Halloween Ends

Directed by: David Gordon Green
Starring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Andi Matichak, Rohan Campbell
Released: 2022
Trailer

Let’s get these Halloween reviews started with a more divisive film: Halloween Ends, the supposed final entry in the Halloween canon. Rather than centering on Michael Myers’ killing sprees this time around, the film focuses on how Laurie Strode and her granddaughter Alyson are trying to piece their lives together after the traumatic events of Halloween (2018) and Halloween Kills. Michael has disappeared after the events of the last film, and in those interim years the town has understandably become more paranoid, with horrific and often violent results. We get a new character named Corey Cunningham, who, due to an unfortunate series of events involving the death of a child under his watch, ends up a pariah in Haddonfield. Laurie and Alyson try to help and support him, but after a particularly traumatic night, Corey ends up face to face with Michael Myers himself and begins to go down a dark path. Because after all, if Haddonfield thinks he is a monster, perhaps Corey should live up to the name.

From the synopsis alone, one can understand why this final entry in the series is so divisive among filmgoers and critics. The only other film in the series that didn’t focus so much on Myers was Halloween III: Season of the Witch, which also was divisive. I will admit, I was very harsh in a past review, but my feelings on it have softened with time. Despite its flaws, I appreciate Halloween III for trying to do something different. It doesn’t necessarily work as a whole, but its components are interesting and creative. And while it is silly and boring at times, the film still has that Halloween atmosphere. And honestly, it is far from the worst Halloween film that I have seen, what with Rob Zombie’s first Halloween film with its messy script and baffling choices regarding Myers’ past, the boring and tedious Halloween 5 with the focus on pranksters and annoying characters, the disastrous and incoherent Halloween 6, and the ridiculous Halloween Resurrection.

The same goes for this one. Is it messy in its storytelling? Yes. It lacks the tight script of the original Halloween and Halloween (2018), and at times feels like a combination of It and Friday the 13th Part V: A New Beginning rather than a Halloween movie. But I still enjoyed the story being told, and it does a better job of exploring the themes of evil being like a virus that Halloween Kills, while an enjoyable slasher romp, fumbled the ball on.

I enjoyed Rohan Campbell’s performance as Corey Cunningham, and was invested in his character’s fall into darkness. Jamie Lee Curtis is of course great as Laurie, playing her not as a survivalist/Sarah Conner-type this time around, but as a traumatized woman finally acknowledging her trauma and simply trying to move on and give her granddaughter the happy and supportive life she failed to give her daughter. Andi Matichak does fine as Alyson, though her character is not given much to do this time around other than have a rather rushed romance with Corey and serve as a pawn for Michael and Corey’s mind games against Laurie.

Ah, yes, the romantic subplot. While I enjoy this film, the romance itself is lacking. While I found myself invested in the idea of of it–two people traumatized by Michael Myers’ legacy find comfort in each other’s arms–in practice it feels very rushed and melodramatic.

The kills are quite good in this one. It balances the restraint of the original and Halloween (2018) with the malicious gore of Halloween Kills very well, with some particularly nasty deaths involving scissors in one shocking scene and a blowtorch in another. 

The score is, of course, fantastic. With John Carpenter at the lead, how could it not be? And the licensed music, particularly a reprise of “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper” by Blue Öyster Cult, were used very well.

Halloween Ends is going to be divisive, but I think it is one of the more entertaining entries in the series, and an overall satisfying send-off for Laurie Strode. It isn’t perfect, it’s messy, but I appreciate what it is trying to do. This is one Halloween film that I look forward to seeing again.

After a Long, Long Hiatus…

Hello, everyone.

I know it has been a while since I’ve written on here. It’s been…FIVE YEARS?! Sheesh, I’ve been gone a long time.

So, a long LONG story short, I took a hiatus for my own mental well-being. I’d been dealing with a lot mentally, and pushing myself to write a whole slew of reviews during the month of October ceased to be fun and became more of a chore that was killing my love of writing. So, other than a few bits of poetry here and there (one of which got published in an online mag…yay!) I sort of…gave up on writing. The idea of putting words to paper or the blank Word document made me anxious and tired rather than excited to fill the page. So, as with anything that no longer gives me joy, I let it go for the most part.

