The Dead Room (2015) – movie review

The Dead Room (2015)

directed by Jason Stutter

 

starring:
Jed Brophy
Jeffrey Thomas
Laura Petersen

 

This film is a real slow burn, but if you stick with it, it builds to a big payoff. Firm characterization has each actor playing a convincing role. The beginning reminds one of The Shining, where wide angle views treat the viewer to the beautiful landscapes of New Zealand. We wind down to a small claustrophobic domicile reminiscent of the cabin in Evil Dead. Three paranormal investigators are sent to the home which previous owners had fled. Their assignment is to prove to the insurance company either way, that it’s haunted and they should tear it down, or its not haunted and they should peruse the previous owners for repayment. The team goes through the usual set up. Liam, the tech guru sets up cameras and scanners. Scott, the boss sets up a control center and mans his Mel meter, and Holly, is the sensitive and does psychic readings of the home. When they first arrive, she feels nothing in the home. Likewise, there are no readings on any equipment or movements breaking the motion sensors. They do an EVP session and get nothing. There is a definite reason for that which you will soon learn.

 

If you can take a ghost hunting session seriously and accept that ghost evidence would be at best subtle, then you will be able to enjoy this film. The first few nights we get nothing more than a swinging chandelier and an opening door. However, stay with the film and you will get more each night as the actions escalate and the entity eventually makes a clear attempt at taking a life. The ending has a big payoff and plot twist, worth the wait for any haunted house horror fan. Shades of The Legend of Hell House, and The Haunting are evident but not detracting from the film. The director gets the mood and atmosphere pinned down perfectly with the gloomy long hallway being the focus of the film. Nobody is going to be blown away by this film, but in the end, it’s entertaining. 

 

Despite the slow start, If you like ghost stories and haunted house movies you will likely enjoy this film. 
I give it 3.5 ghastly ghoulies on the haunted harbinger of horror scale.

 

If you like; Legend of Hell House, The Awakening, The Haunting, The Innocents…

 

Bloopers: Look for the ending that was obviously filmed at a different time from the rest of the film as Petersen’s hair suddenly becomes 3 inches shorter.

 

Parlor of Horror, Horror movie reviews!

 

Odd Thomas (2013) – movie review

Odd Thomas (2013)

Directed by Stephen Sommers

Anton Yelchin
Addison Timlin
Willem Dafoe

I’m not a huge fan of PG-rated horror. I’ll often criticize a film when I think it was purposely tamed and diluted to reach the widest audience possible. But for whatever reason, I didn’t mind the PG-rated antics of Odd Thomas. Perhaps it was because the film made it clear from the first minute, this is a pg-rated horror comedy. Don’t get me wrong, there is some serious subject matter in this film-a child predator, satanic themes, and a planned mass killing-but it is told in a way that is not too gritty. It’s been over ten years since I read the Odd Thomas trilogy by Dean Koontz, but I seem to recall a much darker presentation of the story in the books. Or maybe that was just how I interpreted it.

Part of the acceptance of the film was the charm of the two main characters, Odd and his girlfriend, Stormy (Anton Yelchin and Addison Timlin). Odd does quite a bit of narration in this film. His acceptance of his place in the world, combined with his no-nonsense, flippant attitude toward life was likable. The film cut sideways to little vignettes often and it moved at a fast pace keeping my interest. Willem Dafoe’s talents are mostly wasted here as the police chief with few lines and limited screen time. The story has some nice plot twists and a high concept climax. It wasn’t really scary at any point and it was comical but not laugh-out-loud funny. However It was a good story with some good characters.

This is a film for a wide audience, from YA to old coots like me. It’s a shame this didn’t get a proper release here in the US because this could have been a big film for Koontz, provided it found the right audience. I’m sure Harry Potter fans, those into paranormal-light with a bit of fantasy, would have liked this.

Odd can see paranormal entities. When his small town is overrun by demons that feed on tragedy, Odd knows some major bad event is about to go down. It’s up to him to hunt down the paranormal clues and prevent this catastrophe from hurting the people he loves.

The Frighteners with a dose of John Dies at the End and a sprinkle of The Sixth Sense, if that kid Haley grew up and had a sense of humor. Good for a casual viewing.

I give it 3.0 dastardly demons on the scale of sinister satanic plots to steal souls!

