Search
Search results
Emma @ The Movies (1786 KP) rated Murder on the Orient Express (2017) in Movies
Sep 25, 2019
It is 1934, and our moustachioed detective has just solved a theft in Jerusalem. He looks forward to resting in Istanbul, but his break is interrupted with the news that he must return to London for a case. It seems like Poirot's luck is in, having just met his friend who is director of the Orient Express.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
Once on board Poirot catches the attention of the businessman, Samuel Ratchett. Ratchett has received threatening letters, and wishes to hire the detective as his bodyguard during their journey, but the offer is politely declined.
That night an avalanche derails he train and the passengers are stranded. In the morning Ratchett is found dead, stabbed a dozen times. Poirot and Bouc, the train director, investigate the passengers as repairs begin. Poirot discovers a partially destroyed note connecting Ratchett to the kidnapping of Daisy Armstrong, a child who was abducted from her bedroom and held for ransom. After the ransom was paid, Daisy was found murdered. Ratchett is identified as John Cassetti, Daisy’s kidnapper and murderer.
First off, let me address the elephant in the room... that'll be Kenneth Branagh as Poirot. David Suchet will always be my Poirot, he's perfect. Branagh, for me, has an overacting issue. And that moustache, it's just ridiculous. That's not even taking into account the scene where Poirot is laying in bed and he doesn't have his night-time moustache cosy on. Crazy.
Agatha Christie's tale has definitely been given the Hollywood treatment. It's gone from the quite dark Suchet version, to something quite farcical in comparison. I can understand remaking some things, but when you have such a definitive portrayal of a character why would you recast them?
Having just rewatched the 2010 version I will say that the story line in the movie is probably easier to understand. It's also more suitable for a younger audience.
As a passing comment to everyone who was surprised to hear they were going to do Death On The Nile next... no shit, Poirot! It was dropped in at the end of the film.
HerCrazyReviews (247 KP) rated Rent: The Complete Book and Lyrics of the Broadway Musical in Books
Aug 24, 2019
AIDs Representation (1 more)
LGBTQIA+ Representation
Great Representation, Horrible Characters
I have never seen the musical Rent nor have I ever seen the movie (though I heard it is not as good and different from the musical). Therefore, my rating is based solely on this book and because of that, I may not be able to understand or enjoy it as much as I would have if I had watched the movie or musical first.
First off, I loved that the book (or rather, musical) was set during the AIDS crisis and showed LGBTQIA+ representation. I think that is fantastic because (a.) we are lacking in our current day representation of LGBTQIA+ characters (though, we are slowly beginning to have this become the norm.) and (b.) the AIDS crisis was not a good time in history. The American government was not doing much to help with this crisis and seemed to sort of sweep it aside. Now, I was not alive during the beginning of this crisis and therefore have learned from sources and not with my own experiences, but not much was being done and this was mostly because this was originally considered a “gay disease” and, sadly, people in the past have not treated the LGBTQIA+ community with the respect they deserve. Instead, because this was considered a “gay disease” it was considered unimportant and therefore the AIDS epidemic was ignored. Luckily, today we have better people who are trying their best to find a cure.
Second, while I extremely enjoyed the representation and awareness this book (or musical) brought I did not enjoy most of the characters. While I do believe that characters should have flaws (after all no one is perfect and that is part of what make us human) I did not appreciate the way the characters in the book seemed to make excuses. Especially the fact that they used others difficulties to try and better themselves. Not to mention, most of the characters seemed to accentuate their poorness and use it as a way to better themselves. One scene that really got to me was when Mark was starting to film a homeless person. He did save them from the police but even they said “My life’s not for you to make a name for yourself on” and “Hey artist you gotta dollar? I thought not,” (Pg.38). It literally stated that these people who claim themselves to be “artists” use this as an excuse to exploit others.
Another huge part of what I did not appreciate about this book would be the harmful relationship that most of the characters seem to be in. Most of these relationships seemed too toxic and seemed to revolve around awful and sometimes disgusting circumstances.
Maureen (Cheater) + Joanne = 💔
Maureen and Joanne were repeatedly arguing, breaking it off, then getting back together. Now, that alone already seems like it’s not a healthy foundation for any relationship but then we find out that Maureen is a HUGE cheater. Mark himself told Joanne that she used to cheat on him when they were together and even had a bit of evidence that she was doing it again.