But in that long five years, I began to develop a love of film critique again. Maybe the pandemic knocked some perspective in me (or maybe the fact that the only thing I could do in that time was go to work, play video games, and knock out the movies on my DVD shelf could have been a contributing factor), but I realized that I missed publishing reviews here. I missed excitedly posting and waiting to see people read and comment. And while the reviews aren’t blockbusters by any means, every comment on here has made me smile and feel like my writing is making others feel good.

So, do I plan to do my Halloween film months like years past? No. Those have run their course, and looking back, I think I sacrificed quality of writing for quantity of reviews. But I would love to review a horror film or two this month, maybe a new release here and there. But my output will not be nearly as prolific as in the past.

See you in the next one. I love and appreciate you all.

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #31: Halloween II

 

Director: Rick Rosenthal

Starring:  Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasance

Released: 1981

Trailer

Synopsis: Resuming exactly where the first film left off, this installment continues the mayhem as Laurie Strode is transferred to a hospital. At first, it seems as though she’s safe, until Michael Myers returns to finish what he started.

 

So, at last, we have finally reached the conclusion of this year’s Halloween review series. Since I’ve made somewhat of a tradition of ending almost every series with a Halloween film, I decided to tackle what many consider the last good sequel to John Carpenter’s original horror masterpiece: Halloween II. And I have to say that I was really let down by this one.

Granted, my past experiences with the Halloween franchise have often been less than stellar, but at least they were entertainingly bad. Even Halloween III with all its weirdness had more to offer than this film that essentially just feels like an overlong coda to the first film.

That isn’t to say that this film is terrible. There’s a great deal of suspense, and the kills are definitely more graphic than the first film. There are even some interesting callbacks to things and people established in the first film, some of which only mentioned in passing in the previous installment. That attention to detail is worth commending.

But Halloween II feels just like more of the same, except in a hospital and now there’s a whole reveal of why Michael is so fixated on Laurie. But only a handful of characters, most of whom carry-overs from the first film, are at all interesting. The rest of the characters are just walking dead-bodies-to-be, with obnoxious personalities that make the audience pretty much root for Michael. At least in the first film, the audience kind of cared about Laurie’s two friends, even if they were terrible people, because they had a connection to Laurie. None of these new characters have a connection to Laurie other than passing glances or the occasional exchange of banal dialogue.

That said, there are a variety of kills compared to usual Michael’s M.O. of stabbing or slashing people with his knife. People are boiled alive, garroted (in an actually creepy scene, I might add), brained with claw hammers, and stabbed with scalpels. The film does go too far at times with its bloodlust, as there is a rather unnecessary scene where a child is shown going to the hospital after eating candy with a razor blade in it, with cruelly gruesome results. Other than shock value, I can’t even begin to imagine why this was left in.

While the first film had its goofy moments (Michael seems to put a lot of effort into his showmanship as far as kills go), everything that happens in the film feels like they are building up to something important. One tense scene builds on another until the tension becomes too much for the audience to handle without being frightened for Laurie and the children she’s babysitting.

And that is where Halloween II ultimately fails. The film is far more sloppy in its presentation, with kills and moments of tension that are more scatter shot than those of its predecessor. Scenes that do not involve killing or buildup to killing feel slow and clunky. As a result, the whole film does not feel as fluid or cohesive as the first installment. There’s still suspense and enough violence to please some, but for those seeking a sequel that improves on the original, this is a disappointment.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #30: Sleepy Hollow

 

Director: Tim Burton

Starring: Johnny Depp, Christina Ricci, Miranda Richardson, Christopher Walken

Released: 1999

Trailer

Synopsis: There’s murder afoot in Sleepy Hollow, and it’s up to Ichabod Crane to solve it before it is too late. But what could be killing people? Could it be the Headless Horseman of legend?

 

Despite my criticism of Dark Shadows during last year’s review series, I do have to admit that overall, I love Tim Burton’s work. Well…mostly, anyway. It seems that at some point in his career (perhaps around the time he did the remake of Alice in Wonderland), his work has taken a huge consistent dip in quality compared to his past films. Dark Shadows was disappointing, as was Frankenweenie. Even films promising to be like his older films—Corpse Bride, being an earlier example—were a letdown. So, where does that leave Sleepy Hollow in the scheme of things?

Visually, the film is impressive. The grotesque and creepy nature of Washington Irving’s original story seemed to be practically calling for Burton’s creative viewpoint to retell it in a refreshing and interesting way. And the dark and dingy atmosphere of the village and the gnarled and twisted trees of the surrounding wood in this version of the story help to augment the creepiness of the story. This is also one of those Burton films that does not hold back on its grotesque imagery, and is certainly far more bloody than most of Burton’s previous films up until that point.

