Category Archives: Hauntings

I Am The Pretty Thing That Lives In The House 2016

I-Am-the-Pretty-Thing-That-Lives-in-the-House-2

I Am The Pretty Thing That Lives In The House take minimalist filmmaking to new highs with very little, obviously. Or it could be to new lows, depending on your tolerance levels.

Ruth Wilson plays a home nurse who has come to look after a famed author in her dying days. Wilson suspects there may be something haunting the house. She dies. That your lot.

Don’t worry, I’m not giving anything away, she says she dies in her opening dialogue, which is in one way unfortunate because not a hell of a lot else happens. On the flip side, by knowing that Wilson is ultimately doomed it adds a tragic air to the whole proceedings. Also you will be less prone to shouting “is that it!?!?” at the screen.

Writer and director Oz Perkins has constructed a meticulously crafted ghost story. It is about mood rather than story. In fact the plot is so bare bones that it could be told in half the time. However that isn’t what Perkins is trying to do here. He’s creating a piece of atmosphere and dread rather than story beats. We find out about a previous inhabitant called Polly who was killed here, the old author has a connection to Polly and we get snippets of Wilson’s life before she moved into the house. It all makes some kind of sense but there’s not a lot else to it. It’s a shame that the story, such as it is, isn’t a little bit more original. It’s no different to The Turning of the Screw, M R James or any number of Shirley Jackson novels, but with far less detail. There are some interesting ideas about how ghosts are free from time, able to look in on any point of their life or the lives of others, but it is barely touched upon.

Wilson is, as you would expect if you’ve seen any of her other work, terrific. She spends most of the film alone and without dialogue (apart from a somewhat dense voice over) and portrays someone alone and gradually slipping into a world of fear with subtlety and depth. Without her the film would have fallen apart, it is beautiful to look at but with its glacier speed you need someone with Wilson’s presence to keep you watching.

There are other actors here and there in smaller roles but you never get to know much about them. I would have liked to learn more about the old author, played by Paula Prentiss in modern times and Erin Boyes in flashback, but then that would have been besides the point.

I Am The Pretty Thing That Lives In The House is a character study of a ghost, something enigmatic and invisible. As such it’s a brave attempt to do something different with the genre. It succeeds in many ways, especially as a mood piece, but don’t expect big scares or even much of a pay off. Just accept it for what it is and enjoy its minimalist charms.

 

