Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated The Nun (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
I’ve always been a sucker for supernatural thrillers that are based on “actual events”, even if the way it’s portrayed in the movies nowhere resembles the truth. For some reason, it’s always intriguing to watch a film and imagine that these things could potentially happen. This has always been the draw of The Conjuring films, which are loosely based on the lives of Ed and Lorraine Warren, whose paranormal investigations were the inspiration behind not only this series but the Amityville Horror. So, when I heard that The Nun was another movie set in the same cinematic universe as The Conjuring franchise I anxiously awaited the opportunity to review it.
The Nun begins with two nuns who are attempting to destroy an evil being that has cursed an abbey in a small Romanian village for hundreds of years. After a young man who goes by the name Frenchie (Jonas Bloquet) discovers one of the nuns has hung herself, the Vatican summons Father Burke (Demián Bichir), who is known for his special skills in exorcisms and Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga), a young nun-in-training to investigate the matter. With Frenchie as their guide, they travel to the abbey to uncover the mysteries of the nun’s suicide.
The Nun reintroduces us to a familiar demonic figure that was originally introduced in The Conjuring 2. Sadly, this is where the similarities to the other Conjuring films end. The Nun has its share of jump scares, but the entire film seems to be a compilation of various horror tropes including everything from crosses turning upside down to using holy water to get rid of demons. All the typical exorcism movie elements are there, but none of them really add any context to the story or answer any questions as to why the priest and nun were sent to investigate the suicide. There is no discernable path that the characters take to unravel the mystery, and it attempts to build suspense only to “Hollywood-up” the ending. They sacrificed suspense and mystery and replaced it with monster filled battles and cheesy one-liners. Instead of beautifully haunting ghosts and demons we got what I could only describe as nun-mummies which can now be taken down with shovels and shotguns. A shotgun was not part of Father Burke’s exorcism arsenal but towards the end of the movie you start to think maybe that should have been his weapon of choice all along (who needs a cross and holy water, when you have your trusty 12-gauge).
The setting is as beautiful as it is creepy, and it’s hard not to wonder how they could take such an amazing setting and dumb it down. The Nun herself is particularly creepy and the characters at first glance appear to be interesting which is why it’s so disappointing that the movie feels so much like a missed opportunity. The pacing of the movie is incredibly slow as well, with all the buildup of the investigation most of the time you are just waiting for something to happen. To make it even worse, most of the buildups lead the audience down a path of confusion and not only raise more questions that will never be answered, but also destroy any believability of the story.
Ultimately, fans of The Conjuring franchise will likely leave disappointed and with even more longing for The Conjuring 3 to be released. The movie lacks much of the suspense and outright terror that the previous movies in the series were well known for and ultimately feels like a spinoff movie that lacks any real connection to the movies preceding it. The Nun isn’t a terrible movie, and I didn’t leave feeling as though I had completely wasted an hour and a half of my time, it just really doesn’t do anything to break new ground or move the franchise along in any meaningful way. While there are parts of the movie that will have you jump, the reality is, that the scenes following these moments will keep you bewildered and likely cause you to forget what made you jump in the first place. It has some interesting concepts, but nothing that hasn’t been done better in similar movies before it. In the end it’s a movie that people will not likely hate but will not feel satisfied with either. I certainly wouldn’t recommend paying full price to see it, but it may be worth the Saturday matinee price or watching it when it comes to Blu-ray. If you want a good ghost or demon movie to get you in the Halloween spirit, this isn’t it. You’d be much better off watching the spectacularly classic Poltergeist or The Exorcist if you really want to be scared out of your wits.
What I liked: The setting and atmosphere, The Nun herself was pretty freaky
What I liked less: Disjointed story, Too many unanswered questions, Overall “meh” feeling
The Nun begins with two nuns who are attempting to destroy an evil being that has cursed an abbey in a small Romanian village for hundreds of years. After a young man who goes by the name Frenchie (Jonas Bloquet) discovers one of the nuns has hung herself, the Vatican summons Father Burke (Demián Bichir), who is known for his special skills in exorcisms and Sister Irene (Taissa Farmiga), a young nun-in-training to investigate the matter. With Frenchie as their guide, they travel to the abbey to uncover the mysteries of the nun’s suicide.
The Nun reintroduces us to a familiar demonic figure that was originally introduced in The Conjuring 2. Sadly, this is where the similarities to the other Conjuring films end. The Nun has its share of jump scares, but the entire film seems to be a compilation of various horror tropes including everything from crosses turning upside down to using holy water to get rid of demons. All the typical exorcism movie elements are there, but none of them really add any context to the story or answer any questions as to why the priest and nun were sent to investigate the suicide. There is no discernable path that the characters take to unravel the mystery, and it attempts to build suspense only to “Hollywood-up” the ending. They sacrificed suspense and mystery and replaced it with monster filled battles and cheesy one-liners. Instead of beautifully haunting ghosts and demons we got what I could only describe as nun-mummies which can now be taken down with shovels and shotguns. A shotgun was not part of Father Burke’s exorcism arsenal but towards the end of the movie you start to think maybe that should have been his weapon of choice all along (who needs a cross and holy water, when you have your trusty 12-gauge).
The setting is as beautiful as it is creepy, and it’s hard not to wonder how they could take such an amazing setting and dumb it down. The Nun herself is particularly creepy and the characters at first glance appear to be interesting which is why it’s so disappointing that the movie feels so much like a missed opportunity. The pacing of the movie is incredibly slow as well, with all the buildup of the investigation most of the time you are just waiting for something to happen. To make it even worse, most of the buildups lead the audience down a path of confusion and not only raise more questions that will never be answered, but also destroy any believability of the story.
Ultimately, fans of The Conjuring franchise will likely leave disappointed and with even more longing for The Conjuring 3 to be released. The movie lacks much of the suspense and outright terror that the previous movies in the series were well known for and ultimately feels like a spinoff movie that lacks any real connection to the movies preceding it. The Nun isn’t a terrible movie, and I didn’t leave feeling as though I had completely wasted an hour and a half of my time, it just really doesn’t do anything to break new ground or move the franchise along in any meaningful way. While there are parts of the movie that will have you jump, the reality is, that the scenes following these moments will keep you bewildered and likely cause you to forget what made you jump in the first place. It has some interesting concepts, but nothing that hasn’t been done better in similar movies before it. In the end it’s a movie that people will not likely hate but will not feel satisfied with either. I certainly wouldn’t recommend paying full price to see it, but it may be worth the Saturday matinee price or watching it when it comes to Blu-ray. If you want a good ghost or demon movie to get you in the Halloween spirit, this isn’t it. You’d be much better off watching the spectacularly classic Poltergeist or The Exorcist if you really want to be scared out of your wits.
