The Innkeepers (2011)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Ti West
Studios:  Dark Sky Films, Glass Eye Pix
Starring:  Sara Paxton, Pat Healy, Kelly McGillis; ft. Lena Dunham
Tagline:  Some guests never check out.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, suspense, ghost, haunting, paranormal, paranormal investigation
Scare score:  B-
Rating:  A-/ B+

Plot overview:  College dropouts Claire (Paxton) and Luke (Healy) are the last workers left at the Yankee Pedlar Inn before its imminent closing.  With plenty of free time and only several guests to attend to, the young coworkers decide to investigate the hotel's haunted past.  But are they too eager to dig up the inn's legendary ghosts?

After enjoying the style and heart put into The House of the Devil, I decided to check out more Ti West, and I'm glad I did.  While this movie shared a similar, suspenseful structure regarding heavy build up over a long introduction, saving the action and delivery for the end of the movie, there were certainly more mature, well-played scares throughout.

I like the sense of reality that I have seen so far in West's movies.  By reality I don't mean that I believe in eclipse-worshiping satanic cults, but what I do mean is that Mr. West is young and when it comes to screenwriting he keeps his ears open to the real world: how people talk, phrases people use, modern jokes, and cultural relevance.  It's a breath of fresh air in any genre, but especially in horror.  On the other hand, given his characters' sense of actuality, there is also an undeniable nod to older horror movies, which West has clearly tried to achieve by means of cinematography and by establishing plots and characters that go deeper than exposed breasts and sharp kitchen knives.

Let's talk about the realism in The Innkeepers.  The combination of West's script and the acting here just had me feeling very happy, very in-tune with what was going on in this movie.  People love the paranormal, and a lot of amateurs and "professionals" alike spend tons of money on equipment just to go record white noise and sounds they can't explain (or, rather, choose not to).  People like Luke with too much time on their hands start up websites dedicated totally to horror that people probably don't even read.  I mean could you imagine.....?

More about Luke: maybe it was Pat Healy's appearance or the costume, but I'm sure I've met people just like him before (at least in aspect and attitude).  Otherwise, he was a very believable college dropout, faking paranormal sightings, sort of drifting through life with no purpose.

I'm wasn't sure how I felt about Sara Paxton at all times.  My initial reaction was that I had seen her before (no I don't mean in Aquamarine); she reminded me an awful lot of Nicholle Tom who is ten years her senior.  I was inclined to like her - and ultimately I did - although her overall performance as Claire felt a little too animated for me.  While I thought she was believable at first, little by little she became too naive, like a Disney character who also happens to be a teenage girl.  Luckily, even given her slightly exaggerated portrayal, good writing helps make Claire more realistic and enjoyable to follow throughout the film - and we get a lot of her.

Horror Fan doesn't watch Girls, but he was surprised to see a Lena Dunham cameo as the stereotypically realistic barista.  I'm not sure if she and Ti West are friends, but I did read an interview she conducted with him a few years back, so there's some professional history there.

Finally, as the only other actor that is really present in the film, we have Kelly McGillis as actress-turned-psychic Leanne Rease-Jones.  Her more mysterious role permits the audience to accept that the supernatural is something approved by the plot and not just concocted in the minds of Claire and Luke.

Like many a horror movie, The Innkeepers walks the line between what is real and what is imaginary without ever clearly showing truth from hysterical fiction.  Naturally, this can be a smart move because the audience then controls the power to decide, based on the movie's actions, whether or not the ghosts are real.

*SPOILER ALERT*

The horror in this movie was very interesting.  Again, it takes a while to begin, but then there are some truly pleasant scares.  First of all, the character of the Madeline O'Malley bride is a cute idea; who hasn't heard of the legend of so-and-so, who died because of you-know-what way back you-know-when?  It's an urban legend like every town in America probably has.  As she begins to appear, she isn't the most terrifying ghost we've ever seen and personally I think the whole bride bit is overdone.  Her scares are nice though; I liked the sit-up-straight-in-bed thing.  Spooky!

Much creepier than the bride is the old man.  Even when he first appears he is utterly eerie: his pale, flabby skin, his slow, awkward speech, and especially his black eyes.  Once we see him as a ghost it's even worse.

What I liked most about the concept of ghosts in this movie is whether or not they were in Claire's head.  Given the state of their indecisiveness, their dropping out of college, their dead-end jobs, and their general stagnation in life, it could be said that the true ghosts in this movie are Claire and Luke themselves.  As Leanne herself says, real ghosts - much like humans - just want to live.  That is what Claire wants although she is unsure of where to begin, and that's what Luke wants although he, too, has regrettably reached a temporary dead-end.  Both of these characters want to do something - create a hit website, record ghost sightings, maybe fall in love - but, much like many 20-year-olds, they are having a hard time taking that first step.  As for Madeline and the old man, or as for any ghost trying to make contact with humans, what do they want?  To be noticed.  To be important.  To truly live.  Leanne serves as a medium between the living and the dead here, showing to us that it's very much possible to be like dead when still alive, and still like alive when dead.

Final critique:  I liked this movie.  It's paced more slowly than the movies we're used to seeing today, but if you're into a realistic script and more developed characters instead of just slamming doors and ghosts sightings, then this might also be a movie for you.  As I read in an interview with Ti West, he isn't necessarily trying to make one big movie that will change a genre forever, rather he would consider a successful career as consisting of 50 decent movies that people will at least see and talk about, regardless of whether or not they liked them.  Well so far, I've seen two of his smart, based-in-reality horror movies, and I must say that so far, so good.  With a few big bangs, some creepy imagery, and masterful suspense, I'd recommend this movie to general audiences who think they can handle pretty scary ghosts.

The House of the Devil (2009)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Ti West
Studios:  MPI Media Group, Dark Sky Films
Starring:  Jocelin Donahue, Tom Noonan, Greta Gerwig, A.J. Bowen, Mary Woronov; ft. Dee Wallace
Tagline:  Talk on the Phone.  Finish Your Homework. Watch TV.  Die.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, suspense, spawn of satan, religious occult
Scare score:  D
Rating:  A-

Plot overview:  Broke college student Samantha (Donahue) has just settled on a new apartment with her understanding landlady (Wallace).  The welcome change from her dingy, uninviting dorm room and roommate, however, will require extra cash that Samantha doesn't have.  Almost miraculously, Samantha manages to set up a babysitting gig for one night during a lunar eclipse that has the entire town - except for Sam's best friend Megan (Gerwig) - excited.  That night, Megan drives Sam out to the impressive yet isolated home where they meet the awkward Mr. Ulman (Noonan) and his somewhat bizarre wife (Woronov).  When Mr. Ulman explains that Sam will actually be watching his mother-in-law, Megan urges her to leave, but at the rate of $400 for 4 hours, the deal is too good for Sam to pass up.  Will the mysterious job end up being more responsibility than Sam bargained for?