The Interior 2015

theinterior1
There certainly was a good deal of resistance to the digital revolution in film, and in some ways who can blame people. There will always be something lush, vivid and real about film stock that digital will never be able to capture. However, film was always a prohibitively expensive necessity: even the most low-budget of movies had to spend half of their money on film stock and development. So thank god for digital is what I say – it has opened up movie making to talented people who would otherwise never be able to put their ideas up on the big screen. The Interior is a case in point.
What The Interior presents is minimalist film making taken to its limits. Although the first act does have other characters in it, the bulk of the film is literally one man alone in a forest. In fact if the end credits didn’t prove otherwise I’d be tempted to think it really was just lead (and almost only) actor Patrick McFadden setting up the camera on a tripod and filming his next scene. Of course, being a horror movie McFadden is NOT alone in the forest…
 The opening segment of the film concerns McFadden’s deathly dull life working for an advertising agency in some anonymous Canadian city. He hates his boss, smokes weed in front of his doctor and dumps his girlfriend who claims it was nothing serious and then is broken hearted about how much time she has wasted on him. There’s some fun stuff as he imagines fighting his boss and the whole thing has a indie Office Space vibe to it. However the doctor he is seeing also suggests that there is something very wrong with him mentally and/or physically and it is shortly after this that we find ourselves in the interior of the film. Whether this is the interior of the land or the interior of his mind is the main question. 
Right so this is where things get tricky as I’m going to discuss the end of the film so SPOILERS AND SKIP THIS PARAGRAGH IF YOU HAVEN’T AND OR DON’T WANT TO SEE THE INTERIOR. That question about what is the interior isn’t answered in the slightest. Plus I’m all for ambiguous endings if it makes you think but The Interior doesn’t have an ending at all. It just stops. There are a number of freaky occurrences which I’ll get back to, but we don’t build up to a climax, events just repeat themselves a bit and then the film’s credit rolls. The film is only 77 minutes long so the upshot of this is it just feels like they lobbed off the ending. Clearly this isn’t the case, every minute counts in a low budget movie so it must be deliberate but if there is some kind of resolution to the story then it is too obscure for me. I’m not sure how anyone can watch this and not throw their hands up in despair when we reach the end. I know I did. And that is a real shame as up to that point there have been some genuinely good scares.
(END OF END SPOILERS)
Writer and director Trevor Juras creates a brutal and bleak feeling of self-imposed loneliness in the forest that McFadden finds himself in. Giant trees loom over him like ancient tombstones and the feeling of doom and dread are palpable. Juras fathoms up some brilliant frights with the most basic of tools, for example when McFadden is hiding in his tent at night. Having his zip open up from the outside in the middle of the night when he thinks he is by himself is terrifying. The Interior does this scene even better that you’d imagine because it uses your imagination: it is done in total darkness. Literally all I had was a dark screen and the sound of a zip opening and I felt the hairs on the back of my neck stand up.
There are many other good scares in the back of the film but don’t expect much action, this is a slow burn of a movie. However unlike great slow burns like The House of The Devil, it didn’t have the payoff I hoped for (see spoiler above if you must). Maybe other people got more out of this than me. The bulk of the movie is interesting and different, beautifully shot and cleverly edited. It just didn’t add up to much in the end. 
interior
 

The Conjuring 2 2016

image

I first read the screenplay for The Conjuring 2: The Enfield Poltergeist (as it was known then) when the company I was at was bidding to work on the effects. At the time I was struck by two things. One, that if we got it and I was to go on set to supervise then instead of some glamorous location I would be in grotty old Enfield, a miserable part of North London and home to my ex mother-in-law. It’s unlikely she would have invited me round for tea, which was at least something. And two, whilst the script was well written and solid it didn’t grab me as anything new or even that exciting.

It is well known that the screenplay is the foundation of any movie. If it isn’t a solid construction, the only thing the rest of the film can do is crash down around it. However, the screenplay isn’t the be all and end all of a production and The Conjuring 2 is a prime example of that. Okay, so it remains, as it did on page, a robustly constructed story with good dialogue (considering some of the exposition needed for such a film) and interesting lead characters. It also isn’t anything new, dealing with haunting in suburban homes and young girls getting possessed by demons, both of which have been done a hundred times before. However, what director James Wan and his team has brought to the screen supersedes what was written down in black and white. He has taken that basic foundation and built a castle on the top.

The Enfield Poltergeist is allegedly a true incident. A recently divorced mother and her four children are relentlessly tormented by a malevolent spirit, particularly the younger daughter, Janet, who may or may not be possessed by it. It takes psychic dynamic duo Ed and Lorraine Warren to fly in and solve the case and banish the demon back to hell, which isn’t much different from Enfield so I’m not sure why it bothered. When I say true I mean maybe bollocks. The Warrens actually didn’t get involved much, just turning up for a day unannounced before scuttling back to America. And even the film acknowledges that some of the photos of young Janet flying through the the air could just be her jumping.

image

But The Conjuring 2 isn’t trying to be a historical document, it merely uses the “truth” to add an extra layer of fear to the proceedings. What this film is is a great ghost trainbat the fairground: you know where you’re going but it’s going to frighten the life it of you on the way.