Roger (Past Drug Addict) + Mimi (Drug User) = 💔
Now, Roger is one of the many characters in this musical to have AIDS and because he is a past drug user we can infer that he got AIDS from drugs, or from his ex-girlfriend. Anyway, his goal before he dies from AIDS is to write one last song so that his life could mean something. To make sure that his life was worth it (to have glory), and I actually admire him for that. Lots of people would give up and I think it’s amazing that he wants to continue to try to make his life worth living. However, Mimi comes in and started to spark a flame (or light a candle) with Roger. There’s just one problem. Mimi is a drug user. Plus, it seems like she is trying to get Roger to get back on drugs. Definitely not something a healthy and loving relationship would have.
Benny (At least 30yrs.) + Mimi (Younger than 19) = 💔
Now, this has to be the most disgusting relationship in the book. While I don’t mind couples having age differences I am one-hundred percent NOT behind underage people dating men who are at least thirty, if not forty, years old. This was revealed when we got told that Mimi use to date Benny before she met Roger. Mimi was nineteen when she met Roger and if she had a prior relationship with Benny she was most likely eighteen or under.
Finally, I wasn’t very happy with the ending of the book. Mimi’s sort-of “death” scene just wasn’t my thing. It seemed to be that the situation as a whole seemed too excessive. She was dead, then she was back, then she was dead again, and she managed to come back because Angel told her too. While Mimi is a main character and main character deaths are extremely sad this story was supposed to make people more aware of AIDS and it just seemed to be too fanciful for me. This is an extremely deadly disease and just because someone told you that it was not your time to die yet does not mean that you are not going to yet pass. However, this is fiction and this does happen.
Would I Recommend? No. I really enjoyed the representation this showed within the LGBTQIA+ community and the awareness it would bring to people about the AIDS crisis, but I thought the story itself was bad. The characters, in my opinion, were not written well and I especially did not enjoy their actions or choices.
First off, I loved that the book (or rather, musical) was set during the AIDS crisis and showed LGBTQIA+ representation. I think that is fantastic because (a.) we are lacking in our current day representation of LGBTQIA+ characters (though, we are slowly beginning to have this become the norm.) and (b.) the AIDS crisis was not a good time in history. The American government was not doing much to help with this crisis and seemed to sort of sweep it aside. Now, I was not alive during the beginning of this crisis and therefore have learned from sources and not with my own experiences, but not much was being done and this was mostly because this was originally considered a “gay disease” and, sadly, people in the past have not treated the LGBTQIA+ community with the respect they deserve. Instead, because this was considered a “gay disease” it was considered unimportant and therefore the AIDS epidemic was ignored. Luckily, today we have better people who are trying their best to find a cure.
Second, while I extremely enjoyed the representation and awareness this book (or musical) brought I did not enjoy most of the characters. While I do believe that characters should have flaws (after all no one is perfect and that is part of what make us human) I did not appreciate the way the characters in the book seemed to make excuses. Especially the fact that they used others difficulties to try and better themselves. Not to mention, most of the characters seemed to accentuate their poorness and use it as a way to better themselves. One scene that really got to me was when Mark was starting to film a homeless person. He did save them from the police but even they said “My life’s not for you to make a name for yourself on” and “Hey artist you gotta dollar? I thought not,” (Pg.38). It literally stated that these people who claim themselves to be “artists” use this as an excuse to exploit others.
Another huge part of what I did not appreciate about this book would be the harmful relationship that most of the characters seem to be in. Most of these relationships seemed too toxic and seemed to revolve around awful and sometimes disgusting circumstances.
Maureen (Cheater) + Joanne = 💔
Maureen and Joanne were repeatedly arguing, breaking it off, then getting back together. Now, that alone already seems like it’s not a healthy foundation for any relationship but then we find out that Maureen is a HUGE cheater. Mark himself told Joanne that she used to cheat on him when they were together and even had a bit of evidence that she was doing it again.
Roger (Past Drug Addict) + Mimi (Drug User) = 💔
Now, Roger is one of the many characters in this musical to have AIDS and because he is a past drug user we can infer that he got AIDS from drugs, or from his ex-girlfriend. Anyway, his goal before he dies from AIDS is to write one last song so that his life could mean something. To make sure that his life was worth it (to have glory), and I actually admire him for that. Lots of people would give up and I think it’s amazing that he wants to continue to try to make his life worth living. However, Mimi comes in and started to spark a flame (or light a candle) with Roger. There’s just one problem. Mimi is a drug user. Plus, it seems like she is trying to get Roger to get back on drugs. Definitely not something a healthy and loving relationship would have.