I really pleasantly enjoyed this film.  From the second I saw the poster, I knew I liked the retro feeling about it, probably one of the nicest things director Ti West could have decided to do.  If you've read this blog before, you'll probably know that I love period pieces, be it 19th century England or the 1980s.  The opening credits, the costumes, the props, the soundtrack - that dance scene - the cinematography: it was all so great, such an interesting vintage feeling that reminds us of the 80s horror we so love.  The script especially was a breath of fresh air.  In a brief but nice homage to the ghosts of horror past, we have Dee Wallace (an acclaimed horror actress although the only movie I've reviewed that she's in is the 2007 remake of Halloween) welcoming us into the film in the role of a landlady.

That being said, we have a lot of time to focus on these details because this film sure as heck takes its time to start the scares.  I believe that it wasn't until the 35 minute mark that we witnessed some real horror instead of just suspense and interactions that give us the creeps.  I'll say it now and I'll say it again later, but if you're looking for constant thrills, gore, and physical horror - this isn't the movie for you.

Even after we know that there is trouble afoot, most likely heading towards our babysitter, the film returns to a calm (but never too slow) pace, following Sam around the dark, winding Victorian home, at times making us aware both of the evil lurking out in the eclipsed night as well as the evil still dwelling within the house.

Speaking of the house itself, is this an adequate title for the film?  I mean, sure, a lot of the movie's action takes place inside a house, but when we hear this title (or see the movie poster) our minds jump to The People Under the Stairs, to name one, and as soon as babysitting for strangers becomes the obvious plot, seasoned horror movie lovers will know we're headed towards a spawn of satan deal.  That being said, if it really isn't the devil's house, and the satanic rituals here have more to do with the people themselves, I just think the title becomes a little distant from the plot.

Nowadays, you can't do spawn of satan without thinking of The Omen or Rosemary's Baby (which this film made a multitude of allusions to), but The House of the Devil - and I'm still surprised it came out in 2009 because I have no idea where I was since I seem to have missed its publicity and theatrical release - added its own touches and excitement to the genre.  Unfortunately, I can't say the same thing about the whole 'babysitter in peril' plot line, especially considering that Babysitter Wanted (which I saw on TV once upon a time) came out in 2008, just one year earlier.  Can you say awkward?

This movie doesn't have a lot of scares, but when it does scare it scares well.  We have some jumps (hey, AJ Bowen), and then just some real discomfort - I was very impressed with the makeup choices for the character we can assume to be Mr. Ulman's "mother-in-law."

*SPOILER ALERT*

Not surprisingly, as far as spawn of satan movies go, there isn't a very happy ending for our heroine here.  Also, staying true to some retro movies we know and love, the motive here is never made 100% clear, just some satanists doing their thang.

Final critique:  Here we have a fun, modern take on vintage horror.  From the 16mm footage to the heavy usage of low camera angles and dramatic zoom, the cinematography transports us from the onslaught of amateur, unoriginal slashers of today back to a time when suspense and terror were more important than blood and body counts (which this film also has).  This is a nice movie to watch when you have the time to sit and enjoy a horror movie.  This is not the right film to watch if you are looking for a fast-moving, gory, scream-filled ride on the horror train.  Impressive acting matched with a fun plot and a believable script lead to one good horror movie in The House of the Devil.

Darkness Falls (2003)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Jonathan Liebesman
Studios:  Revolution Studios, Distant Corner Entertainment Group Inc.
Starring:  Chaney Kley, Emma Caulfield, Lee Cormie; ft. Emily Browning
Tagline:  Every Legend Has Its Dark Side.
MPAA Rating:  PG-13
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, suspense, ghost, mythical
Scare score:  D+
Rating:  C+

Plot overview:  In the small town of Darkness Falls, there is a local legend about a woman named Matilda Dixon.  A hundred years ago, she used to take children's baby teeth in exchange for a gold coin, earning herself the nickname "the Tooth Fairy."  But after sustaining horrible injuries in a fire, Matilda became an outcast, and following the disappearance of local children, she was hanged by a suspecting mob.  In her last breath, she placed a curse upon the town, swearing vengeance upon children losing their final baby tooth.
A hundred years later, young Kyle Walsh (Joshua Anderson) has just lost his final baby tooth.  When the legend of the Tooth Fairy turns out to be true, will older Kyle (Kley) ever be able to return home and face his fear of the dark?

My relationship with this movie is complicated and forces me to be somewhat biased.  13 and 14-year-old Horror Buff probably watched this movie about a hundred times with friends throughout the summer before freshman year.  The memories made during the hot summer days and nights with the AC at full blast while Horror Buff & Crew got scared (or didn't) has always left me very fond of this movie, although after recently re-watching I am now fully aware that Darkness Falls is amateur hour.

Let's start with the positive.  This movie poster is pretty sick, and I do like the tagline "Darkness Falls, Evil Rises."  Clever!  Furthermore, it's not that this movie isn't scary or that it has a bad plot, because, while there certainly are a lot of plot holes or just random advancements in action, plus a whole lotta' the stupidity principle ("Stay in the light!" "Okay but let me just step in the dark for a seco--"), the concept of this ghost strikes a chord with humans from all cultures: fear of the dark.  During the film itself, there are some pretty entertaining scenes and scares that take place between the growing shadows and shrinking sources of light.  This leads to some very suspenseful moments that many audiences are sure to enjoy.  Lastly, I do enjoy the ghost in this film, even if that guttural noise she makes is unnerving.  The creative team here had their fun playing with the mask trope - which admittedly in its contrasting, porcelain white, was pretty eerie - as well as her horrid, burnt face, which I was impressed by as far as the concept of a monster, ghost, or killer's face goes in the horror genre.  Hers may not be the most memorable face, but I think it's a good one.

Moving along... the progressing action in this movie is awkward at times.  Sometimes a kill is needed to spice up a dull moment, and then we're not even sure why we ended up there in the first place, other than to take up in more time in what is still an extremely short film.  Because of the lacking length of the movie, there is a noticeable speed that careful viewers will pick up on and question.  The script could have used more work, although it still manages to be entertaining in babble between various, even unnecessary characters.