The superstar of The Conjuring series is director James Wan. He said after the first film that he was through with horror but clearly the stress and strain of directing Fast and Furious 7 sent him back to the comfort of the genre he knows best. I was worried that his statement about being through with horror would mean he’d be phoning it in here for the cash, but I couldn’t be more wrong. Wan has long, incredibly clever tracking shots setting up the haunted house and it’s geography whilst at the same time developing the family in their environment. He uses the darkness and obscuring parts of walls and furniture to full effect, making you think there is something awful just out of sight (by the way – there usually is). He and his excellent crew also place a huge amount of attention to detail to recreate poverty stricken working class London in the nineteen seventies. This isn’t just as a faithful recreation of the events but also a way to increase the feeling of dread – the house is a ramshackle wreck of a property before anything supernatural happens. It’s like it is made to welcome ghosts.

It’s not all perfect though. They may have got posters of Purdey from The New Avengers on the wall just right but it’s really unlikely they would have had a colour television in a house like that, and no way in hell would they have had a remote control. Also is the house is a little TOO grim. With its flooded cellar and peeling mouldy walls it’s almost unbelievable that anyone could live there, but then maybe that’s the point.

There are other things that stand out like SImon McBurney playing local paranormal investigator Maurice Grosse. He looks like a comedy character from an old Dick Emery show. It’s hugely distracting. Look:

image

However if you look at the real Grosse you realise that it’s a completely accurate portrayal afterall:

image

One of my maths teachers at school sported the same look now I come to think of it. Oh and the London accents are all over the place, often sounding like characters from On The Buses in an attempt to capture that particular sound which has faded a bit nowadays. Weirdly the young American actor playing Janet, Madison Wolfe, pulls off the most convincing North London accent, and she’s only thirteen.

These are minor complaints. I really do hope they try something a bit different for the next movie, story wise, but this is such a well made horror film with such dedication from all involved that it is hard to criticise. Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson are back as the Warrens and both give it their all. Farmiga has the most to do with her wild visions and creepy trances, doing them without looking a bit daft is really quite a feat but she makes it look easy. However it’s the chemistry between the two of actors that makes them so compelling. I mean if you think about it, the Warrens are a middle aged couple who are basically weird social misfits with terrible clothes taste but Farmiga and Wilson commit themselves so much to their roles that it ends up feeling that they are the only thing protecting us from hell taking over the world. They may be oddballs but they know things we can’t ever know and should never want to.

That commitment runs throughout the rest of the cast and crew. There are hundreds of ropey ghost films about but none of them seem to put their all into making as good a piece of entertainment as The Conjuring movies. That goes for Warner Brothers too who are prepared to stump up a decent (but not over the top) amount of money to make a small intimate ghost story about a family and its protectors. No one is saying that The Conjuring films are completely original but they do show what can be done with a talented team given the resources to make as good a horror movie as they can do within the confines of the genre.

 

image

Tales of Halloween 2015

Tales-Of-Halloween2

Here in the Queen’s country we don’t really don’t celebrate Halloween as much as our American cousins do. We think it’s all a bit crass and uncouth. Trick or treating is even worse as it seems like a desperate attempt to get money of strangers and we’d never been caught dead begging. Of course we’re completely missing the point. Dressing up as ghouls and goblins may well be crazy and weird but it’s as old a celebration as any in most societies, and more importantly it’s an excuse to dress up as SEXY ghouls and goblins. This isn’t a religious affair like Easter or even an overtly commercial one like Christmas has become. It’s about dressing up and having fun. That’s what I think we don’t always realise about Halloween in America, it’s about having a making yourself look crazy, mucking about in the macabre and having a laugh.

Saying all that I approached Tales of Halloween with a huge amount of trepidation. It’s directed by some of the best indie horror movie makers around at the moment, it’s also a horror anthology with each story directed by these guys and girls, sorry girl. Well one is better than nothing I suppose. The trouble with a number of these anthologies of late is that the different directors bring such wildly varying tones and styles than the stories feel more like a collection of shorts competing against each other rather than one film. The advantage something like Creepshow had was than George A. Romeo made one big film with the same asthetic, and the connecting story, though minor, helped bind all the others together. The only thing binding the Tales from Halloween seems to be the great Adrienne Barbaeu who reprises her role as Stevie Wayne the smokey voiced DJ from The Fog. This time we only here her and she’s not attacked by undead leaper pirates but it’s better than nothing.