Benny (At least 30yrs.) + Mimi (Younger than 19) = 💔
Now, this has to be the most disgusting relationship in the book. While I don’t mind couples having age differences I am one-hundred percent NOT behind underage people dating men who are at least thirty, if not forty, years old. This was revealed when we got told that Mimi use to date Benny before she met Roger. Mimi was nineteen when she met Roger and if she had a prior relationship with Benny she was most likely eighteen or under.
Finally, I wasn’t very happy with the ending of the book. Mimi’s sort-of “death” scene just wasn’t my thing. It seemed to be that the situation as a whole seemed too excessive. She was dead, then she was back, then she was dead again, and she managed to come back because Angel told her too. While Mimi is a main character and main character deaths are extremely sad this story was supposed to make people more aware of AIDS and it just seemed to be too fanciful for me. This is an extremely deadly disease and just because someone told you that it was not your time to die yet does not mean that you are not going to yet pass. However, this is fiction and this does happen.
Would I Recommend? No. I really enjoyed the representation this showed within the LGBTQIA+ community and the awareness it would bring to people about the AIDS crisis, but I thought the story itself was bad. The characters, in my opinion, were not written well and I especially did not enjoy their actions or choices.
MichaelS (0 KP) rated Justice League (2017) in Movies
Feb 20, 2018
"Meanwhile, at the Hall Of Justice..."
This movie is the culmination of a childhood full of Saturday mornings in front of the tv in pajamas with a bowl of cereal. "Superfriends" was superheroes at it's most basic. The bad guys wanted to take over or destroy the world and the good guys have to stop them. That was the depth of the plots for both those classic cartoons, and this movie. It's pure cartoon fun brought to life, and I loved every minute of it.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
The plot only serves as a reason for these heroes to come together. So you can say that story is not a top priority. Character is the name of the game here, and on that level, the movie is gold. Each character is fully realized, with their own individual situation they need to grow from. Every hero is given his or her moment to shine as an individual. When they stand as a team, it's some of the best superhero action we've ever gotten.
The performances of the League members is spot on across the board. Every character is presented exactly the way they should be. Ben Affleck continues to prove all the doubters wrong, by giving us the best live action version of Batman we've ever seen. Right from the start you see how he demands fear from evildoers, but filled with hope for the good things in the world. Gal Gadot IS Wonder Woman. If there was any doubt left after her solo movie, it should be thoroughly erased now. She's strong in body, mind, and spirit. Jason Mamoa forever erases the idea of Aquaman being the wimpiest superhero. His "surfer dude" take on the character brings all the recklessness and abandon you'd expect from a beach bum. He's almost like a Spartan soldier that lives for the excitement of battle. Ezra Miller brings a youthful excitement of someone who is simply jazzed by what he, and others, can do with their abilities. He's almost the comic relief until you realize that the excited reactions he gives to everything is exactly what we would to if we were dropped in that situation.
SPOILER TERRITORY....skip to "END SPOILERS" if you don't want anything ruined
Although it should really come as no surprise to anyone, Superman does indeed return from the dead in this movie. Not only is that he's resurrected very cool, but the aftermath gives us the best fight scene of the film. Superman vs The Justice League. 'nuff said? I've always loved Henry Cavill as Superman, but now he owns the role. He has grown from a man filled with self doubt, trying to find his place in the world, to a man who now fully realizes who he is, and what purpose he serves to mankind. Lots of great Superman stuff in this movie, and that is the thing I'm most thankful for.
END SPOILERS
This is the most fun I've had with a superhero movie in a long time. It may not have the deepest plot, but that is fine with me, because this is truly a comic book come to life. It's full of the action and joyful spirit that the boy in me tuned into every weekend. Now, if the post credit scene in the movie delivers, it REALLY will be everything that the classic Challenges Of The Superfriends, and reduce me to that boy in pajamas again, cereal in hand, and a smile on my face.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated Onward (2020) in Movies
Mar 25, 2020
Fun...but..."lesser" PIxar
I am a big fan of the PIXAR films. I am a big fan of Chris Pratt and Tom Holland. I am a big fan of Fantasy films (wizards, elves, dwarves and so on...) So when I heard there was going to be a Pixar flick featuring the voice talents of Pratt and Holland about characters in a Fantasy world, I was excited to check it out.
I should have lowered my expectations.
Don't get me wrong, ONWARD is a good film. It is whimsical, fantastic and fun. It just could have been better.