What I liked least about this movie was that the character of Michael Greene (Cormie), while cute and important as a sort of modern-generation version of Kyle, had some sort of power of omniscience.  This kid should not have any special power; he simply suffers from night terrors ("or so they say.")  It makes no sense, then, that Michael knows so much about Kyle's past with the Tooth Fairy.  The fact that this is never explained and serves only to make Michael a bit creepier really irks me.  Horror Buff likes purpose and not cliches.

(Not so) Fun Fact: The star of this film, Chaney Kley, died of sleep apnea.  Or so they say.

Final critique:  This movie has a smeared rep as far as horror films go, but Horror Buff will still recommend Darkness Falls.  It's a great example of fun, playful, early 2000s horror, and in fact, to its own discredit, this movie takes itself a little too seriously.  While the scares are not overly scary, they still pack a punch that is sure to entertain and even frighten general audiences.  This is a nice choice for an evening in with a significant other on the couch, or for a group of young friends to watch at a late night horror movie session.  With a creative and pretty freaky ghost leading the thrills, this movie will at least put a toothy smile on your face.

Fright Night (1985)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Tom Holland
Studios:  Columbia Pictures
Starring:  William Ragsdale, Chris Sarandon, Stephen Geoffreys, Roddy McDowall, Amanda Bearse
Tagline:  There are some very good reasons to be afraid of the dark.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, thriller, drama, teen, vampire
Scare score:  C-/D+
Rating:  A-

Plot overview:  Charlie Brewster (Ragsdale) is your average teenager, dividing his time between school, his girlfriend Amy (Bearse), and old horror movie marathons on TV hosted by Charlie's hero, the vampire hunter Peter Vincent (McDowall).  But when a mysterious (Sarandon) moves in next door and a rash of murders begin in town, will Charlie's love of vampire movies get the better of him?

This is one a true treat of a horror movie.  While it certainly isn't in the running for 'scariest,' the original Fright Night is a film I find myself going back to time and time again.  At face value you have your standard (although modernized for the time) tropes of a vampire flick, but aside from garlic, crucifixes, and holy water, this movie really does its own thing.  What's my favorite part about this movie?  It's not afraid to use humor, and no, I don't mean that corny humor that '80s horror made so infamous, but rather humor that we in the audience find ourselves laughing along to, even 30 years later.

The acting in this film, while perhaps a little slow at times, is interesting enough that we want to keep watching and entertaining enough that we enjoy watching.  One of the best things about this cast of characters is the diversity we're given: normal teenage girls and boys; formidable, supernatural adversaries; cowardly, aging TV personalities; aloof suburban mothers; and even nerdy underdogs turned demon.  William Ragsdale in the role of Charlie is pretty great, and aside from occasional hysteria, he's both an actor and a character that we find ourselves identifying with and supporting throughout the ordeal.  Chris Sarandon as Jerry Dandrige is tall, dark, handsome, and perfectly evil.  There is a sinister attitude and manner he carries with him at all times, both when charming the ladies or fighting the men.  From the first time I saw this movie years ago until now, one thing I haven't forgotten is Stephen Geoffreys as 'Evil' Ed.

*SPOILER ALERT*

There is something about this young actor's awkward face, sort of crazy laugh, and cracking voice that makes him hard to forget.  To me, Ed represents this sort of underdog; pushed aside by his 'friend' Charlie who is more handsome and more successful with girls (although that still may not be very successful).  Ed is perhaps dealing with a transition from childhood to adolescence, with his short stature, way of dressing, and the toys we see on the shelves of his bedroom.  After being bitten by Dandrige, Ed is given the opportunity to be more powerful, to become something greater than himself.  He is an easy target and welcoming victim, looking to improve his own situation by becoming a vampire himself.

I also really like Miss Bearse as Charlie's girlfriend Amy.  Amy is this pretty, hip, driven, and dependable teenager, and while she isn't very realistic (who would pay a stranger $500 to help out their [on the rocks] boyfriend who believes in vampires?).  Either way, I like her character and I like her acting.

This film is fun to watch.  We're not sure at all times where we're headed, but we're generally happy with where it ends up.  Aside from the extreme overuse of fog machines, the special effects are pretty great.  I personally think the brief scene with a werewolf gives us a better depiction of the mythical beast than An American Werewolf in London does (blasphemy??).  I'm not a fan of the sort of monster bat we see a few times, but other features (goo, slime, blood, bones, etc) are decent and in fact better than your typical '80s movie.  Speaking of which, I guess I watched some remastered version last night because the quality was actually fantastic.  Didn't look like an '80s movie at all... except for the spaceship of a motorcycle Amanda rolls up in at one point.

A couple brief things that surprise me: sure, Charlie's car gets wrecked (off camera), his fist gets squeezed tight a few times, there's some brief strangulation, and maybe one bat bite- but he doesn't get hurt that much otherwise.  Do we want to see him fight more or get beat up a bit more before saving the day?  Secondly, I am just so surprised that Peter Vincent doesn't dramatically die in this movie.  Am I a sucker for stereotypes, or does everybody get away just a little too smoothly in this movie?

Underneath our 'how to kill the vampires' plot, we have this really romantic, sexual subplot revolving around Charlie, Amy, and Dandrige.  One of my favorite scenes in this movie is the dance break - yes, you read right - at the club.  With a special '80s touch, not only are we treated to music and some tricky mirrors-without-reflections work, but there is this powerfully sensual exchange between the characters of Amy and Dandrige that leaves us loving the latter's evil just a little bit.  Historically, vampires have a certain power or control over women (especially the virginal ones), and the same is true in Fright Night.  At the beginning of the film, during a rather unromantic make out session (even Horror Buff doesn't leave horror marathons on while with his hypothetical girlfriend), we learn that Amy and Charlie still haven't slept together because Amy is nervous.  That is to say we can check off 'The Virgin' on our horror movie checklist.  Dandrige's interest in Amy, aside from spiting Charlie and aside from her unexplained similarity to the woman in a portrait at Dandrige's house, is pure vampire-on-virgin seduction.  Hot stuff.  Furthermore, this leads to a sort of masculinity crisis between the young Charlie and the suave older man.  So much sexual angst packed into these teenagers' lives!

Final critique:  This movie has something for everybody.  While rated R for your standard reasons, this movie practically has no gore or even scares, which makes it great to watch with friends who don't deal well with horror movies.  The likable characters, good acting, and fun plot line - not to mention '80s music and the terribly catchy "Fright Night" song that plays over the credits - makes for a charming, witty favorite in the horror genre.