What I liked: The setting and atmosphere, The Nun herself was pretty freaky
What I liked less: Disjointed story, Too many unanswered questions, Overall “meh” feeling
Mark Jaye (65 KP) rated The Conjuring (2013) in Movies
May 13, 2019
The Conjuring Review
Contains spoilers, click to show
Originally wrote in 2013:
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
As an avid fan of horror I look for a few little things which if aren't apparent within the first minute decide on whether I'm going to bother with the rest of the film. Usually the company releasing the movie is a good starting point, reputable/recognised director or producer, recognisable actor/s, good production values - that sort of thing. I've seen some hum-dingers over the years - those films where Johnny Nobody has gathered several of his buddies together with a cheap camcorder or two and filmed some alleged zombie epic in the woods at the back of their school.
**The Conjuring is not one of those**
I like to think I have a strong disposition when it comes to scares - usually it takes a lot to make me squint. Examples that come to mind are 'Sinister', 'The Grudge', the end of 'The Ring' (you know, the scary dark haired girl climbing out of the TV!). The Conjuring is one of those - I watched this in the middle of the morning and found it pretty scary in places.
James Wan certainly knows how to make a movie of this type and is great at evoking atmosphere and notching up the scares as the film develops. In a nutshell, this is the alleged real life story of the Perron family who in 1971 moved into a new farmhouse. It isn't long before the usual shenanigans begin - pictures pulled off walls, doors knocking in the dead of night, the children befriending mysterious 'imaginary' kids (who we all know watching are going to show up at some point). The film sticks to the tried and tested story - gradual possession of one of the adults (Lily Taylor), gradually increasing appearances by ghostly figures, calling in the ghostbusters, gathering the proof, then the exorcism. It may be join the dots territory but it works.
Patrick Wilson shines and seems to be making his mark in films of this nature (Insidious and Insidious Chapter 2) - he portrays real life paranormal investigator Ed Warren who with his wife Lorraine (played just as well by Vera Farmiga) become immersed in the life of the Perron's making themselves targets of the supernatural force at work in the process.
The demonic spirit at work is that of a witch who was married to the guy who built the house back in the 1800's who cursed the land before committing suicide after murdering their child whilst a few days old. There is one particularly pant browning scene where the witch makes her first appearance atop a bedroom wardrobe....and I'll leave it there!
Quality. Best horror I've seen since Sinister.
Hazel (1853 KP) rated The Flame Never Dies (The Stars Never Rise, #2) in Books
Dec 17, 2018
<i>This ARC was provided by the publisher via NetGalley in exchange for an honest review </i>
Rachel Vincent’s first novel<i> The Stars Never Rise</i> introduced Young Adult readers to a whole new dystopian concept. The world as we know it has been invaded by demons who can possess the human body. After discovering she has the power of exorcism, seventeen-year-old Nina joins other teenage exorcists, including the disembodied Finn, who aim to rid their town of the parasitic creatures. However the totalitarian Unified Church, the rulers of what was once the USA, have been secretly taken over by demons and will stop at nothing to get rid of Nina and her friends.
<i>The Flame Never Dies</i> continues five months after the Anathema (the name the demons gave to the group of exorcists) escaped from the clutches of the Church. Whilst exorcising all the demons they come across, Nina and company are desperately seeking food and supplies to sustain themselves as well as nourish Nina’s heavily pregnant sister.
The story is fast paced and contains a multitude of climaxes and plot twists. Vincent omits all the mundane details resulting in a tale that appears to take place over a few days rather than weeks and months. With bombshell following bombshell it is impossible to get bored of reading or predict the final conclusion. The ending, however, is the only part of the novel that is a little disappointing. After such a build up, the speed and ease that the final burst of action takes leads to a slightly unsatisfying finale.
The key characters from the first book are all involved in <i>The Flame Never Dies</i> as well as a welcome selection of new and splendid faces. Vincent emphasises the importance of teamwork, the effects of love and the notion of hope through religious belief. Although unique, the beliefs expressed by some of the characters are not much different from the monotheistic faiths of today. As a result there is something in this book that almost everyone will be able to relate to.
<i>The Flame Never Dies</i>, in my opinion, is much more exciting and engaging than its predecessor, so if you loved <i>The Stars Never Rise</i> you can guarantee you will enjoy this too. Sadly the ending does not do the story justice, readers are left with no knowledge of how the characters survive the future, and, as this is a duology, no one will ever know. Yet despite all this, Rachel Vincent has created a fantastic piece of fiction that will no doubt be as popular as other books in its genre.
Rachel Vincent’s first novel<i> The Stars Never Rise</i> introduced Young Adult readers to a whole new dystopian concept. The world as we know it has been invaded by demons who can possess the human body. After discovering she has the power of exorcism, seventeen-year-old Nina joins other teenage exorcists, including the disembodied Finn, who aim to rid their town of the parasitic creatures. However the totalitarian Unified Church, the rulers of what was once the USA, have been secretly taken over by demons and will stop at nothing to get rid of Nina and her friends.
<i>The Flame Never Dies</i> continues five months after the Anathema (the name the demons gave to the group of exorcists) escaped from the clutches of the Church. Whilst exorcising all the demons they come across, Nina and company are desperately seeking food and supplies to sustain themselves as well as nourish Nina’s heavily pregnant sister.
The story is fast paced and contains a multitude of climaxes and plot twists. Vincent omits all the mundane details resulting in a tale that appears to take place over a few days rather than weeks and months. With bombshell following bombshell it is impossible to get bored of reading or predict the final conclusion. The ending, however, is the only part of the novel that is a little disappointing. After such a build up, the speed and ease that the final burst of action takes leads to a slightly unsatisfying finale.
The key characters from the first book are all involved in <i>The Flame Never Dies</i> as well as a welcome selection of new and splendid faces. Vincent emphasises the importance of teamwork, the effects of love and the notion of hope through religious belief. Although unique, the beliefs expressed by some of the characters are not much different from the monotheistic faiths of today. As a result there is something in this book that almost everyone will be able to relate to.
<i>The Flame Never Dies</i>, in my opinion, is much more exciting and engaging than its predecessor, so if you loved <i>The Stars Never Rise</i> you can guarantee you will enjoy this too. Sadly the ending does not do the story justice, readers are left with no knowledge of how the characters survive the future, and, as this is a duology, no one will ever know. Yet despite all this, Rachel Vincent has created a fantastic piece of fiction that will no doubt be as popular as other books in its genre.
Ryan Hill (152 KP) rated Doctor Strange (2016) in Movies
May 11, 2019
"Try me Beyoncé"
The 14th instalment in the Marvel Cinematic Universe marks the arrival of yet another avenger into the already crowded Marvel family while also bringing mystic arts & alternate dimensions into its ever-expanding universe. But even though it offers a kaleidoscopic journey through astral realms, infinite realities & spacetime contortions, it isn't entirely different from the norm.
Doctor Strange tells the story of Stephen Strange, a brilliant but arrogant neurosurgeon who loses the use of his hands after a car accident, spends all his money on experimental surgeries to regain his abilities, and travels east for a last resort treatment where he meets a powerful sorcerer who teaches him ways to harness energy & shape realities through the mystic arts.