But other than the setting, the film does some impressive special effects work for the Headless Horseman. Using CG, the filmmakers do excellent work to wipe away the head of the actor playing the Horseman to make him look truly headless. There are no points where it’s obvious that CG was used to bring the Horseman to life, and even the non-head-related additions made to the Horseman’s attire by CG work are difficult to spot. Yes, there are moments where the CG is obvious and dated, particularly during a scene where the Horseman’s original head begins to appear as a skull, but the overall digital effects (including one that gives the illusion of the Horseman urging his bounding horse out of a tree trunk) are still fine by today’s standards.

Tonally, the story is a black comedy, borrowing a lot stylistically (particularly in the gore department) from Hammer Horror films. For some, the humor may be off-putting and take away from the tension that the story is trying to build, the portrayal of the Horseman as a man with razor sharp teeth that communicates only in growls and shouts being a potentially huge sticking point. But for myself, these humorous moments provide some levity and self-awareness to a film that could have easily been a dark and depressing slog.

The fact that the film completely changes the story from the source material to basically be a proto-Guy Ritchie-Sherlock Holmes action adventure mystery may also turn away Irving purists. The addition of actual witchcraft rather than making the magical elements ambiguous as to whether they are really magical or an illusion may also push away those who liked the ambiguity of the original short story. In this film, the Horseman definitely exists and isn’t potentially a practical joke orchestrated by town bully Bram Bones.

As for me, Sleepy Hollow is a weird and enjoyable ride that, despite its sometimes inappropriate goofiness, is still a worthwhile watch for Burton fans. At the very least, it is certainly more enjoyable than Dark Shadows.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #29: The Elephant Man

 

Director: David Lynch

Starring: John Hurt, Anthony Hopkins

Released: 1980

Trailer

Synopsis: The (semi)biopic about the life of John (in reality, Joseph) Merrick, the Elephant Man, and his relationship with Frederick Treves.

 

This is a film that has come under fire since its release for many reasons, all of which I can understand. Some dislike it because of its manhandling of history and its reliance upon a historical account that may not be entirely accurate. Others dislike it because it seems cloying and sentimental. Still others dislike it because they admire David Lynch’s more surreal work and see this as Lynch selling out to the Oscar types.

But despite agreeing that these are legitimate issues one can have with the film, I love The Elephant Man so much. Maybe it’s because of my love for the misunderstood characters misinterpreted as monsters that this film resonates so much with me. Whatever the reason this is one of the few films that actually made me tear up in places.

Some say the film is overly sentimental and maudlin. I agree that for a Lynch film, that is the case. But as a film in general, not comparing it to Lynch’s other work but to other films similar to this one, this is not nearly as cheesy or sappy as it could have been. The film still has elements of Lynch’s style—the black and white presentation and surreal imagery peppered throughout the film bring to mind sequences from Eraserhead. But it also has some emotional moments that really do work dramatically and are a welcome change from Lynch’s typically emotionally cold and withdrawn style. Scenes where Merrick is moved to tears by human kindness most people take for granted are especially striking.

The friendship between Merrick and Treves is also well done. It’s not a perfect friendship, as Treves also views Merrick as an experiment at first, creating a conflict between the two and raising questions as to whether Treves is being kind because he wants to be, or out of obligation to keep his experiment healthy enough to observe. But the conversations between Merrick and Treves are entertaining and interesting, especially as Treves and the audience begin to grow emotionally attached to Merrick.

The performances in this film are fantastic. Anthony Hopkins does well as Treves, but the real star here is John Hurt as John Merrick. Hurt has been known as a powerhouse actor for decades, playing some of the most commanding and intimidating roles. Here, however, he plays a pathetic and sweet character who wants only to belong in our world. Though his makeup makes it difficult to make out much of his expressions, his voice conveys so much emotion that one cannot help but be moved by the performance.

The makeup is also fantastic, perfectly matching photos of the real Merrick in a seamlessly grotesque manner. Even by today’s standards, the makeup is nearly flawless. I cannot even imagine the amount of time and craftsmanship required to not only design the make-up but also to apply it to John Hurt every day of shooting.