An American Werewolf in London (1981)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  John Landis
Studios:  PolyGram Filled Entertainment
Starring:  David Naughton, Jenny Agutter, Griffin Dunne; ft. Frank Oz
Tagline:  Beware the Moon.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, tragicomedy, thriller, werewolf
Scare score:  B+
Rating:  A/ A-

Plot overview:  While backpacking through the English moorland, American friends David Kessler (Naughton) and Jack Goodman (Dunne) stop at a pub full of morose locals who warn them to keep off the moors and "beware the moon."  Laughing off the townspeople's hostility and lack of hospitality, the two friends continue trekking through the night.  When the full moon comes out from behind the clouds, however, David and Jack find themselves lost, off the road, and being pursued by some animal in the darkness.  Despite their attempts to escape, they boys are chased and attacked by a large wolf, which manages to bite David before being killed by the locals.  When David wakes up in a London hospital three weeks later, he suffers from strange nightmares and visions of his dead friend who warns him that he is a danger to society.  Could Jack's warnings be right, and is David himself turning into a werewolf?

I watched this movie about three weeks ago, so my memory is a little rusty.  Most importantly, I thought this movie was surprisingly fantastic (although I guess it's not a surprise to all the millions of people who have seen it before Horror Buff and given it critical acclaim).  While there is a definite late '70s/ early '80s feel to the movie, it is by no mean dated, especially in terms of the expertly convincing and terrifying makeup and special effects.

*SPOILER ALERT*

The plot is fun, different, and easily fools us in a false sense of comfort because of the tragicomic nature of the film.  While our protagonists are almost always light-hearted and joking (in life and in death), the situations revolving around werewolf attacks are cold blooded, gory murders.  Basically we have the exposition and first attack in the moors, then a sort of flatline of "rising" action during David's time in the hospital, followed by the third set of more exciting rising action as David begins to feel the effect of the werewolf bite during the following full moon.  The climax of the movie perhaps comes with David's transformation in Piccadilly (my favorite word in the English language) Circus, resulting in one of the most chaotic (and awesome) scenes I have ever seen, followed by an almost absent denouement and an ending that leaves us wanting more.

Much of the movie's action in otherwise relaxed parts are driven by nightmarish sequences that take us by surprise and scare us in a confusing, unexpected way.  I absolutely loved the scene where David is back home with his family before nightmarish, futuristic stormtroopers break in and wreak havoc.  My other favorite touch had to be the incredible makeup used on the reanimated dead, the various victims of the werewolf.  I was surprised the first time we see Jack in the hospital, and each time he returned I was even more pleased with his decomposing self.  The realistic makeup that kept these characters as they might have been at the time of their murder added a strangely personal and colorful touch to the film.

While commenting on makeup and effects, I do have one criticism.  Although a lot of the effects from this film are still believable and enjoyable today, I was disappointed by the transformation sequence and the wolf in general.  The first wolf to attack the boys was fine (not that we see all that much of it), but when it's David's turn later on, the gremlin-esque, oddly proportioned werewolf and his stunted snout seemed far too animated and prop-ish to keep up with the calibre of the rest of the movie.  To clarify, I enjoyed the transformation itself (morphing hands and feet, etc), but the result was a bit disappointing.  Perhaps it was the proportions that bothered me most.  Oh well, one some problem in an otherwise grand movie.

The final climactic scene in the movie, revolving around David's transformation in Piccadilly Circus, is now officially one of my favorite sequences in horror.  The sheer chaos caused by a werewolf, police, citizens and tourists, and traffic had me cringing and laughing at the same time: it was horror entertainment at its best.  What exactly was the death toll here?  I'm not sure, but this was a fascinating final sequence filled with plenty of action, scares, gore, and pure delightful chaos.

Final critique:  Since happening upon this movie late one night, An American Werewolf in London has quickly risen towards the top of my favorite horror movies list (which I should consider actually making one day).  After 30 years and change, this film has delighted horror-going audiences with its expert makeup, captivating plot, and well-delivered scares and thrills.  This is certainly a movie I'll find myself going back to.  Recommended for any audience looking for good horror that also has a sense of humor.

February Review

February was off to a great start after I watched about 4 horror movies in 4 days... but then I forgot to blog about them.  And then I didn't watch any more.  Sorry, folks.  Here's to a better March.

For your consideration:

1.  Jaws (1975): A
2.  A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984): A-
3.  A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985): A-/B+

Jaws (1975)

The movie that made you afraid to go back in the water... or the bath, or the shower, or to sit on the toilet.

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Steven Spielberg
Studios:  Universal Pictures
Starring:  Roy Scheider, Richard Dreyfuss, Robert Shaw
Tagline:  Don't Go in the Water
MPAA Rating:  PG
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, suspense, drama, monster
Scare score:  B
Rating:  A

Plot overview:  Just as the summer season is about to hit full swing on the small Amity Island, a terrible and unprovoked shark attack leaves a young woman dead.  While local sheriff yet New York City native Martin Brody (Scheider) wants to close all beaches immediately following the discovery of the girl's mutilated body, Mayor Vaughn (Murray Hamilton), other members of the town council, and local business owners refuse to lose their summer customers.  As more attacks threaten the island's safety, fisherman come from far and wide on a shark hunt, but will they be able to outwit the great white monster?

This is not only an excellent movie, it is an important movie.  After all, this was America's first summer blockbuster.  Can you imagine a summer (or a halloween, or a holiday season, or any other sub-season) without its highly anticipated movie releases?

Jaws begins slow, and in fact it very much maintains that pace throughout, giving us one of the finest examples of suspense that we can think of.  I mean, sure, the movie begins with an attack on a really hot hippie, and there are a decent amount of gory attack scenes throughout, but the star of this movie is man and not animal.  Aside from on occasional fin, we don't see much of Jawsy until well into the movie, I think I remember timing it at around an hour or so.  There is really fine work done in this moving as far as plot development goes concerning the time spent on attacks (action) and the time spent on the human response (reaction).

Acting in this movie is both convincing and entertaining.  Leading us bravely through the entire film is Roy Scheider in the role of the out-of-place New Yorker that must learn to maintain his power as police chief while dealing with pressure from the local "islanders."  Brody represents the human conflict in the film, as well as a civilized yet masculine response to the chaos.  Representing science in a somewhat less masculine role is Matt Hooper (Dreyfuss), marine biologist and general shark nerd that lays down the voice of expertise and reason while the islanders panic.  Finally, as the ultimate '70s Ahab we have Quint (Shaw), a man's man (and fisher's man), war vet, probable alcoholic, and cold blooded, ruthless shark killer.  These three actors form the trifecta of manpower that is needed to try and defeat the shark- a seemingly unstoppable, prehistoric, bloodthirsty, and even intelligent creature that will outsmart its way into terrorizing the summer population of Amity Island.