Co-written & directed by Scott Derrickson (best known for The Exorcism of Emily Rose & Sinister), Doctor Strange marks his first stint with comic book movies and while he succeeds in delivering a sufficiently entertaining blockbuster, his latest suffers from the same issues that marred his earlier works as Derrickson begins this story on a promising note but once again loses his grip in the middle.
The screenplay features a universe that's full of imaginations & possibilities yet beneath its parallel universes, time manipulation & astral projections lies the same generic storyline following the same predictable route that we all have seen many times before. What's interesting, however, is how the arc of the eponymous character is handled, for Stephen Strange remains an intriguing character at all times.
Production Design team chips in with set pieces that brim with mystical qualities while props such as ancient artefacts & antiquated relics provide added details to the desired spiritual environment. Camerawork is fine, Editing gets carried away by letting numerous CGI-infested moments overstay their welcome due to which it feels longer than it should. And Michael Giacchino contributes with a score that's fitting yet not enthralling.
Coming to the acting department, the film features a talented ensemble in Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelsen & Tilda Swinton. Cumberbatch as Strange is pitch-perfect casting and does total justice to his role by depicting his stubbornness, arrogance & ambition with precision while Swinton steals nearly every scene she's in. But the main highlight of this film is its shape-shifting & eye-popping visual effects.
On an overall scale, Doctor Strange does serve its purpose by delivering an entertaining, amusing & serviceable origin story but it isn't impressive enough to garner a spot amongst Marvel's finest features. Travelling a safe, risk-free route & sugarcoated with trippy, hallucinatory visuals, it is a typical fun-filled extravaganza that we've come to expect from Marvel Studios and is another enjoyable addition to their ever-inflating repertoire. Definitely worth a shot.
Doctor Strange tells the story of Stephen Strange, a brilliant but arrogant neurosurgeon who loses the use of his hands after a car accident, spends all his money on experimental surgeries to regain his abilities, and travels east for a last resort treatment where he meets a powerful sorcerer who teaches him ways to harness energy & shape realities through the mystic arts.
Co-written & directed by Scott Derrickson (best known for The Exorcism of Emily Rose & Sinister), Doctor Strange marks his first stint with comic book movies and while he succeeds in delivering a sufficiently entertaining blockbuster, his latest suffers from the same issues that marred his earlier works as Derrickson begins this story on a promising note but once again loses his grip in the middle.
The screenplay features a universe that's full of imaginations & possibilities yet beneath its parallel universes, time manipulation & astral projections lies the same generic storyline following the same predictable route that we all have seen many times before. What's interesting, however, is how the arc of the eponymous character is handled, for Stephen Strange remains an intriguing character at all times.
Production Design team chips in with set pieces that brim with mystical qualities while props such as ancient artefacts & antiquated relics provide added details to the desired spiritual environment. Camerawork is fine, Editing gets carried away by letting numerous CGI-infested moments overstay their welcome due to which it feels longer than it should. And Michael Giacchino contributes with a score that's fitting yet not enthralling.
Coming to the acting department, the film features a talented ensemble in Benedict Cumberbatch, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Rachel McAdams, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelsen & Tilda Swinton. Cumberbatch as Strange is pitch-perfect casting and does total justice to his role by depicting his stubbornness, arrogance & ambition with precision while Swinton steals nearly every scene she's in. But the main highlight of this film is its shape-shifting & eye-popping visual effects.
On an overall scale, Doctor Strange does serve its purpose by delivering an entertaining, amusing & serviceable origin story but it isn't impressive enough to garner a spot amongst Marvel's finest features. Travelling a safe, risk-free route & sugarcoated with trippy, hallucinatory visuals, it is a typical fun-filled extravaganza that we've come to expect from Marvel Studios and is another enjoyable addition to their ever-inflating repertoire. Definitely worth a shot.
Darren (1599 KP) rated The Possession of Hannah Grace (2018) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Characters – Megan Reed is a former cop that has been through rehab after struggling after her own experience in the field, cleaned up, she looks to get back into work on a graveyard shift at the morgue. Megan does start to have strange visits while on duty and becomes convinced strange things are going on, she is left to wonder whether she is having a bad experience from her drugs or is something supernatural going on. Andrew is the ex-boyfriend and fellow cop of Megan, he was left no choice, but to leave her, but will support her through her struggles. Hannah Grace is the young woman that went through the exorcism, she hasn’t remained dead though, searching for more victims in her afterlife. Randy is the friendly paramedic that offers support for Megan because of his own past.
Performances – Shay Mitchell does everything she can with her leading role without being terrible, just not getting much to do from it. Grey Damon doesn’t have much to do, neither does Nick Thune, though he does make the most of his limited time. Kirby Johnson does get extra praise for her ability to try and make her character creepy throughout.
Story – The story here follows a cop fresh out of rehab that takes a graveyard shift in a morgue only to find her night become a nightmare when a corpse comes back to life to haunt them. The story is a true disappointment because we have one side of Megan’s story being that she might be falling off the wagon again, which would make everything going on great, only we get plenty of disposable characters that offer the corpse a chance to kill instead of building the tension of Megan losing her mind. This story does feel like a complete rip off The Autopsy of Jane Doe.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film comes from how the haunting figure is searching for the latest victim, only it never reaches the true level it could do. The mystery is meant to be around why the corpse isn’t remaining dead, only for it to end up feeling like it is the back burner.
Settings – The film is set inside the city morgue, we do have the lights that only come on when you are in their sensors go off, though it does feel too large to get the most out of the environment.
Special Effects – The effects are a mixed bag because the physical movement is great, but the CGI covers up too much in this film and it is weak.
Scene of the Movie – The first discovery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We just doesn’t seem to get the smart enough decisions in writing here.
Final Thoughts – This is a poor horror that just copies The Autopsy of Jane Doe, only to lose all the atmosphere in the film.
Overall: Disappointing throughout.
Performances – Shay Mitchell does everything she can with her leading role without being terrible, just not getting much to do from it. Grey Damon doesn’t have much to do, neither does Nick Thune, though he does make the most of his limited time. Kirby Johnson does get extra praise for her ability to try and make her character creepy throughout.
Story – The story here follows a cop fresh out of rehab that takes a graveyard shift in a morgue only to find her night become a nightmare when a corpse comes back to life to haunt them. The story is a true disappointment because we have one side of Megan’s story being that she might be falling off the wagon again, which would make everything going on great, only we get plenty of disposable characters that offer the corpse a chance to kill instead of building the tension of Megan losing her mind. This story does feel like a complete rip off The Autopsy of Jane Doe.
Horror/Mystery – The horror in this film comes from how the haunting figure is searching for the latest victim, only it never reaches the true level it could do. The mystery is meant to be around why the corpse isn’t remaining dead, only for it to end up feeling like it is the back burner.
Settings – The film is set inside the city morgue, we do have the lights that only come on when you are in their sensors go off, though it does feel too large to get the most out of the environment.