She can’t see these things, only Odd can

Fungus Bob

Had to throw this pic in with my review

monsters before the digital gloss effect

 

The Quiet Ones (2014) – movie review

The Quiet Ones (2014)

I like the analytical approach toward parapsychology taken by the main character in this film. Dr. Coupland contends that all ghostly activity is the byproduct of living people with strong telekinetic powers. Paranormal activity is not from the great beyond but created in the subconscious of a person and manifested upon the physical world. He intends to prove his theory with experimentation and documentation of his prime test subject, Jane. He ‘rescued’ her from the barbaric grip of the mental healthcare industry. The doctor and a small team of students hole-up in an abandoned countryside home, away from the prying eyes of Oxford’s administrators. With scientific monitoring equipment, they will prove Dr. Coupland’s theory.

With the ‘set-up’ of the camera-man documenting the event, you may get the impression that this is a found footage film. It’s not. Director, John Pogue, limited the 1^st person/camera POV to a few well-placed scenes that add to the creepiness of the film. Most of the film is portrayed in traditional style.

The film is an intellectual tug-o-war that successfully has the viewer taking sides on the professor’s theory, then flipping opinion back and forth as events escalate. This is mostly atmospheric horror following a cycle of building creepy tension then releasing it. It’s effective in that aspect. The team spend the day discussing the case but when night falls and the team members sit up alone (in shifts) watching Jane’s behavior on monitors, the atmosphere tenses up considerably. Jane speaks of a malevolent presence named ‘Evey’ and her intensions to do bad things. Coupland argues that ‘Evey’ is just a part of Jane’s subconscious and they will be able to extract that negative energy to cure Jane of her ailment.

There are some good plot twists as creepy Jane (played by Olivia Cooke) manipulates the characters with her words and turns them against each other. I wouldn’t consider this film a ‘classic’ but it’s a good watch on a quiet night, for eerie malevolent tension and some good jump scares. It’s original in concept and doesn’t contain the usual Hollywood clichés; I appreciate that. This is a Hammer film Production. Hammer have been releasing a steady stream of interesting films since their re-launch. It is loosely based on a real event known as the Philip Experiment, conducted in Toronto in 1972.

Creepy little film that was well-acted and original in concept, worth a watch.

I give it 3.9 outta’ 5, on the creepy, dark-haired, goth-girl scale of paranormal psycho-haunt films.

 

What is ‘Horror’ to You?

What is ‘Horror’ to You?

The other day on Facebook someone said, Stir of Echoes wouldn’t be considered a horror film. Really? It has a vengeful spirit/ghost, it has some nasty deaths, it has creepy atmosphere… it certainly ain’t a drama. It is written smarter and with more complexity than your average horror genre flick, thanks to the pen of Richard Matheson, but I would still consider it horror.

I would tend to think that paranormal films are more horror than slasher films, but some people disagree. Just because someone doesn’t find a particular film scary, doesn’t mean it’s not horror.

You’re Next is more of a suspense/thriller film than horror, but I feel if someone dies in a nasty way and didn‘t deserve it, it is pretty horrible and therefore considered horror. So my definition of horror is in the broad sense. Of course, even though Ghost had a supernatural element to it, I wouldn’t consider that film horror. Nor would I consider all of the ‘romance with ghosts’ novels and stories that have inundated Amazon.com lately, to be horror. But that’s just me. If you want to consider them horror be my guest, I won’t argue.

————————————

My definition of horror is:
‘a book, film, or story that raises your defense mechanism, makes you nervous, edgy, frightened, or scared with the threat of danger, death, and even damnation, at the hands of an individual or thing, above and beyond the conventions of normalcy.’ 

————————————

To further explain, being attacked by a serial killer is not a normal event. Attacked by a poltergiest or angry spirit isn’t either. I would consider both horror.

I wouldn’t consider a Tom Clancy novel horror, even though it raises your defense mechanism, and includes the threat of danger/death. If you are in the mob, or if you cross the mob and get shot for it – that is normal for that lifestyle and not considered horror. Likewise, if we are following a detective who is investigating/hunting a serial killer, that is somewhat normal for what they do and would most likely be considered a thriller or crime drama.

In certain instances a thriller can cross over into the horror genre, like in Se7en and Silence of the Lambs. Serial killer films can be considered horror if we are up close and intimate with the killer’s actions – if we can actually experience the horror felt by their victims. They create a psychological horror atmosphere – an atmosphere of horror within your mind. The Human Centipede and Maniac are definitely horror under this aspect. Jaws can also be considered horror under this parameter.

I would consider most stories with a ghost, spirit or a supernatural entity to be horror. I would also consider films with a psychological terror aspect to be horror. Of course, Horror has many sub-genres. I will have a post about sub-genres in the near future.

But until then, What is horror to you?

What are your feelings on what makes a good horror story?

What films are considered horror that you wouldn’t consider horror?

– and visa-versa –

What films are not considered horror that you would classify as horror?