While the first third of the movie is more relaxed while following the internal and legal debates of Brody (as well as his relaxing and even admirable family life- special shout out to Lorraine Gary in the role of spunky and ultimately concerned Ellen Brody, wife of the police chief), it isn't until later on that we move into the monster hunt.  The terror, therefore, much like the famous theme music (which is, perhaps, more well known than the movie itself), begins as something subtle, something we know is present or could present itself at any moment but which chooses to refrain from doing so until the right time.  Jaws is filled with plenty of tease scares, or even attacks we know are happening but with no true fright behind them (the horror, rather, awaits in the reaction upon the discovery of the death.  Take, for example, that mother on the beach when he son doesn't come out of the water).

It is the climax and falling action of the movie that takes us on the hunt, led by the no-nonsense Quint (who I love).  Together with the defensive Hooper (who provides an awful lot of comic relief) and our hero Brody, the team of three men sets off, giving us some back story on each of their lives as well as the realization that this shark is not to be trifled with.  In a series of somewhat repetitive scenes, as well as a not-necessarily-necessary-but-good-for-suspense sequence of Hooper being lowered into the water in a cage, the fight against the great white rages on.

*SPOILER ALERT*

Horror Buff was exposed to this movie at a surprisingly young age.  I have several distinct memories of watching this movie with other young friends while our parents would be in another room doing their adult party thing.  Since those wonder years, my favorite scene - and the scene I consider the scariest in the movie - has been the discovery of Ben Gardner (Craig Kingsbury) in his destroyed boat.  If I could watch that scene over and over again I probably would.  Every time, I know exactly what is coming, and it still always gets me.  I explicitly remember watching this scene as a child, and I was probably as scared then as I am now.  A+ terrifying.  I also remember from this time that my friends (other children) were scared to bathe, shower, swim in the pool, and one girl was even afraid to sit on the toilet after seeing this movie.  Talk about scarring!

The shark itself is an impressive beast.  I've read a lot about the different models they used and the ones that broke and the ones that didn't, and it's truly an endeavor of movie magic.  Sharks fascinate me.  And is it just me, or is the scariest thing about them their perfectly black eyes?  Gives me the creeps.  I read a lot of shark attack statistics following this movie, and it's true that Jaws has directly led to them being both hunted and smeared as human hunters- which, according to science, they really aren't.  Just curious little fellas willing to take a bite out of anything.  In many cases, after tasting bony humans, sharks decide they don't like the flavor and are on their way.  As a New Jersey native, I've also done some reading in my time regarding the Jersey Shore shark attacks of 1916 (which are cited as *true inspiration* behind Jaws... ugh), so I mean, sure, they're not entirely innocent either.  I suggest you watch Jaws and make your own educated opinion.

Huge question: HOW is the movie only PG?  While it isn't exactly dirty (some nudity at the beginning... gotta' love the '70s), it is disturbing and filled with human parts in and around a giant shark's mouth.  Like this is at least a PG-13.  I wonder what was going on with the MPAA while rating this blockbuster.

Fun fact: Horror Buff has both dove with sharks in the Bahamas near filming locations from Jaws: The Revenge and has also enjoyed some really tasty burgers in Menemsha on the Vineyard, the other principle filming location of movies from the Jaws 'series.'  Really I suppose I'm a secret Jaws enthusiast.

Final critique:  Everyone should see this movie.  Even the American government considers it culturally important.  Not convincing enough for you?  Consider this: we know more about outer space than we do about the oceans on our planet... and what lurks in them.  Jaws brings to the surface (ha. ha.) one of these mysterious and perhaps one of the most notorious hunters on our planet: the great white shark.  As this movie is equally as much about human drama as it is about shark hunting, there is drama, suspense, thrill, and even some comic relief, which means that most audiences will find something to love about this staple of the horror genre.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Jack Sholder
Studios:  Heron Communications, Smart Egg Pictures, New Line Cinema
Starring:  Mark Patton, Kim Myers, Robert Rusler, Robert Englund
Tagline:  The Man of Your Dreams is Back.
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, slasher, teen
Scare score:  C+
Rating:  A-/B+

Plot overview:  A few years after the events of the first film, a new family has moved into 1428 Elm Street, and the teenage son Jesse (Patton) is already having terrifyingly realistic nightmares.  These nightmares largely revolve around a terribly scarred murderer, Fred Krueger (Englund).  This time around, he doesn't just want to kill teenagers, he wants to use Jesse's body to do so.  Worried that he is losing his mind, Jesse depends on the support of his [it's complicated with] girlfriend Lisa (Myers) and new friend Ron Grady (Rusler).  Will the help of his friends and family be enough to combat Freddy from taking over his mind and body?

The saga continues with this sequel, released only a year after the original movie (love a good horror franchise).  One of the best things this movie does, quite unlike other franchises at the time, is (almost) totally switch up the plot.  If this were your standard horror sequel, Freddy would merely be haunting Jesse in the same way that he haunted Nancy in the last film, simultaneously moving on to his friends.  This clever sequel, however, turns the protagonist's battle with Krueger into something not only mental but also physical, a haunting equally as diurnal as nocturnal.  Perhaps the greatest change we are given here is the fact that the protagonist and main victim of the horror is a teenage boy and not a girl.

While this isn't completely groundbreaking (in The Evil Dead our main protagonist is a college-aged male), it is certainly different than our typical damsel in distress in the horror genre.  Furthermore, unlike films such as The Evil Dead where the male protagonist largely fights against the given terrors, in this Elm Street installment, our protagonist is much more of a victim than he is a hero.  In fact, his debated saving comes at the hands of a girl.

Is that what's groundbreaking about this movie?  A debatably homosexual protagonist in a mainstream horror movie?  Truth be told, Horror Buff doesn't buy that theory.  If you watch this movie convinced that Jesse is straight, it still makes complete sense.  The boy is going crazy (like the last movie, we may very well debate that the horror sequences only take place in a fantasy world created by Jesse).  While Jesse's sexuality may or may not be in question, one thing that's certain is that he doesn't fulfill every standard male/ macho stereotype usually attributed to masculine characters such as Ash in The Evil Dead.  We see Jesse nervous from nightmares and social pressure, we see Jesse dancing (including some butt gyrating) while cleaning his bedroom, we hear Jesse's ear-piercing screams - true screams, not yells - several times throughout the movie.  Jesse is sexualized, often shown in his underwear, and at one point almost made to be the victim of sexual assault.  Forget final girls and forget jock boys that get killed off oh-so-close to the finale: here we have a masculine boy victim.