Special Effects – The effects are a mixed bag because the physical movement is great, but the CGI covers up too much in this film and it is weak.
Scene of the Movie – The first discovery.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – We just doesn’t seem to get the smart enough decisions in writing here.
Final Thoughts – This is a poor horror that just copies The Autopsy of Jane Doe, only to lose all the atmosphere in the film.
Overall: Disappointing throughout.
Darren (1599 KP) rated 1920 London (2016) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: 1920 London starts as we meet the Prince Veer (Karwel) and Princess Shivangi (Chopra) living in London, they soon become the latest victim of an evil spirit which takes over Veer’s body, Shivangi must go into her past to find her former lover Jai Singh Gujjar (Joshi) a man that was left banished because of their affair, who has an ability to tackle unwanted spirits.
With the past being placed in the past, Jai comes to figure out how to save Veer and giving Shivangi a peaceful life, only the evil spirit isn’t going to let that happen.
Thoughts on 1920 London
Characters – Shivangi the princess who has just gotten married, she sees her husband become possessed, which forces her to return to her family for help, with her ex-lover being the only one that could save her husband. Jai Singh is the exorcist that was once the lover of Shivangi, but not being from the royal family means he was once banished for their love. Now he must help her fight an evil spirit, he speciality. Veer is the husband that gets stricken down by the evil spirit that has taken over his body.
Performances – We focus mostly on just the two stars of the movie, Meera Chopra and Sharman Joshi who are both great through the film dealing with the horror, the personal status they are facing and love they both feel.
Story – The story here follows a possession, this is a story I have seen many times, but the different is, I have only ever seen Christian or Jewish religions deal with the spirits, this time we get to see how Hindus treat unwanted spirits. The story does follow the traditional scares, but then here is a twist in the story which explains the possession, one about honour, love and revenge, which does make the story feel fresher, I learnt that this is part of a series of film, but I am confident there isn’t a connection between the previous ones. Most of this is by the books and that is al we want from a horror film.
Horror/Mystery – There are good scare moments in this film, nothing overly original, but they will give the jumps required, the mystery comes from just what the motivation of the evil spirit is to be doing the possessing.
Settings – The film takes the action to London, which I guess is new to the franchise, this is fine even though we spend most of the time in the mansions with no landmarks in the background, with the landmark scenes including the bridges only.
Special Effects – The effects are used well to create the horror moments, like most films the practical is good, but the CGI comes off weak.
Scene of the Movie – The final battle.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While I understand this is a Bollywood film, the songs lose moments of tension in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror that works for the exorcism genre well, it shows how a different religion reads evil spirits and does battle against them, which is interesting to see and does give us good moments of horror.
Overall: Good horror.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/07/27/abc-film-challenge-world-cinema-1920-london-2016/
With the past being placed in the past, Jai comes to figure out how to save Veer and giving Shivangi a peaceful life, only the evil spirit isn’t going to let that happen.
Thoughts on 1920 London
Characters – Shivangi the princess who has just gotten married, she sees her husband become possessed, which forces her to return to her family for help, with her ex-lover being the only one that could save her husband. Jai Singh is the exorcist that was once the lover of Shivangi, but not being from the royal family means he was once banished for their love. Now he must help her fight an evil spirit, he speciality. Veer is the husband that gets stricken down by the evil spirit that has taken over his body.
Performances – We focus mostly on just the two stars of the movie, Meera Chopra and Sharman Joshi who are both great through the film dealing with the horror, the personal status they are facing and love they both feel.
Story – The story here follows a possession, this is a story I have seen many times, but the different is, I have only ever seen Christian or Jewish religions deal with the spirits, this time we get to see how Hindus treat unwanted spirits. The story does follow the traditional scares, but then here is a twist in the story which explains the possession, one about honour, love and revenge, which does make the story feel fresher, I learnt that this is part of a series of film, but I am confident there isn’t a connection between the previous ones. Most of this is by the books and that is al we want from a horror film.
Horror/Mystery – There are good scare moments in this film, nothing overly original, but they will give the jumps required, the mystery comes from just what the motivation of the evil spirit is to be doing the possessing.
Settings – The film takes the action to London, which I guess is new to the franchise, this is fine even though we spend most of the time in the mansions with no landmarks in the background, with the landmark scenes including the bridges only.
Special Effects – The effects are used well to create the horror moments, like most films the practical is good, but the CGI comes off weak.
Scene of the Movie – The final battle.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – While I understand this is a Bollywood film, the songs lose moments of tension in the film.
Final Thoughts – This is a horror that works for the exorcism genre well, it shows how a different religion reads evil spirits and does battle against them, which is interesting to see and does give us good moments of horror.
Overall: Good horror.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/07/27/abc-film-challenge-world-cinema-1920-london-2016/
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Ghost Stories in Tabletop Games
Jul 28, 2020 (Updated Jul 30, 2020)
The Gameplay (4 more)
The Strategy
Replay Value
Thinking Ten Steps Ahead
The Concept
Hard (2 more)
Luck of the dice
The cruse dice
Spooky Scary Ghosts
I learned about this game through Dice Tower reviews, Rahdo runthrough and BoardGameGeek. And it looked really good. A cooperative game in which the players protect the village from incarnations of the lord of hell – Wu-Feng – and his legions of ghosts before they haunt a town and recover the ashes that will allow him to return to life. That sounded really intresting and unquite. So i bought it and its a excellent game. Let me talk more about it..
Gameplay:
Each Player represents a Taoist monk working together with the others to fight off waves of ghosts.
The players, using teamwork, will have to exorcise the ghosts that appear during the course of the game. At the beginning of his turn, a player brings a ghost into play and places it on a free spot, and more than one can come in at the same time. The ghosts all have abilities of their own – some affecting the Taoists and their powers, some causing the active player to roll the curse die for a random effect, and others haunting the villager tiles and blocking that tile's special action. On his turn, a Taoist can move on a tile in order to exorcise adjacent ghosts or to benefit from the villager living on the tile, providing it is not haunted. Each tile of the village allows the players to benefit from a different bonus. With the cemetery, for example, Taoists can bring a dead Taoist back to life, while the herbalist allows to recover spent Tao tokens, etc. It will also be possible to get traps or move ghosts or unhaunt other village tiles.
To exorcise a ghost, the Taoist rolls three Tao dice with different colors: red, blue, green, yellow, black, and white. If the result of the roll matches the color(s) of the ghost or incarnation of Wu-Feng, the exorcism succeeds. The white result is a wild color that can be used as any color. For example, to exorcise a green ghost with 3 resistance, you need to roll three green, three white, or a combination of both. If your die rolls fall short, you can also use Tao tokens that match the color in addition to your roll. You may choose to use these after your roll. Taoists gain these tokens by using certain village tiles or by exorcising certain ghosts. One of the Taoists has a power that allows him to receive such a token once per turn.