The Elephant Man has an admittedly sentimental story that might at times grow cheesy. But what sets it apart from other films dealing with similar subject matter are the strong performances by the main leads as well as the fantastic makeup work and overall Lynchian design of the film. Not everyone will love this film, but like its main character, The Elephant Man will prove to be a moving experience if given the chance.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #28: Over the Garden Wall

 

Directors: Nick Cross, Robert Alvarez, Larry Leichliter, Eddy Houchins, Ken Bruce, Nate Cash

Starring: Elijah Wood, Collin Dean, Melanie Lynskey, Christopher Lloyd, John Cleese

Released: 2014

Trailer

Synopsis: Two brothers (with the help of a talking bird) try to find their way home in a story that is one part Nightmare Before Christmas, one part Alice in Wonderland, with a little bit of The Wizard of Oz to balance it out. But it is not all fun and games as the boys are being watched by a mysterious and malevolent force known as the Beast.

 

For those who recall last year’s review series, I finally saw one of the shows that everyone seemed to want me to watch. This year, I do this once again. Not with Stranger Things 2 (I have not finished it yet, but so far it’s really good), but with a more kid-friendly show, Over the Garden Wall. Like what happened with Stranger Things, everyone and their brother were pushing this Cartoon Network miniseries as easily one of the greatest cartoon events in history.

But does the show live up to the hype? While I’m not on the bandwagon of it being the greatest thing ever, Over the Garden Wall is still an excellent tale that sets the mood for Halloween. The visuals alone make the show worth watching, giving the audience beautiful autumn imagery that perfectly captures the atmosphere of fall, from colorful leaves to an entire town of pumpkin people. The show is also not afraid to delve into darker aspects of the story, including the horrifying (at least for a program directed at children as well as adults) specter of the villainous Beast.

The voice acting is also excellent. Elijah Wood does well as the protagonist Wirt, and never sounds like an adult trying to act like a teenager. No one in this show feels out of place or distracting in their roles. Even Christopher Lloyd—who I was sure would be distracting because of how recognizable his voice is after playing Doc Brown in Back to the Future—does well as the Woodsman.

The music and the musical numbers are often a lot of fun, even if some of the musical numbers aren’t crucial to the narrative. The old-timey sound of the music is a lot of fun and a nice throwback to a nostalgic time this entire series seems to be trying to capture. Numbers like “Potatoes and Molasses” and “Adelaide Parade” still stick with me long after watching the series.

The overall story is simple, but its simplicity allows for the script to delve into sequences of world building as well as powerful emotional depth. The stops that the characters make on their journey home don’t necessarily have an impact on the overall plot, but are interesting diversions that help build the main trio’s relationships with each other while fleshing out this fantastical places and introducing some colorful characters like Enoch and the Highwayman. The dialogue is also charmingly written, especially when it comes to capturing the childish innocence of Wirt’s younger brother, Greg.

My only issue with the show is that the conclusion feels somewhat rushed, at least during the last few minutes after the Beast story is concluded. A slower coda that allows the audience to properly say goodbye to these characters they have grown to love over the series would have been nice. But the conclusion they ultimately utilize, although brisk, is still satisfying in its own right.

Over the Garden Wall is yet another piece of media that makes me wonder why I waited so long to finally watch it. The animation, the music, and the characters are all likeable and enjoyable, and the writing is clever and amusing while also not hesitating to delve into darker aspects of the story.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #27: A Christmas Horror Story

 

Directors: Grant Harvey, Steven Hoban, Brett Sullivan

Starring: William Shatner, Zoé De Grand Maison, Adrian Holmes, Amy Forsyth

Released: 2015

Trailer

Synopsis: An anthology of Christmas-themed horror films, including a killer Krampus, changelings, murderous ghosts in darkened school hallways, Santa Claus fighting zombie elves, and William Shatner as a radio DJ to tie it all together.

 

What is it about Christmas and horror that seems to go well together? Or, if not “well” together, at least tempt screenwriters and filmmakers to combine the two over and over again to varying outcomes in quality? Also, Netflix always seems to carry some of the more interesting films, doesn’t it? Not necessarily “good” films, but at the very least films that seem to actually be trying despite having low budgets or poorly written scripts. That is A Christmas Horror Story in a nutshell.

The writing is not fantastic, and is certainly standard B-movie faire as far as the quality goes. This is certainly not a script that’s going to win awards. In addition to barely passable dialogue, none of the characters are well written in a way that makes them interesting on paper, let alone onscreen. This is a shame, as there are some legitimately creepy and disturbing moments that crop up on occasion and entire sequences, such as the Santa and Changeling stories, work very well on their own and could be their own feature-length productions.