However, as it turns out I had nothing to worry about. All the stories have a similar feel to them in that they embrace the fun element of Halloween and of the horror movie in general. Sure there are countless intestines pulled out, heads chopped off and eyes gouged out but it’s done with a light touch. The locations are mostly of the LA suburb variety so it feels like this is all one neighbourhood these stories are unfolding, with a number of characters wandering in and out of the different tales. Plus the main film showing on TV in each story is, of course, Night of the Living Dead (with a bit of Carnival of Souls thrown in for good measure). The stories all seem to have a similar look to them too so there are lots of extremely red rooms with very blue corners, harking back to the EC comics and Dario Argento at his best. Most of this seems to happen in camera rather than in a colourist’s suite in post production which leads me to believe there was some mood meeting where all the director’s agreed on certain things.

Tales-Of-Halloween

Another thing they all agreed on (and which modern horror director worth their salt wouldn’t agree to this?) is to use as many practical effects as possible. This results in buckets of blood and some very old school looking monsters. There’s even a bit of stop motion in there which is more Morph than Harryhausen but is thoroughly charming nonetheless. These film makers really have embraced what horror movie fans enjoy and it could have been a self indulgent disaster with the amount of cameos and in jokes, however everything is so brisk and breezy that nothing is around long enough to outstay it’s wound-dripping welcome.

The stories themselves are mostly silly bits of fluff. There’s a killer pumpkin on the rampage, devil dwarves terrorising crooks, a ghost following lonely women home (which has probably the bast scare and made May jump out of her skin) and a urban legend come to life. We have aliens vs a Jason Vorhees type, murderous children and vengeful demons. Most of these stories don’t have much meat to them (although they do have a lot of MEAT to them) but all of them are at least entertaining and some of them legitimately great. As a sucker for crazy gore I particularly liked the Jason Voorhees type one which just went way over the top with the arterial spray and limb dismemberment. It also had the cute stop motion alien in it so was kind of the perfect film.

Tales-of-Halloween3

The only one which really bucked this trend was Lucky McKee’s entry which was about being barren women and domestic abuse. But don’t let that put you off, it was still a barrel of laughs and was certainly the weirdest with Pollyanna Macintosh as an unhinged witch with multiple red arms beating her poor, suffering husband insensible. Maybe because it was saying a little bit more than most of the others (although I’m not entirely sure what) but that’s the one that has stuck with me the most.

So the Tales of Halloween that these directors have to tell us aren’t going to change the world, and probably won’t change our British minds about this festive season, but as a celebration of the day everyone stateside puts a pumpkin in their garden and send their children out to their doom, I mean for candy, it’s pretty bloody great. Even non-horror fans will enjoy this, although if you’re a non-horror fan, what the hell is the matter with you?

tales-of-halloween_poster

 

 

Annabelle 2014

ANNABELLE

It is clear that all the best horror movies nowadays are being made by independents. The studios seem happy to churn out either overblown found footage films like The Pyramid and countless Paranormal Activities or haunted/possession numbers like Ouija or another Insidious. The independents meanwhile are knocking our socks with Starry Eyes, Honeymoon, Late Phases, It Follows etc. That’s not to say that the studios aren’t still capable of making great horror movies, its just that they seem to have fallen into the trap of playing it safe – giving us the same thing again and again. Keep them in low on budget and original ideas and market it well and a profit will surely ensue.

Annabelle is the perfect example of this trend. The haunting and possession thing has really reached a point where there seems very little left to say about it. The Conjuring was the best example of taking all the familiar ghost tropes and making something great out of them, but this spin-off about the creepy doll from the beginning of that film just rehashes those same old tropes without adding anything new. Annabelle suffers from a big lack of original ideas from its underdeveloped characters to its long black haired ghosts.

Saying all that I really liked it.