Set in a time where Elves, Faeries, Unicorns and Wizards exist, but they exist as "regular" people, going to jobs, going to school, living their lives...ONWARD tells the tale of 2 brothers (Pratt and Holland) who go on a magical quest to bring back their dead father - at least for one night.
It's a fun romp, but it's not a REALLY fun romp. And that's the issue with this film. It is all lower case - where the film could have been UPPER CASE (if you know what I mean). Holland and Pratt are good together, they are not GREAT together (like Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in TOY STORY or Billy Crystal and John Goodman in MONSTER'S INC.). Julia Louis-Dreyfuss is off-beat as their mother, but she isn't over-the-top WACKY as the mother. Octavio Spencer is "octane" as a former mythical creature that aids the boys - but she's not HIGH-OCTANE.
You get the drift.
I lay the fault of this on Director Dam Scanlon who's other Pixar Directorial effort, MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY suffered from a similar malaise. It was fun...not AWESOME FUN. The pacing of the film doesn't really help as there is no strong push to the goal in this film. I caught myself stirring in my seat as the film progressed...never a good sign.
Don't get me wrong, it is still a good film - the kids will like it. I just have come to expect more from PIXAR. I put Pixar films on 2 levels - GREAT Pixar films (the TOY STORY films, UP, WALL-E) and LESSER Pixar films (MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY, CARS 2, BRAVE).
I would put ONWARD in the LESSER category.
Letter Grade: B (even a "lesser" Pixar film is still above average)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
I should have lowered my expectations.
Don't get me wrong, ONWARD is a good film. It is whimsical, fantastic and fun. It just could have been better.
Set in a time where Elves, Faeries, Unicorns and Wizards exist, but they exist as "regular" people, going to jobs, going to school, living their lives...ONWARD tells the tale of 2 brothers (Pratt and Holland) who go on a magical quest to bring back their dead father - at least for one night.
It's a fun romp, but it's not a REALLY fun romp. And that's the issue with this film. It is all lower case - where the film could have been UPPER CASE (if you know what I mean). Holland and Pratt are good together, they are not GREAT together (like Tom Hanks and Tim Allen in TOY STORY or Billy Crystal and John Goodman in MONSTER'S INC.). Julia Louis-Dreyfuss is off-beat as their mother, but she isn't over-the-top WACKY as the mother. Octavio Spencer is "octane" as a former mythical creature that aids the boys - but she's not HIGH-OCTANE.
You get the drift.
I lay the fault of this on Director Dam Scanlon who's other Pixar Directorial effort, MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY suffered from a similar malaise. It was fun...not AWESOME FUN. The pacing of the film doesn't really help as there is no strong push to the goal in this film. I caught myself stirring in my seat as the film progressed...never a good sign.
Don't get me wrong, it is still a good film - the kids will like it. I just have come to expect more from PIXAR. I put Pixar films on 2 levels - GREAT Pixar films (the TOY STORY films, UP, WALL-E) and LESSER Pixar films (MONSTER'S UNIVERSITY, CARS 2, BRAVE).
I would put ONWARD in the LESSER category.
Letter Grade: B (even a "lesser" Pixar film is still above average)
7 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank (ofMarquis)
My Sister, the Serial Killer
7.8
Rate It
Book
Satire meets slasher in this short, darkly funny hand grenade of a novel about a Nigerian woman...
Leanne Crabtree (480 KP) rated Wrecking Ball (Hard to Love, #1) in Books
Jan 11, 2021
This starts with Camilla in court (i think?) as she is told she has lost everything she owns after her dead husband started a ponzi scheme that lost a lot of people a lot of money. She is public enemy number one and nobody wants to hire her so she ends up living with her parents and going through agencies in the hopes of finding a job. She's finally offered one looking after a young boy who has a celebrity uncle and must live with them for the duration of the contract. Sparks fly between Cam and Calvin from the start but as they grow closer, animosity turns to attraction.
I actually really enjoyed this. It was definitely a slow burn romance but you could see there was a spark there from pretty early on. Probably from when Cal turned up at her evening job asking her to take the nanny job and wanting to drive her home afterwards since it was so late. That there put him down as being a gentleman in my books and I was smitten. I devoured it from that point on, willing them to finally do something about their attraction.
Of course, there's the dilemma that tears our couple apart and even I was getting emotional at that part. Geez, they were so good together and something like that was going to end up tearing them apart. All came right in the end, though, thank God, or I would be an emotional wreck right now.
I may have to read the next book in the series because it focuses on Cam's best friend and apparent man-hater, Amber, so that should be fun.