This poor writing might explain why much of the acting is barely average from many of the actors, particularly from the younger ones. The only characters that stand out in the film are Santa and William Shatner’s DJ character, mostly because the actors seem to embrace the cheesiness of the story.

The effects (at least the computer generated ones) are nothing to write home about. They aren’t the worst effects that this reviewer has seen by a long shot, but they are noticeably fake, mostly because of budgetary concerns. Which once again is a shame, because the filmmakers seem to have wild imaginations and clearly have an over-the-top vision that is limited only by the animation budget. This is clearly illustrated by the whole Santa versus zombies sequence as well as the Krampus effects which, despite looking more like a costume than a real creature, looks far more like the many pieces of art depicting it than whatever the monster was supposed to be in the 2015 film Krampus.

A Christmas Horror Story is a mixed bag, to say the least. While by no means a great film, there are plenty of good things in it to make it worth at least a look.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #26: Rec 4: Apocalypse

Director: Jaume Balagueró

Starring: Manuela Velasco, Paco Manzanedo, Hector Colome, Ismael Fritschi

Released: 2014

Trailer

Synopsis: Taking place immediately after Rec 2, this film completely disposes of the found footage element and moves the action to a ship, where yet another outbreak occurs and those who are on the ship must fight for their survival.

 

Attention: I am skipping Rec 3 (at least for this year) because other than a brief reference to the events that take place in the third film, this installment has almost no bearing on the story.

 

So, for those who came in late, I thought that the first Rec film was fantastic and the second one was not as good as the first, but still entertaining for what it was.

It is with a heavy heart that I must report that Rec 4: Apocalypse is easily the worst out of the three films dealing with the reporter Angela and the events surrounding her venture into the apartment complex. Does this mean that it is a terrible film?

Rec 4 does immediately have an advantage over the first two films in that it takes place in a new setting that is actually scarier than being trapped in a quarantined building. At least in a building, those in danger of being infected could potentially sneak out and escape on foot if they are lucky enough to slip by the quarantine. But to have an outbreak in a ship out in the middle of the ocean? There are far fewer ways for one to escape from the vessel. And once escape is achieved, what then? The survivors would still have to find land before their resources (if they brought any with them) run out. This isolation coupled with the claustrophobic hallways with no windows already create a dreadful atmosphere.

It is unfortunate that the film does not seem to want to do anything new with its scares, however, essentially becoming a rehash of the first two installments, even ripping off a twist from the second film, only with a different character. The only scary thing that happens is that at one point, the food on the ship becomes infected and the infection spreads to much of the crew. The rest of the film is ridiculous action that serves only to remind the audience how good the first two films were at creating suspense with subtle scares.

The film is far too reliant on CG to scare the audience. The effects are not the worst I have seen, but they are certainly worse than those used in the first two films. At least in the previous installments, any CG effects were hidden by shadows and chiaroscuro lighting. In this, the effects are clearly CG and not obscured to hide any of the fakeness, particularly when infected monkeys are involved.

And, as variable as the found footage genre can be, I wish that the filmmakers had employed first-person camerawork like in the previous two films, not only to maintain consistency of cinematography but also to create some semblance that this film takes place in the same universe as the other two. The grittiness of the camera picture could have potentially hidden the imperfect aspects of the CG and made the effects seem less fake.

As-is, Rec 4: Apocalypse, in abandoning all of what made the series so distinct, appears to be generic zombie faire that barely resembles its predecessors. For those wanting to continue to original story, I suppose this will sate this wanting. But for those wanting this story and for this story to actually be well told and interesting, this is one to ignore.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

 

 

 

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #25: Rec 2

 

Directors: Jaume Balagueró, Paco Plaza

Starring: Jonathan Mellor, Javier Botet, Oscar Sánchez, Manuela Velasco

Released: 2009

Trailer

Synopsis: Taking place on the same night as the first installment, this film continues the story as a doctor and a GEO team enter the building where the first film took place to not only quarantine the apartment complex, but to find something that only the doctor, who may not be who he says he is, knows.

 

For those of you who have followed my blog since the beginning (or at least checked out the directory of reviews upon your first visit here), you may remember my review of the original Rec. To summarize: I loved it and its found footage style, as shocking and unbelievable as that sounds. So, naturally, when I heard that there were sequels to the film, I was excited to check them out.