To win, the players must defeat the incarnation of Wu-Feng, a boss who arrives at the end of the game. There are also harder difficulty levels that add more incarnations of Wu-Feng, in which to win, you must defeat all of them.
There are many more ways to lose, however. The players lose if three of the village's tiles are haunted, if the draw pile is emptied while the incarnation of Wu-Feng is still in play, or if all the priests are dead.
It is hard game but the strategy to this game is excellent cause you have to think about your moves and what to do next. That and the clock is ticking down to one of the ten Wu-Feng Minions. Also if 3 village spaces get crushed than you lose. Also the luck of the dice and the cards. The strategy is ten fold. Its hard but a excellent game and a must play game. Buy it if you havent already cause its a must. If you want to learn more or see a runthrough of the game go to BoardGameGeek, Rahdo Runthroughs or Dice Tower Reviews.
Gameplay:
Each Player represents a Taoist monk working together with the others to fight off waves of ghosts.
The players, using teamwork, will have to exorcise the ghosts that appear during the course of the game. At the beginning of his turn, a player brings a ghost into play and places it on a free spot, and more than one can come in at the same time. The ghosts all have abilities of their own – some affecting the Taoists and their powers, some causing the active player to roll the curse die for a random effect, and others haunting the villager tiles and blocking that tile's special action. On his turn, a Taoist can move on a tile in order to exorcise adjacent ghosts or to benefit from the villager living on the tile, providing it is not haunted. Each tile of the village allows the players to benefit from a different bonus. With the cemetery, for example, Taoists can bring a dead Taoist back to life, while the herbalist allows to recover spent Tao tokens, etc. It will also be possible to get traps or move ghosts or unhaunt other village tiles.
To exorcise a ghost, the Taoist rolls three Tao dice with different colors: red, blue, green, yellow, black, and white. If the result of the roll matches the color(s) of the ghost or incarnation of Wu-Feng, the exorcism succeeds. The white result is a wild color that can be used as any color. For example, to exorcise a green ghost with 3 resistance, you need to roll three green, three white, or a combination of both. If your die rolls fall short, you can also use Tao tokens that match the color in addition to your roll. You may choose to use these after your roll. Taoists gain these tokens by using certain village tiles or by exorcising certain ghosts. One of the Taoists has a power that allows him to receive such a token once per turn.
To win, the players must defeat the incarnation of Wu-Feng, a boss who arrives at the end of the game. There are also harder difficulty levels that add more incarnations of Wu-Feng, in which to win, you must defeat all of them.
There are many more ways to lose, however. The players lose if three of the village's tiles are haunted, if the draw pile is emptied while the incarnation of Wu-Feng is still in play, or if all the priests are dead.
It is hard game but the strategy to this game is excellent cause you have to think about your moves and what to do next. That and the clock is ticking down to one of the ten Wu-Feng Minions. Also if 3 village spaces get crushed than you lose. Also the luck of the dice and the cards. The strategy is ten fold. Its hard but a excellent game and a must play game. Buy it if you havent already cause its a must. If you want to learn more or see a runthrough of the game go to BoardGameGeek, Rahdo Runthroughs or Dice Tower Reviews.
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated John Carpenter's Vampires (1998) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
A group of eccentric vampire hunters lead by the rugged and cold-hearted Jack Crow (James Woods) never really stop working. Taking great pride in the fruits of their labor, they work hard and play even harder as their celebrations after a job well done consist of alcohol flowing freely and plenty of women to take their minds off of work. But this particular job didn't go exactly as planned and it's weighing heavily on the mind of Jack Crow. Even after killing what's referred to as a "nest" of nine vampires, the master was no where to be found. Hardly a reason to celebrate in Jack's eyes. Unfortunately, his gut instinct was right as things get a hell of a lot worse for Jack's team when the master shows up to their little shindig. But this master is different from the others; stronger, more powerful, and why does he know Jack's name? There's something more elaborate going on and Jack Crow is going to find out exactly what it is while eradicating as many vampires as he possibly can along the way.
Judging by the ratings this film has (34% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, 5.8/10 on IMDb), I guess it's safe to say that this could be a guilty pleasure of mine. I love most of John Carpenter's work and I really enjoyed his take on vampires. Jack Crow is certainly reason alone to sit through this and although the character originated in John Steakley's novel, I feel Crow is just as strong of a character in Carpenter's world as Snake Plissken from Escape From New York. Even though he's basically a mean spirited SOB, you can't help but sympathize with the character as the film moves on. Considering all that's happened to him in his lifetime, he seems to be a decent guy deep down underneath that extremely thick and rough exterior. His dialogue was also a lot of fun. Gems such as him asking Father Adam Guiteau if he had wood after the fight they just had or when he's explaining the true mythos behind vampires and to "forget whatever you've seen in the movies" was just classic.
Other than Jack Crow, I actually really enjoyed the storyline which seemed to be a breaking point for a lot of people. A vampire seeking a black cross to finish a reverse exorcism, so he can walk in daylight without turning to dust. Only Carpenter could pull something like that off. Their methods of killing vampires were also a bit more original and unorthodox compared to other vampire films of the past. Jack Crow would shoot an arrow from a crossbow, which would be attached to a wire on the bottom of a jeep that would be reeled in by Daniel Baldwin's Anthony Montoya that would drag the vampire into the sunlight where their body would burst into flames. Maybe it's considered cheesy to some, but it was refreshing to see something different for a change. As big of a horror fan that I am, I don't really think of myself as a fan of vampires. I'm not sure if it's because I'm picky or because it seems like everything is being recycled when it comes to storylines in horror films these days, but I like to think when a vampire film does make an impact on me that it says more than the average horror film containing vampires.
John Carpenter, the master of horror, delivers a refreshing and interesting take on vampires with the aptly named Vampires. It also dawns another strong lead character in a Carpenter film in the form of Jack Crow and contains some of the most witty and enjoyable dialogue of any horror film from the late '90s. The storyline is also magnificently peculiar, which is a definite plus in my book. This would definitely make my list of favorite vampire films, if I ever decided to make one. If you're a fan of John Carpenter and haven't seen this gem, I highly recommend doing so. Or if you have, maybe it's time to dust it off and give it another watch.
Judging by the ratings this film has (34% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, 5.8/10 on IMDb), I guess it's safe to say that this could be a guilty pleasure of mine. I love most of John Carpenter's work and I really enjoyed his take on vampires. Jack Crow is certainly reason alone to sit through this and although the character originated in John Steakley's novel, I feel Crow is just as strong of a character in Carpenter's world as Snake Plissken from Escape From New York. Even though he's basically a mean spirited SOB, you can't help but sympathize with the character as the film moves on. Considering all that's happened to him in his lifetime, he seems to be a decent guy deep down underneath that extremely thick and rough exterior. His dialogue was also a lot of fun. Gems such as him asking Father Adam Guiteau if he had wood after the fight they just had or when he's explaining the true mythos behind vampires and to "forget whatever you've seen in the movies" was just classic.