What's good about this movie?  As mentioned, the total change in plot is refreshing.  It also adds a level of psychological depth to the film as the main character has to truly debate whether or not he is going insane.  While there is plenty of time dedicated to plot development, when the scares come they're certainly fun, providing small thrills here and there.

*SPOILER ALERT*

The best scene of the movie, or at least one of them, has to be the pool party at Lisa's house.  When Freddy breaks loose here, he shows no mercy, and a TBP or teen booze party turns into an absolute bloodbath.  Seriously though, this scene is great.  I love when chaos breaks loose.  It's reminiscent of Carrie and the final prom scene, except with a creepy pedophile slashing students while fire seems to burst forth from everything.  Then, towards the end of the film we have a pretty gross burn sequence which alludes to Freddy's human demise and perhaps Jesse's mortal end.  This features some disturbing makeup and another Jesse being sort of born forth from the ashes aka burnt, charred skin.

Another favorite scene?  Shortly before Grady's death, we see Freddy literally bursting forth from Jesse's body.  I love the special effects here: a disturbing, Alien-esque birth of evil from a human character.  Gross and so smart.

The worst scene?  This probably has to be when the family bird goes crazy, kills it's companion, and then we literally have an unnecessarily extensive scene that can at best make us think of The Birds and at worst make us want to stop watching.

While our main characters all deliver some good or decent acting, my favorite has to be Kim Myers in the role of Lisa.  Does she not look exactly like Meryl Streep?  Also her acting is a breath of fresh air.

Final critique:  I'm keeping this review short because I watched this movie over a week ago and have sort of forgotten about other major points that I think I might have wanted to have touched upon.  Regardless, this is a truly well-done sequel, and while its scares don't necessarily surpass those of the first movie, the new cast and new plot keeps this franchise upbeat and interesting.  Stayed tuned as I review more Nightmare on Elm Street-s to see whether Freddy sinks or swims.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

The film that gave every Elm Street in America a bad reputation...

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Wes Craven
Studios:  Media Home Entertainment, Smart Egg Pictures, New Line Cinema
Starring:  Heather Langenkamp, Johnny Depp, Ronee Blakley, Robert Englund
Tagline:  If Nancy Doesn't Wake Up Screaming, She Won't Wake Up At All...
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, terror, thriller, slasher, teen
Scare score:  C+
Rating:  A-

Plot overview:  A group of friends begins to be haunted by a terrible figure in their nightmares, but soon their nightmares become reality.

I guess it was only a matter of time until we got to the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, one of horror's most visibly recognizable and well known titles, series, and villains - and for a good reason.  Much like Michael and Jason, Freddy and his numerous films have left a marked impact upon popular culture as well as the entire horror genre, heavily influencing what people think of, remember, and fear when they go to watch a scary movie.

This movie is the epitome of '80s horror, often drifting into the now passé tropes created by earlier films (and contemporary franchises) like Halloween and Friday the 13th.  If the viewer goes into the film expecting and accepting corny lines, acting that is only so so, and a handful of predictable moments, then he or she is in for a treat.  There's a reason that this film has remained relevant for *gulp* 30 years: an intriguing plot mixed with an original villain plus plenty of that '80s teen raciness.  That is to say, cardinal rule number 2 is exploited and broken.  Naughty teens and an even naughtier killer?  What's not to enjoy?

In the role of our heroine Nancy Thompson we have Langenkamp, who plays the courageous and virtuous, normal teenager with heart although I don't think she always stayed completely within her role.  After all, there's only so many times an actress can play an awkwardly elongated scene merely expressing frustration (it happens a lot here).  Some interactions between Heather and friends Glen (Depp), Rod (Nick Corri), and Tina (Amanda Wyss) also feel a little stiff, and throughout the movie each of these four teens has his or her fair share of poor reactions as far as acting goes.  Then again, when limited by the script itself, I guess there's not much they could do.

In one of the more bizarre roles of horror we have Nancy's mom, Marge (Blakley).  First of all, isn't Blakley oddly striking?  Or is it just a combination of her hair, makeup, and tan?  Aside from her excessive outward appearance, we quickly learn that as a mother Marge is pretty thick (although concerned), but as a lush she's right on par.  Regardless, she is one of the more interesting and entertaining characters in the film, complete with her own dark secrets, and she goes on to deliver one of my favorite lines in the movie when telling Nancy that she's going to be safe.

The plot and bad guy were the real gold mines for this film.  Freddy Krueger (Englund) is a conglomerate of all these terrible ideas, created from various things we both generally hate and fear in society: a pedophile/ child killer; a kidnapper; he is disfigured and disgusting; at times he shows himself to be filled with pus, maggots, and other bugs; he is the manifestation of a nightmare.  He furthermore represents the return of a bad guy, thus making him a criminal who begins claiming new victories long after the original heroes thought they had assured his defeat.  Fred Krueger is a complex figure, the combination of a killer, the undead, and monsters, who bends the line between fiction and reality.  Not only does Freddy haunt and then hunt his victims, he possesses his victims by entering their minds and taking them from their safe reality into his reality: a special sort of hell.  When it comes to Michael Myers, you can either not cross his path, or you can run from him (for a time).  When it comes to Jason, just stay out of Crystal Lake.  But Freddy?  He crosses your path, he comes into your space - your most personal space (the mind) - and then he makes it (and you) his own.  It's one thing not wanting to sleep in case some killer is coming after you - but to not want to sleep because that's where the killer is waiting for you?  It's no wonder that the first few kids merely try ignoring their nightmares, because otherwise there is no escape - which is what Nancy realizes quickly, causing her to take drastic measures such as hiding coffee makers in her bedroom and popping Stay Awake pills.

In this first installment, Freddy is truly a scary and innovative character.  From one of the first chase scenes in the film when we see him appearing and disappearing (decent special effects, 1984), his clawed arms expanding and retracting at will, to his skin being cut, pulled, and burned off, and not to mention the general scraping of his knifed-hand against metal (who doesn't hate that sound?), we learn quickly that this is a force to be reckoned with (for veteran viewers, remember, this is before Freddy adapted a more comical [read: corny] persona).  With complete power in his dream/ nightmare world and a pretty considerable amount of influence on the real world as well (or at least on the fringe between the two) - what can't Fred do?