And after seeing Rec 2, I think it’s…okay. It’s definitely not on the same level as the first film, namely because we have less-interesting characters to follow this time around. They’re certainly not as likeable as the first film’s Angela. Fortunately, the men in the GEO team do share a camaraderie that helps the audience to at least care about their survival, and the doctor’s quest is at least engaging and interesting.

Story-wise there are some decent twists and turns throughout the film that keep the audience guessing, which I won’t spoil here because discussing any of them in detail would ruin a lot of the fun anyone would have watching the film for the first time. And despite the fact that the audience has had some exposure to the basic idea of how this infection works and where it may have come from after watching the first film, there are still mysteries to be solved and details that were merely hinted at in the previous film to be fleshed out. Granted, not all of the reveals are great. The reveals of the ultimate nature of this infection, as well as how the infected are able to detect where the uninfected are hiding, are disappointing, at least to this reviewer. Without spoiling too much, the infection is less scientific and more supernatural in nature, which feels out of place, especially when one considers how grounded the first two films are in reality. Making the source of this disease something beyond reality feels like kind of a cheat. Of course, whether this works for other people or not comes down to personal taste.

The camera work is actually done very interestingly here. Rather than utilizing a single camcorder like in the first film, Rec 2 utilizes the GEO’s bodycams to tell the story. Seeing two tense moments occur simultaneously, especially when the events occur fairly close to each other, is interesting and not something this reviewer has seen done before. While found footage has often been hit or miss, quality-wise, the camera work here is effective in creating an atmosphere of dread as well as (at times) isolation and claustrophobia.

While not as good as the first film, Rec 2 has enough in it to engage the audience as well as build further upon a creepy mythology.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!

Halloween Film Month: 31 in 31 (or Less) #24: Ghost Story

 

Director: John Irvin

Starring: Fred Astaire, Melvyn Douglas, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., John Houseman, Craig Wasson, Alice Krige

Released: 1981

Trailer

Synopsis: Members of an old gentleman’s club (known as the Chowder Society) are dying one by one at the hands of a mysterious woman. But why? And why does she also seem to be targeting the son of one of the members?

 

When I first heard the title of the film, I thought, “Come on…Ghost Story? That’s the most generic title ever. It’s like taking Halloween and calling it Masked Slasher Film.”

What also didn’t help were the overall negative reviews directed at the film, many of them calling it generic and bland. But, surprise surprise, I found myself actually enjoying Ghost Story. Well, for the most part, anyway.

The special effects work for the titular ghost’s appearance is effective and disgusting. The face of the ghost is especially striking with its rotting appearance. But while the ghost does look scary, it would have been nice for the film not to show the face so soon in the story and so frequently. The big reveal of the ghost’s true face would have been effective if it only occurred once: during the climax when one of the main characters, Don, seems to be at his darkest hour. With how frequently the face appears, its impact on the audience steadily diminishes to the point where in a scene where a reveal like this would actually be effective just feels underwhelming.

All of the actors in the film do suitable work. Craig Wasson does fine as Don Wanderley, and is passable as the short-lived twin brother of Don, David. It does not help that David has little to no screen time or development to craft any sort of memorable character other than serving as the driving force for the main action of the film. Alice Krige also plays a dual role as Eva Galli and Alma Mobley, and while she portrays Alma well (her near-robotic performance as Alma makes sense in context), her acting as Eva (essentially borrowing a great deal from her Alma role) sometimes feels unnecessarily awkward and takes away from the humanity of the character. The actors portraying the younger versions of the Chowder Society members are also awkwardly acted in places, taking the subtler traits of the older versions of themselves and overblowing them to make them seem like cartoon characters rather than people.

The story is intriguing, though slowly paced. The film utilizes flashbacks to convey bits of exposition. And, despite my previous complaints regarding some of the acting, the use of these flashbacks is effective and suspenseful while also conveying vital information regarding certain events and characters. The biggest complaint I have regarding the story is that while the buildup to the ending is suitably climactic, the ending itself is a letdown as it is yet again one of those endings where the film does not so much conclude as stop without any sort of epilogue to tie everything up. Ultimately, the ending proves unsatisfying.

Despite its flaws and pacing, Ghost Story is a surprisingly entertaining ghost yarn that warrants at least one viewing.

---

For more reviews, be sure to like this page as well as the Facebook page. For previous reviews, be sure to check out the full directory of reviews. As always, thank you for reading!