous consequences). The use of his machine to rid the house of ghosts, of course, became an important part of "Ghostbusters" later on and the science versus the supernatural theme is always an important part of any haunted house movie anyway. There'll always be a sceptic, a psychic, a control and a scientist in any of these stories. You can almost, but not quite, swap any of the characters for the ones in Stephen King's "Rose Red" too to see how much "The Legend of Hell House" has had an influence.
I expect you all want to know if it's actually scary or not. Well, depending on the age at which you first see it, it is definitely scary. Only "The Others" comes any way close to the same scariness for a modern audience although really that movie has more in common with "The Innocents" than anything here. Some scenes work better than others including the jump scares and twists. The ones which don't work usually involve Gayle Hunnicutt to some extent but it's more the fault of the dialogue than anything else. I also found Roddy McDowell to be a rather odd choice for a hero but I really couldn't see anyone else capable of filling that role either. "The Legend of Hell House" is all very tense more than anything else (and a little bit too wordy rather than graphic), but it's still one of the best haunted house movies ever made.