Other than Jack Crow, I actually really enjoyed the storyline which seemed to be a breaking point for a lot of people. A vampire seeking a black cross to finish a reverse exorcism, so he can walk in daylight without turning to dust. Only Carpenter could pull something like that off. Their methods of killing vampires were also a bit more original and unorthodox compared to other vampire films of the past. Jack Crow would shoot an arrow from a crossbow, which would be attached to a wire on the bottom of a jeep that would be reeled in by Daniel Baldwin's Anthony Montoya that would drag the vampire into the sunlight where their body would burst into flames. Maybe it's considered cheesy to some, but it was refreshing to see something different for a change. As big of a horror fan that I am, I don't really think of myself as a fan of vampires. I'm not sure if it's because I'm picky or because it seems like everything is being recycled when it comes to storylines in horror films these days, but I like to think when a vampire film does make an impact on me that it says more than the average horror film containing vampires.
John Carpenter, the master of horror, delivers a refreshing and interesting take on vampires with the aptly named Vampires. It also dawns another strong lead character in a Carpenter film in the form of Jack Crow and contains some of the most witty and enjoyable dialogue of any horror film from the late '90s. The storyline is also magnificently peculiar, which is a definite plus in my book. This would definitely make my list of favorite vampire films, if I ever decided to make one. If you're a fan of John Carpenter and haven't seen this gem, I highly recommend doing so. Or if you have, maybe it's time to dust it off and give it another watch.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Annabelle Comes Home (2019) in Movies
Jun 28, 2019
Not The Best In The Series But Entertains
One of the most intriguing yet often exaggerated lines in movie history is “based on actual events”. I’ve always had a fascination with supernatural thrillers that came with this tag line, whether it’s a movie like Amityville Horror or The Exorcism of Emily Rose. None of these are more popular than The Conjuring series, based on two real life demonologists Ed and Lorraine Warren. Whether you believe in ghosts and haunted houses or not, these films always played on the notion that the events “could” possibly happen…even if they were exaggerated for Hollywood audiences. Annabelle Comes Home breaks the trend of previous Conjuring movies by not bothering to pretend that it’s based on any of the “actual” events from the previous films. So how does it stack up to its predecessors?
The movie begins with Ed and Lorraine Warren retrieving Annabelle and taking the scary doll home to lock her away in the now infamous artifact room. The dolls presence is so evil, that it takes not only blessings by a priest but being locked away in a case made up of glass from an old church to keep it’s evil at bay. Not only is the display case locked, but a sign is placed upon it, warning any who may enter not to release the doll within. Several pad locks later the Warrens feel comfortable that the evil within is contained.
A year passes and both Ed and Lorraine are called away on business, entrusting the care of their young daughter Judy (McKenna Grace) to her responsible babysitter Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman). Mary Ellen’s friend Daniela (Katie Sarife) blackmails Mary Ellen into allowing her to come over and stay with her and Judy in the Warren’s household. Using an opportunity when both Judy and Mary Ellen are out of the house, Daniela finds the artifact room (and the keys necessary to open it), and what at first appears to be idle curiosity, quickly turns into an attempt to utilize the artifacts in the room to reach out to her recently deceased father. It is in this attempt that Daniela unknowingly releases the evil in the room when she opens the case that Annabelle is in (it’s not like there was a BIG sign warning her not to do so).
Annabelle in her search for a soul, releases the full power and evil of all the artifacts in the room. Everything from an empty suit of Samurai armor to a wedding dress the drives the wearer insane is on display. Even a werewolf is released upon the world hunting an unwary suitor of Mary Ellen’s who happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. It’s up to this band of babysitters and children to restore order to the house and find a way to contain the evil that has been brought upon the world.
Annabelle Comes Home starts out fairly slow and takes awhile to build the tension. The first hour of the movie is mainly the interaction between the family and friends, and introductions to the various artifacts that are in the room. It’s not until the second half of the film when things really begin to take off. When the movie finally hits its creepy stride, it has plenty of genuine scares and intense moments, but focuses on several of the iconic artifacts and their affect on the individuals in the house.
While each of the artifacts has its own unique and interesting characteristics, we are hit with a barrage of items that are each going after one of the guests in the house. Whether it’s the television that can predict the future, or the locket that allows communication with the dead, it’s a lot to keep track of and tends to lose focus on the main plot. The movie attempts to cram every noticeable item from its previous films and give it some main purpose in the plot. In fact, the creepiest of all the artifacts Annabelle, takes on the role of evil puppet master controlling the artifacts which means less screen time and scares for her. Personally, Annabelle is scary enough to carry her own film (she has in previous installments), but in this film she is relegated to a side character, where the haunted artifacts take center stage.
The area I feel the movie loses the most is in the “believability” state. Remember that the Conjuring universe is based on real people, and on their actual encounters. Unfortunately, at no point in this film does one believe that any of these supernatural events could be mistaken for reality. It’s what I feel is the difference between a supernatural thriller and simply a monster movie. Much like other supernatural films, it’s about what you don’t see, rather than what you do, and Annabelle Comes Home unfortunately relies too much on its visuals leaving little to the viewers imagination. Imagining what a demon could look like is scarier than what Hollywood can dream up and show on the screen.
Ultimately Annabelle Comes home is a good movie which should have been great. It forgoes much of what made the series popular and replaces it with some goofy scenes and special effects. The artifacts are interesting, which makes the movie enjoyable, but not scary. I went in with hopes that I’d leave at least a little unnerved, looking under my covers, or turning the numerous dolls around that adorn my wife’s doll room. Unfortunately, I left feeling as though I’d simply been given a tour of the artifact room, with one night of scares that would disappear the next morning, as if from a bad dream. If you are looking to be scared, this movie likely won’t do that. If you are looking for an interesting movie with deeper background into the artifacts that have adorned the Warrens room for the past films, then this is the film for you.
3 out of 5 stars
http://sknr.net/2019/06/20/annabelle-comes-home/
The movie begins with Ed and Lorraine Warren retrieving Annabelle and taking the scary doll home to lock her away in the now infamous artifact room. The dolls presence is so evil, that it takes not only blessings by a priest but being locked away in a case made up of glass from an old church to keep it’s evil at bay. Not only is the display case locked, but a sign is placed upon it, warning any who may enter not to release the doll within. Several pad locks later the Warrens feel comfortable that the evil within is contained.
A year passes and both Ed and Lorraine are called away on business, entrusting the care of their young daughter Judy (McKenna Grace) to her responsible babysitter Mary Ellen (Madison Iseman). Mary Ellen’s friend Daniela (Katie Sarife) blackmails Mary Ellen into allowing her to come over and stay with her and Judy in the Warren’s household. Using an opportunity when both Judy and Mary Ellen are out of the house, Daniela finds the artifact room (and the keys necessary to open it), and what at first appears to be idle curiosity, quickly turns into an attempt to utilize the artifacts in the room to reach out to her recently deceased father. It is in this attempt that Daniela unknowingly releases the evil in the room when she opens the case that Annabelle is in (it’s not like there was a BIG sign warning her not to do so).