*SPOILER ALERT*

Finally, the entire concept of dreams vs. reality is still hard for audiences to wrap their heads around today.  How much of this film takes place in reality and how much of it does not is really in the eye of the beholder.  I've read a bunch of theories and I don't exactly know where I fall.  For the most part, I think the movie takes place in a balanced mix of reality and the dreams of the various teens, although sometimes Freddy only kills in pure 'dreamland' where as in some cases his workings from his own realm have direct physical manifestations in the real world (think Rod's death).  At the end of the day I think we can't just limit Fred to dreams alone, and we can't say that fantastic things won't happen in reality (assuming Marge's death scene takes place in reality, then both Nancy and her laid-back-at-all-the-wrong-times father, police Lieutenant Donald Thompson (John Saxon), both see an inexplicable and even impossible (and over the top, Craven) death.  What irks me more than the shotty 'special effects' involved here is the other character's simple willingness to accept what they have just seen).  Lastly, I think that the final seen should not be overly interpreted as a confusing and mysterious mix of reality and dream, but rather as a last-minute, half-assed attempt at a scare in the final seconds of the film.  There, I said it.

I have to quickly complain about the movie poster because Nancy looks like an angry pig.  What is with that face?  That is all.

As a bit of social commentary, isn't it interesting that we never see into either of the boy's (Glen and Rod) dreams?  Following a firm history of final girls and scream queens, A Nightmare on Elm Street in many ways upholds the male bad guy kills female victims plot.  While male victims are killed (and often), we are never shown how scared they are in the moments before their deaths, where as in comparison these movies are filmed with, well, girls screaming, crying, running, and hiding (and a few girls fighting back).  In this first installment, we are given the fairly shallow Rod and the almost deep Glen, with their equally as shallow and equally not-as-deep-as-we-would-like female counterparts in Tina and Nancy, respectively.  While we get to experience loads of funs and frights in the girls' nightmares, we are never invited into the heads of the boys; we are only allowed to watch them suddenly, unknowingly, and emotionlessly die in the real world.  Sure, the boys are victims, but are they victimized like the girls (and one woman) are?  Perhaps this is what will make the sequel so much more culturally shocking.

Favorite line:  [overly dramatic] "Screw sleep!"- Nancy Thompson

Final critique:  Is this movie actually scary?  Not like the scary we're used to today.  But with the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise, Horror Buff will go so far as to say that it's not all about the scares so much as it's about the plots and the characters - especially Freddy - themselves.  That being said, there are definitely a few good scares hidden among the sometimes compelling, sometimes ridiculous storyline here.  Again, if the audience is willing to accept a script that often drifts into the realm of dull as well as acting that sometimes touches on not-believable, then they can sit back and enjoy a film that is truly important to the horror genre.

January Review

For your consideration:

1.  Scream 2 (1997): A/ A-
2.  Scream (1996): A-
3.  The Evil Dead (1981): B+
4.  The Blob (1958): C+/ B-
5.  Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011): C

American Horror Story - S3, E13 (2014)

"The Seven Wonders"

I really have no idea what happened to my write up about E12.

GENERAL INFO:
Creators:  Ryan Murphy, Brad Falchuk
Producers:  20th Century Fox
Channel:  FX
Starring:  Sarah Paulson,  Frances Conroy, Emma Roberts, Taissa Farmiga, Lily Rabe, Gabourey Sidibe, Jessica Lange, Evan Peters; ft. Stevie Nicks
TV Rating:  MA LSV
Genre:  television, horror, terror, drama, witches, magic
Scare score:  F
Rating:  A

Plot overview:  To assure the survival of the Coven, the remaining witches at Miss Robichaux's must compete to perform each of the Seven Wonders so that the true Supreme may claim her throne.

What a way to end.  I will first say that my general, honest impression is that I liked the episode a lot and loved the season, and furthermore that this has been my favorite season so far.  Let's get down to brass tacks.

*SPOILER ALERT*

Just oh my gosh I guess is what I have to say first of all.  Can't believe it's all over, as soon as it started. Is it me, or did this season fly by?  Let's start at the beginning.

There goes Stevie Nicks again just singing her heart out.  I thought it was a groovy albeit overly stylized way to begin the final episode; regardless it was appropriate.  By this point I was just ready to get started with the Seven Wonders, as I think we can all agree that this season did unfortunately lack in magic - the very thing it was all about… or was it?

Feminism.  Motherhood.  Sisterhood.  (Unfortunately, themes of racism sizzled out this season) Between the remaining young women at the school, it was a competition to the death to determine who could lead the Coven forward.  It was interesting to see the [surprise?] return of Fiona (Lange), her sudden death, and the conclusion or not of her story.  What does she then die representing?  Horror Buff dares to say that she in her prime, Supreme glory represents a powerful, uninhibited, and unrestrained woman.  Not only does she have magic, but she has looks, money, charm, smarts - and freedom.  That's not to say she doesn't have vain desires of external beauty and the want of a man's affection.  Unfortunately for her, she cannot keep these things forever.  Her hell?  The married, domestic life (and knotty pine).  Is there commentary about women here?  I think so, at least to the extent of freedom and marriage/ domesticity.

Anywho.  Do the Seven Wonders deliver?  Maybe not as much as we hope they might, but they are still entertain, with a few untimely deaths scattered about.  Speaking of which: Misty Day (Rabe) - what was her point ever except to bring everyone back to life and link us to Stevie Nicks?  One critique I most certainly have about this season was that it was too filled with enticing details that distracted us from the characters themselves - what makes them tick?  And what ever happened to all those random plot lines, like Delia's (Paulson) attempt to conceive, way back when?  Why is Madison (Roberts) so heartless and one dimensional?  Does Zoe (Farmiga) still kill boys when they… you know what?  Why was everyone so willing to let Queenie (Sidibe) back into the club after she ditched them in the first place?  Was Delia really not an obvious choice for leader from long ago?

Speaking of Delia - severe kudos need to be given to whoever does her costume and make up because Sarah Paulson was absolutely stunning all season long with and without peepers.  Never do I remember an AHS character looking so glamorous and hot regardless of the despair surrounding them.  Delia was a character I admit to have doubted at more than one point this season, but now that Coven is done with, I will be the first to admit how happy I am and yet still shocked: a happy ending?  Did American Horror Story really just have its first truly happy ending?  Sure, sure Fiona is stuck in her own little hell, as are several other characters, but Zoe is still safe (I don't see why her little accident took her out of the running for Supreme once she was revived).  Was anyone else expecting Fiona to kill Delia in that last reunion?  Or for Myrtle (Conroy) to suddenly go berserk and destroy the Coven?  I admit I am guilty of both of these things as I spent the entire episode waiting for everything to go wrong, as previous seasons have taught us to do.  And yet - the silver lining at the end of Salem's cloud.