I actually really enjoyed this. It was definitely a slow burn romance but you could see there was a spark there from pretty early on. Probably from when Cal turned up at her evening job asking her to take the nanny job and wanting to drive her home afterwards since it was so late. That there put him down as being a gentleman in my books and I was smitten. I devoured it from that point on, willing them to finally do something about their attraction.
Of course, there's the dilemma that tears our couple apart and even I was getting emotional at that part. Geez, they were so good together and something like that was going to end up tearing them apart. All came right in the end, though, thank God, or I would be an emotional wreck right now.
I may have to read the next book in the series because it focuses on Cam's best friend and apparent man-hater, Amber, so that should be fun.
Grand Theft Auto: Chinatown Wars
Games and Entertainment
App
***ATTENTION*** IF YOU PURCHASED GTA: CHINATOWN WARS HD, PLEASE CHECK YOUR ITUNES PURCHASE HISTORY...
Her Sister's Lie
7.0
Rate It
Book
In this riveting psychological thriller, the international bestselling author of The Bones of You...
mystery thriller
JT (287 KP) rated Insidious (2010) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
James Wan has all the talent but for some reason is unable to put the killer instinct into his films and finish them off like they should be. With the exception of being one of the founding members of the Saw franchise, his films to date haven’t quite lived up to the expectations we know he can and should be able to deliver on.
Wan returns with Leigh Whannell the creator and writer of Saw, with the pair looking to yet again scare everyone shitless with a haunted house tale, this time focussing on a young boy whose slipped into a coma and drifted into the outer realms called The Further.
When writing Insidious Whannell wanted to make sure that he avoided all the haunted house cliches, and he pretty much did that. What he failed to do though was script a stronger third act, something which might have brought this up on a par with Saw.
Dalton is the one in peril as he suddenly slips into a coma one morning, his mother Renai (Byrne) is then forced to spend time looking after her trio of kids all the while looking over her shoulder, as she hears one bump to the next occurring both in broad daylight and at night.
After some decent scares from the outset including the old “he’s behind you” and murmurings through the baby monitor the film was almost guilty of slipping into a farce as our protagonist Josh Lambert (Wilson) was forced to engage in some astro physics in order to save the day.
It was a real shame as up till that point you’d have spent most of the run time hiding under the covers, as Wan introduced one jolt after another, some more subtle than others but ultimately offering the same desired effect.
The introduction of Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) the Ghost hunter whose come to see what all the fuss is about is pretty much inevitable. Armed with the latest high tech equipment and a couple of geeks, the aptly named Specs and Tucker, provides much amusement as Rainier delivers the killer line “It’s not the house that’s haunted”.
The film moves through the gears well, but it’s that annoyingly poor third act that ruins it for me. It does try and redeem itself with an all too predictable ending, those that have seen Wan and Whannel’s other film Dead Silence will know what I mean.
At the end of the day you feel all Wan had to do was hit the target, but this is just off to the right!
Wan returns with Leigh Whannell the creator and writer of Saw, with the pair looking to yet again scare everyone shitless with a haunted house tale, this time focussing on a young boy whose slipped into a coma and drifted into the outer realms called The Further.
When writing Insidious Whannell wanted to make sure that he avoided all the haunted house cliches, and he pretty much did that. What he failed to do though was script a stronger third act, something which might have brought this up on a par with Saw.
Dalton is the one in peril as he suddenly slips into a coma one morning, his mother Renai (Byrne) is then forced to spend time looking after her trio of kids all the while looking over her shoulder, as she hears one bump to the next occurring both in broad daylight and at night.
After some decent scares from the outset including the old “he’s behind you” and murmurings through the baby monitor the film was almost guilty of slipping into a farce as our protagonist Josh Lambert (Wilson) was forced to engage in some astro physics in order to save the day.
It was a real shame as up till that point you’d have spent most of the run time hiding under the covers, as Wan introduced one jolt after another, some more subtle than others but ultimately offering the same desired effect.
The introduction of Elise Rainier (Lin Shaye) the Ghost hunter whose come to see what all the fuss is about is pretty much inevitable. Armed with the latest high tech equipment and a couple of geeks, the aptly named Specs and Tucker, provides much amusement as Rainier delivers the killer line “It’s not the house that’s haunted”.
The film moves through the gears well, but it’s that annoyingly poor third act that ruins it for me. It does try and redeem itself with an all too predictable ending, those that have seen Wan and Whannel’s other film Dead Silence will know what I mean.
At the end of the day you feel all Wan had to do was hit the target, but this is just off to the right!