The Conjuring, I think we can all agree, is a modern classic, and the idea of having a spin off about the story from the opening few minutes is something I welcomed with open, rotting arms. However unlike The Conjuring which was kinda-sorta-probably-not based on a true story, here they’ve just made up some old guff. The opening set up is terrific though: a young married couple, Mia and John, are living next door to an older couple who’s daughter has “run away with some hippies”. As its the end of the sixties we see on the television news about the Manson family and the Tate killing. This sets up what happens next: in the middle of the night the next door neighbour’s daughter returns with some crazy cult friend and attack her parents. Mayhem ensues and Mia’s favourite new doll ends up with the blood of the daughter on it. Its a tight, violent and scary opening that wracks up the tension. Its just a shame that after that we go through the motions of things moving around and switching on and off for a while. Also there are some ghost children running through the house. Please can we have no more ghost children, they have been pretty boring and definitely not very scary for a long time. The last time I was scared by a ghost child was when I read Lost Hearts by M. R. James, when I was a child.

The unhappy couple, and now baby, get the hell out of their house, and not a moment too soon. The place look uncannily like the first house in Insidious for my liking, with the same layout and big, brown front door. Oh, that couple left their family home after the wife insisted in the face of scepticism from the husband too. Can you see how there are a lack of new ideas here? It follow the same story beats as all the other supernatural stories kicking around at the moment.

Things do pick up in the next location, a modern apartment block. Only slight trouble here is that now, with this waif, blonde wife being told she’s mad kicking around an empty apartment block rings of Rosemary’s Baby. Not that that is necessarily a bad thing, and its definitely on purpose – Mia and John are named after Rosemary’s stars Mia Farrow and John Cassavetes. It also learns from Polanski how to shoot an set for maximum effect.

What I like about Annabelle is that despite being incredibly derivative as far as the plot is concerned, it is really, really well directed, and looks fantastic. Director John R. Leonettti and his team take full advantage of the relatively small location with lots of long steady cam shots swinging around Mia as the mostly alone mother defending her baby against unseen forces. There is an absolutely beautiful and scary scene set in the basement when Mia is threatened by some demonic force, she make a dash for the lift, away from this hell, and instead of doing the old cliche of the thing grabbing the lift doors just as they close, the lift does close and move off, but then it opens and she’s still in the basement. This scene repeats itself several times but instead of getting repetitive, it gets more and more tense because of how they have set up the camera. We are viewing things from just behind Mia, so we can see into the basement but we are slightly off to the left so we can’t quite see ENOUGH. Admittedly this is an old Polanski trick again but it works really well.

The basement scene is not just a brilliant composition but is also really well lit, giving just enough of the horrors in the darkness without revealing too much. The other great moment involving shadows and light involves something with the Annabelle doll that I won’t spoil here but is a fantastic moment of horror imagery, and quite frankly Annabelle the movie is worth watching for this moment (and the basement scene) alone.

Annabelle Wallis as Mia is also terrific even though her role is fairly underwritten, being no more than a potentially-mad new mother, but being front and centre of the action means she has to keep a level of intensity that defies the role. Its a shame her character hasn’t been given a little more depth, the Rosemary’s Baby references are here quite apparent being a thin blonde trapped in her city apartment much like Mia Farrow, but a bit more originality wouldn’t have gone amiss.

And that sums up Annabelle as a whole. The film was rushed into production after The Conjuring surprise box office haul and whilst everyone involved has risen to the challenge to produce a handsome and occasionally brilliant looking film, the core of the movie, the actual script feels rushed and underdeveloped. The central couple aren’t given anything new to do, Alfre Woodard pops up as the all knowing spiritual woman almost as an afterthought and even Annabelle herself doesn’t do a hell of a lot.

After I finished the film, which I did enjoy a lot despite its problems, I figured I’d watch the opening of The Conjuring, just for completions sake. Its telling that those first five minutes where we first met Annabelle had more ideas and scares than the whole of the film of Annabelle. Its also a little bit sad.

annabelle poster