I'm going to take a second hear to voice my unpopular opinion about something, or someone.  I don't think Emma Roberts is all that great.  She played exactly the same character in "Coven" as she did in We're the Millers - and that simply shouldn't be so, but why is it?  Because this young actress relies on her 'looks' and attitude… like okay, we've seen that before.  I don't think she's a bad actress, but I don't see what everyone is obsessed with her.  I'm certainly expecting to see more of her though, so I can only assume her skills and characters will improve along with her!

Final critique:  Well, another year, another season done.  Another multitude of witches out of the closet.  While this season certainly had a few plot holes, unnecessary zombies, and a lack of magic and character depth - it was really magical from day one.  Perhaps the worst thing about this season is that it was not scary- like, ever.  I remember when it premiered and everyone on social media set their 140 characters to caps lock to express their horror and shock at the show's debut.  Nope, not here.  Secondly, this season really did tend to drift all over the place (not unlike the previous two seasons, though, I guess).  There were good times, and there was plenty of down time, but this was another fantastic season delivered to us by Murphy and Falchuk, filled with plenty of Lange's graceful diva ability, along with hearty amounts of ingenuity by Farmiga (who I loved - and who is starring in the recently released thriller Mindscape) and Paulson.  How much longer can AHS keep it up?

100th Post

…but not my 100th movie.

In honor of The Horror Blog's 100th entry, Horror Buff would like to announce that from now on, on the last day of each month, I will write a concise list that expressly lists the rating (from highest to lowest) of each reviewed movie from that month.

I hope that this makes it easier to look up a good movie without having to browse through commentary or spoilers.

Stay scary.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark (2011)

GENERAL INFO:
Director:  Troy Nixey
Studios:  Miramax Films, Necropia, Gran Via
Starring:  Bailee Madison, Katie Holmes, Guy Pearce
Tagline:  Fear Is Never Just Make Believe
MPAA Rating:  R
Genre:  horror, fantasy, terror, thriller, mystery, drama, suspense, haunted house, monsters
Scare score:  C-
Rating:  C

Plot overview:  After being sent to live with her father (Pearce) and his girlfriend (Holmes), the precocious Sally (Madison) feels more distraught and misunderstood than ever.  This starts to change when what she imagines to be small fairies begin coaxing her from inside the walls and out of sight.  As Sally grows more determined to learn more about these creatures and prove that they exist, terrible things start happening to the house and its inhabitants.  Will anyone else believe Sally about the creatures before it's too late?

I stumbled upon this film because its impressive score was written by Marco Beltrami, the same composer who orchestrated many other well known horror films such as The Woman in Black and the Scream franchise.  By the short summary I read about the movie's plot, it seemed like the type of story I would really enjoy.  Normally I love what Guillermo del Toro does to films (The Devil's Backbone), fully aware that he heavily mixes fantasy with horror a la Brothers Grimm, but I suppose I should have known that shortly after Don't Be Afraid of the Dark began that I was perhaps seeing a piece with too much of the former and not enough of (my preferred) latter.  That is to say from Beltrami's sweeping score to the heavy dependence on cartoonish CGI, the movie feels like an animated, fantastic story from the beginning, sorely taking away from tons of horror potential.

That's not to say that there weren't some scares, just that this isn't my preferred style of horror.  I admit I haven't yet seen the 1973 made-for-TV original version, which I hear delivers more than this remake.  Regardless, the prologue to the film was pretty disturbing if overdone, and I guess I thought that the last sequence in the basement sort of grossed me out by surprise for about a split second.  Otherwise this was like a less historical and perhaps more malevolent Pan's Labyrinth.

What was good?  I thought the acting was on spot.  Of course we have a surprisingly demanding role in the hands of a child, and Bailee Madison (whose name sounds too much like Billy Madison) delivers, even if we don't like her because the entire character of Sally is dark and disturbed and whiny and annoying.  Though to clarify: I was sick of Sally, and not Bailee.  Are we ever really worried about Sally's well-being, though?  Not if we've studied the rules - which generally makes the film all the more [predictably] anticlimactic whenever we are presented with a child in peril.  The gardener Harris (Jack Thompson) delivers a cliche but eerie role mainly due to his raspy voice.  For me, he really stuck out from the rest of the cast, at least earlier on in the movie.  Katie Holmes was Katie Holmes, and while her character Kim doesn't ever really reach that level of deep believability that a complete character hopefully achieves, I thought she was still convincingly caring and patient and concerned.  Guy Pearce almost convinced me with his American accent, almost as much as Alex convinces us that he is a responsible father.  Whoops just kidding you're shallow although I can respect that the man is driven.  Alex represents a good point in fantasy plots such as this one, that being the realistic side of the story, the practicality that balances Sally's fantasy and Kim's willingness to believe.

Like in other del Toro works, the viewer here is a presented with the dilemma of whether or not he or she chooses to accept the fantasy within the film.  The characters are often faced with this decision as well, resulting in some that accept the fantasy and others that remain firmly in reality.  Is Sally a medicated, depressed child who invents these creatures to keep her company during her lonely experience in a new, unfamiliar, and frightening place?  Are they her imaginary friends helping comfort her from life with her estranged father and her replacement mother?  While I think the movie makes it pretty clear that these monsters do exist, stranger things have happened.

This movie moved along pretty slowly, with plenty of build up and plenty of unnecessary plot - I was most ticked off by the totally irrelevant inclusion of a tooth fairy plot - resulting in not much delivery.  And good acting aside, our big names like Holmes and Pearce are clearly limited at times by the script/ plot.  At times this really didn't feel like a horror movie at all, which irked me while watching because I was really in the mood for a good movie.  Well you can't win 'em all.

*SPOILER ALERT*

One thing that certainly bothered me about the movie was the monsters themselves.  I can understand how hard it must be to sort of dream up and create a new monster that we haven't seen done before.  That's not to say that these things weren't creepy (I've always thought that creatures of precisely that size and height - like not quite above your shin - are especially discomforting).  I just don't really think they were scary.  Also, they're locked behind this old coal chute which seems to keep them at bay - only isn't the coal chute directly attached to the house's ventilation system which they then travel through for the rest of the movie?  Were they already traveling through the vents before Sally opens the chute door?  I don't remember at this point, and I'm not sure I can enough to go back and look.

Final critique:  This film really lies more in the dark fantasy realm than in the horror realm, though I'd give it 'terror' at its scariest scenes.  There seems to have been a lot of ideas put into this that maybe were more important before filming but never were fully carried out/ completed in the film's final cut (aka loose ends).  Basically we have a lot of cliches, a lot of build up, some suspense, and not tons of delivery.  Still not a terrible watch, filled with plenty of fairy tale charm as far as the mansion, gardens, and music go.