Annabelle in her search for a soul, releases the full power and evil of all the artifacts in the room. Everything from an empty suit of Samurai armor to a wedding dress the drives the wearer insane is on display. Even a werewolf is released upon the world hunting an unwary suitor of Mary Ellen’s who happens to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. It’s up to this band of babysitters and children to restore order to the house and find a way to contain the evil that has been brought upon the world.
Annabelle Comes Home starts out fairly slow and takes awhile to build the tension. The first hour of the movie is mainly the interaction between the family and friends, and introductions to the various artifacts that are in the room. It’s not until the second half of the film when things really begin to take off. When the movie finally hits its creepy stride, it has plenty of genuine scares and intense moments, but focuses on several of the iconic artifacts and their affect on the individuals in the house.
While each of the artifacts has its own unique and interesting characteristics, we are hit with a barrage of items that are each going after one of the guests in the house. Whether it’s the television that can predict the future, or the locket that allows communication with the dead, it’s a lot to keep track of and tends to lose focus on the main plot. The movie attempts to cram every noticeable item from its previous films and give it some main purpose in the plot. In fact, the creepiest of all the artifacts Annabelle, takes on the role of evil puppet master controlling the artifacts which means less screen time and scares for her. Personally, Annabelle is scary enough to carry her own film (she has in previous installments), but in this film she is relegated to a side character, where the haunted artifacts take center stage.
The area I feel the movie loses the most is in the “believability” state. Remember that the Conjuring universe is based on real people, and on their actual encounters. Unfortunately, at no point in this film does one believe that any of these supernatural events could be mistaken for reality. It’s what I feel is the difference between a supernatural thriller and simply a monster movie. Much like other supernatural films, it’s about what you don’t see, rather than what you do, and Annabelle Comes Home unfortunately relies too much on its visuals leaving little to the viewers imagination. Imagining what a demon could look like is scarier than what Hollywood can dream up and show on the screen.
Ultimately Annabelle Comes home is a good movie which should have been great. It forgoes much of what made the series popular and replaces it with some goofy scenes and special effects. The artifacts are interesting, which makes the movie enjoyable, but not scary. I went in with hopes that I’d leave at least a little unnerved, looking under my covers, or turning the numerous dolls around that adorn my wife’s doll room. Unfortunately, I left feeling as though I’d simply been given a tour of the artifact room, with one night of scares that would disappear the next morning, as if from a bad dream. If you are looking to be scared, this movie likely won’t do that. If you are looking for an interesting movie with deeper background into the artifacts that have adorned the Warrens room for the past films, then this is the film for you.
3 out of 5 stars
http://sknr.net/2019/06/20/annabelle-comes-home/
Hadley (567 KP) rated The Haunting of Hill House in Books
Apr 19, 2019
Strong writing (1 more)
Good characters
Run-on sentences (1 more)
No explanations for paranormal activity
Contains spoilers, click to show
If you're looking for a scary story, 'The Haunting of Hill House' just doesn't add up.
The story is still worth reading because Jackson's story telling is something that is missing in literature today. The reader is introduced to characters that are different enough to be interesting; their development is just right that it leaves the reader satisfied. The story moves along well enough that the pace keeps us from getting bored. And each turn of the page keeps the reader guessing what is going to happen next- a must for any ghost story.
In 'The Haunting of Hill House,' Jackson mostly focuses on the character Eleanor - a woman who recently lost the sickly mother she had taken care of for years, to receiving an invitation for a paranormal experiment at the infamous Hill House. Eleanor also seems to be the main character affected by the house, not only having her name written on a wall, but also having her named called out by spirits during an automatic writing session with them.
Our first introduction to the Hill House happens as Eleanor arrives: "No Human eye can isolate the unhappy coincidence of line and place which suggests evil in the face of a house, and yet somehow a maniac juxtaposition, a badly turned angle, some chance meeting of roof and sky, turned Hill House into a place of despair, more frightening because the face of Hill House seemed awake, with a watchfulness from the blank windows and a touch of glee in the eyebrow of a cornice. Almost any house, caught unexpectedly or at an odd angle, can turn a deeply humorous look on a watching person; even a mischievous little chimney, or a dormer like a dimple, can catch up a beholder with a sense of fellowship; but a house arrogant and hating, never off guard, can only be evil. This house, which seemed somehow to have formed itself, flying together into its own powerful pattern under the hands of its builders, fitting itself into its own construction of lines and angles, reared its great head back against the sky without concession to humanity. It was a house without kindness, never meant to be lived in , not a fit place for people or for love or for hope. Exorcism cannot alter the countenance of a house; Hill House would stay as it was until it was destroyed."
We never see Hill House through any other character's eyes, and the viewpoints mostly come from Eleanor (a missed opportunity,I think). Everyone who arrives at the house feels uneasy about it: doors and curtains close on their own, unexplained banging noises down the hallways(only at night), the chattering and laughter of children, and with an oddly placed cold spot. Yet,to the reader's dismay, nothing is fully explained by the end of the story - no apparitions show up, no one seems harmed by anything unseen (although, the character, Luke, suddenly shows up with a bruised face that is never discussed), and the reader ends up wondering if this really is a product of mass psychosis. It almost seems like Jackson ended the story abruptly just to finish it(the book is only a little under 200 pages). She set up wonderful scenarios, but without explanations, we're left with a very empty feeling.
Nearing the end of the book, the doctor, John Montague, who has ran the entire experiment, has his wife,Mrs. Montague,arrive a few days later, who seems to know more about contacting spirits than he does: "The library? I think it might do; books are frequently very good carriers, you know. Materializations are often best produced in rooms where there are books. I cannot think of any time when materialization was in any way hampered by the presence of books." And with the arrival of Dr. Montague's wife, we get one of the major experiences in the entire book. Although her character is quite annoying- even seen through the eyes of other characters- she brings some of the most ghost story elements, one of which is her automatic writing sessions: "Planchette felt very strongly about a nun, John. Perhaps something of the sort- a dark, vague figure, even- has been seen in the neighborhood? Villagers terrified when staggering home late at night?" None of the characters, besides Mrs. Montague's companion, Arthur, believe her automatic writing sessions are real, even after Eleanor's name is brought up during one. As I stated before, without any explanations, the reader is even led to believe that nothing was meant to come of these sessions whatsoever.
The ghost story elements may not have been strong in the story, but the characters make up for them. They constantly question what they are experiencing and/or seeing, they question their surroundings, and they question each other -Jackson does an amazing job weaving paranoia into the story line.
