Ran into this while looking for a horror movie to watch on a Saturday evening. I'm not really into gory horror, but this kind of psychological and maybe supernatural is more my cup of tea. It looked like an atmospheric piece with foggy scenery, old houses, churches, autumnal feel with some candles and fireplaces etc. Cast looked good, I'm a fan of Donald Sutherland and why not Sissy Spacek too. Only I was a bit suspicious since this had flown under my radar. Out of all the many many "haunting" movies to come out during this millennium, I didn't recall this one.
If only I had realized the movie was directed by the same guy who did the infamous Dungeon's and Dragons back in the day. The director is not a very well known "bad director", because he only has a few movies under his resume, but none of them seem to have a very good reputation. Had I known this, I would surely have passed this.
The movie is never very engaging. The atmosphere and scenery is OK, but the camera work is not. The camera moves in a very distracting manner and the shots are not very well framed in my opinion. The sets look OK, but details fail like a fireplace looks like a few fake logs on a gas fire. So much for the genuine 1800's feel. The acting is everything from downright bad to mediocre. Even Sutherland doesn't nail it, there are a few scenes that are rather cringe worthy. Rachel Hurd-Wood is OK tho, I think she does quite well and is never as lost or overacting as the others.
The movie isn't very scary and since the outcome is obviously non-supernatural, it's difficult to digest all the supernatural stuff. There are cheapish tricks like the image changing from black and white to color. The sound fx were not that good, listening with headphones. The title graphics uses a typeface that is probably called "The horror movie font" on a site providing royalty free fonts. The overall feel was quite cheap and lacks any sense of style. The framing story of a single mother and a daughter living in a modern world is quite tacky too.
This could've been passable as a shorter episode of Masters of Horror style series, as it's got that cheap TV feel, but even then it would've been a disappointment. Avoid.
If only I had realized the movie was directed by the same guy who did the infamous Dungeon's and Dragons back in the day. The director is not a very well known "bad director", because he only has a few movies under his resume, but none of them seem to have a very good reputation. Had I known this, I would surely have passed this.
The movie is never very engaging. The atmosphere and scenery is OK, but the camera work is not. The camera moves in a very distracting manner and the shots are not very well framed in my opinion. The sets look OK, but details fail like a fireplace looks like a few fake logs on a gas fire. So much for the genuine 1800's feel. The acting is everything from downright bad to mediocre. Even Sutherland doesn't nail it, there are a few scenes that are rather cringe worthy. Rachel Hurd-Wood is OK tho, I think she does quite well and is never as lost or overacting as the others.
The movie isn't very scary and since the outcome is obviously non-supernatural, it's difficult to digest all the supernatural stuff. There are cheapish tricks like the image changing from black and white to color. The sound fx were not that good, listening with headphones. The title graphics uses a typeface that is probably called "The horror movie font" on a site providing royalty free fonts. The overall feel was quite cheap and lacks any sense of style. The framing story of a single mother and a daughter living in a modern world is quite tacky too.
This could've been passable as a shorter episode of Masters of Horror style series, as it's got that cheap TV feel, but even then it would've been a disappointment. Avoid.