One of the more shocking and unbelievable scenes is when Eleanor is suddenly not fearful of the house anymore: "And here I am, she thought. Here I am inside. It was not cold at all, but deliciously, fondly warm. It was light enough for her to see the iron stairway curving around and around up to the tower, and the little door at the top. Under her feet the stone floor moved caressingly, rubbing itself against the soles of her feet, and all around the soft air touched her, stirring her hair, drifting against her fingers, coming in a light breath across her mouth, and she danced in circles. No stone lions for me, she thought, no oleanders; I have broken the spell of Hill House and somehow come inside. I am home, she thought, and stopped in wonder at the thought. I am home, I am home, she thought; now to climb." It was as if Eleanor was a completely different person in just a few pages.
I do have a couple of problems with 'The Haunting of Hill House,' mostly centering around the use of run-on sentences and extra long paragraphs. The run-on sentences are a waste of time because Jackson seems to merely elaborate on something that could be easily explained or experienced with fewer words. The paragraphs, however, need to be broken up for scene transitioning purposes -when she transitions from one scene to the next, she can confuse the reader with them: one paragraph will have all the characters in the dining area, but in that same paragraph, just a few sentences down, Jackson has the characters suddenly in the parlor,drinking Brandy. Maybe the intention was to make the reader feel paranoid and uneasy like the characters in the book, but it was certainly not needed with the way of Jackson's style of writing.
With all that said, it's easy to see why this book is a popular classic. The writing is strong, using enough descriptions to put the reader in Hill House with all of its paranormal beings. And no matter who you are, you are able to find at least one of the lead characters as a favorite. I feel the book is a must-read for anyone interested in the paranormal, because Jackson brings out the occult interest that was going on around 1959 - when she published 'The Haunting of Hill House;' everything from cold spots to the use of a planchette for automatic writing.
I recommend this book, but if you're looking for scares, you must look elsewhere.
The story is still worth reading because Jackson's story telling is something that is missing in literature today. The reader is introduced to characters that are different enough to be interesting; their development is just right that it leaves the reader satisfied. The story moves along well enough that the pace keeps us from getting bored. And each turn of the page keeps the reader guessing what is going to happen next- a must for any ghost story.
In 'The Haunting of Hill House,' Jackson mostly focuses on the character Eleanor - a woman who recently lost the sickly mother she had taken care of for years, to receiving an invitation for a paranormal experiment at the infamous Hill House. Eleanor also seems to be the main character affected by the house, not only having her name written on a wall, but also having her named called out by spirits during an automatic writing session with them.
Our first introduction to the Hill House happens as Eleanor arrives: "No Human eye can isolate the unhappy coincidence of line and place which suggests evil in the face of a house, and yet somehow a maniac juxtaposition, a badly turned angle, some chance meeting of roof and sky, turned Hill House into a place of despair, more frightening because the face of Hill House seemed awake, with a watchfulness from the blank windows and a touch of glee in the eyebrow of a cornice. Almost any house, caught unexpectedly or at an odd angle, can turn a deeply humorous look on a watching person; even a mischievous little chimney, or a dormer like a dimple, can catch up a beholder with a sense of fellowship; but a house arrogant and hating, never off guard, can only be evil. This house, which seemed somehow to have formed itself, flying together into its own powerful pattern under the hands of its builders, fitting itself into its own construction of lines and angles, reared its great head back against the sky without concession to humanity. It was a house without kindness, never meant to be lived in , not a fit place for people or for love or for hope. Exorcism cannot alter the countenance of a house; Hill House would stay as it was until it was destroyed."
We never see Hill House through any other character's eyes, and the viewpoints mostly come from Eleanor (a missed opportunity,I think). Everyone who arrives at the house feels uneasy about it: doors and curtains close on their own, unexplained banging noises down the hallways(only at night), the chattering and laughter of children, and with an oddly placed cold spot. Yet,to the reader's dismay, nothing is fully explained by the end of the story - no apparitions show up, no one seems harmed by anything unseen (although, the character, Luke, suddenly shows up with a bruised face that is never discussed), and the reader ends up wondering if this really is a product of mass psychosis. It almost seems like Jackson ended the story abruptly just to finish it(the book is only a little under 200 pages). She set up wonderful scenarios, but without explanations, we're left with a very empty feeling.
Nearing the end of the book, the doctor, John Montague, who has ran the entire experiment, has his wife,Mrs. Montague,arrive a few days later, who seems to know more about contacting spirits than he does: "The library? I think it might do; books are frequently very good carriers, you know. Materializations are often best produced in rooms where there are books. I cannot think of any time when materialization was in any way hampered by the presence of books." And with the arrival of Dr. Montague's wife, we get one of the major experiences in the entire book. Although her character is quite annoying- even seen through the eyes of other characters- she brings some of the most ghost story elements, one of which is her automatic writing sessions: "Planchette felt very strongly about a nun, John. Perhaps something of the sort- a dark, vague figure, even- has been seen in the neighborhood? Villagers terrified when staggering home late at night?" None of the characters, besides Mrs. Montague's companion, Arthur, believe her automatic writing sessions are real, even after Eleanor's name is brought up during one. As I stated before, without any explanations, the reader is even led to believe that nothing was meant to come of these sessions whatsoever.
The ghost story elements may not have been strong in the story, but the characters make up for them. They constantly question what they are experiencing and/or seeing, they question their surroundings, and they question each other -Jackson does an amazing job weaving paranoia into the story line.
One of the more shocking and unbelievable scenes is when Eleanor is suddenly not fearful of the house anymore: "And here I am, she thought. Here I am inside. It was not cold at all, but deliciously, fondly warm. It was light enough for her to see the iron stairway curving around and around up to the tower, and the little door at the top. Under her feet the stone floor moved caressingly, rubbing itself against the soles of her feet, and all around the soft air touched her, stirring her hair, drifting against her fingers, coming in a light breath across her mouth, and she danced in circles. No stone lions for me, she thought, no oleanders; I have broken the spell of Hill House and somehow come inside. I am home, she thought, and stopped in wonder at the thought. I am home, I am home, she thought; now to climb." It was as if Eleanor was a completely different person in just a few pages.
I do have a couple of problems with 'The Haunting of Hill House,' mostly centering around the use of run-on sentences and extra long paragraphs. The run-on sentences are a waste of time because Jackson seems to merely elaborate on something that could be easily explained or experienced with fewer words. The paragraphs, however, need to be broken up for scene transitioning purposes -when she transitions from one scene to the next, she can confuse the reader with them: one paragraph will have all the characters in the dining area, but in that same paragraph, just a few sentences down, Jackson has the characters suddenly in the parlor,drinking Brandy. Maybe the intention was to make the reader feel paranoid and uneasy like the characters in the book, but it was certainly not needed with the way of Jackson's style of writing.
With all that said, it's easy to see why this book is a popular classic. The writing is strong, using enough descriptions to put the reader in Hill House with all of its paranormal beings. And no matter who you are, you are able to find at least one of the lead characters as a favorite. I feel the book is a must-read for anyone interested in the paranormal, because Jackson brings out the occult interest that was going on around 1959 - when she published 'The Haunting of Hill House;' everything from cold spots to the use of a planchette for automatic writing.
I recommend this book, but if you're looking for scares, you must look elsewhere.