HOST (2020)

So good

NOTE: This is a spoiler free review. Do yourself a favor and view this film WITHOUT WATCHING THE TRAILER FIRST! You will be glad you did. A two minute trailer for a 56 minute film can give a lot away! 

Last Monday I heard about this new "computer screen" horror film called HOST. I saw the screenshot and tried not to roll my eyes. 

"Ok...another UNFRIENDED thing. Cool...I liked that one." 

Then I saw what people were saying about it and took a bit more notice. During the course of the day, reviews kept popping up all over the internet raving about the film. Now, this wasn't studio hyperbole, this was coming from horror folks I knew and respected. I zoomed :::grin::: over to Shudder to view it....but found that I was a few days early and had to wait. 

Last night...the waiting was over. 

I started watching the film on my television and stopped a few minutes in after seeing the format. 

"No...no, this needs to be seen on my computer." 

I raced to my iMac and started the film up again and I was glad that I did! It's PERFECT for late night viewing in the dark via computer. Especially in this era of covid ZOOM meetings and the Cult of Quarantine.

Host tells the tale of six people having an online seance through....ZOOM, the online meeting app. (If you are like me, you are very...VERY familiar with ZOOM right now) With their medium Seylan at the helm, they dive into the mysterious astral plane. :::::DRINK:::::  ;)

My spoiler free mini-video review can be seen here....    It's silly, but I was inspired. 

I'm not sure how they did it, to tell you the truth. I mean, the general "horror over online meeting" concept has been done for sure. The aforementioned UNFRIENDED did a really good job of bringing the paranormal and computer tech worlds together and was very entertaining. But HOST brings something new into the mix - several new things, really. 

Thanks do the wonders of SHUDDER, they didn't have to try and pad out the story to meet the requirements of a theater run film. This allowed them to keep the film down to a wondrous 56 minutes or so. They packed that time with tons of great content and a strong story.

They used small ZOOM meeting knowns to their advantage all over the place which added a lot to the production. People waiting to get into the space, putting themselves on mute, messages popping up saying the meeting was going to end soon, and microphones being turned up to max so people could hear things better all had me grinning from ear to ear. There are more things in this particular bucket that I will let viewers discover for themselves. 

Making use of the new, virtual environment created with the use of six or seven separate locations joined together via cameras and microphones added tension in very interesting ways - again, spoiler free. 

I'd love to see another film on the making of this film, to be honest. Gemma Hurley, Rob Savage, and Jed Shepherd wrote a stellar script and Savage's direction was amazing. Picture staring at a large painting of a town, then zooming into a few of the town's locations and back out again as you stared at it. That's what HOST managed to feel like. You see all six folks, then from time to time you explore one of their apartments or homes. It was incredibly dynamic and engaging. It really brings a lot of NEW to a sub-genre that I thought was tapped out. 

But...more than anything else mentioned here...the acting. 

Haley Bishop, Jemma Moore, Emma Louise Webb, Radina Drandova, Caroline Ward, Seylan Baxter, and Edward Linard sold the film 100%. Subtle, nuanced, and BELIEVABLE performances all around brought a much needed feeling that these were all real people. They seemed like they all knew each other and that they had a history with each other. Subtle changes in the way they interacted felt very real to the point where I actually forgot that they were actors for a moment. So, when the shite hit the fan and things started to go south, I was concerned for their well being. 

AND....they didn't look like they were "acting scared", they looked like they were truly freaked out. 

I'm going to stop there before I say too much. 

HOST brings a ton of fun to the table and is WELL worth a viddy. I'll be watching it again this weekend...on my computer....in the dark....

After you watch you can check out the interview with Rob Savage here:
https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/movies-tv/behind-the-scenes-of-host-a-british-horror-film-shot-on-zoom

Double Feature: Hell House LLC and 21 Days

I recently had a daytime, sick day double feature. A rare treat for an active Father of two. I fired up Amazon Prime and went through my list and was happy to see that HELL HOUSE LLC was and top of my list. I snuggled in and settled in for the viewing.

Hell House LLC is a found footage film that documents the strange goings on in an abandoned hotel as a group of 20-somethings build out a haunted house attraction.

From IMDB:
"Five years after an unexplained malfunction causes the death of 15 tour-goers and staff on the opening night of a Halloween haunted house tour, a documentary crew travels back to the scene of the tragedy to find out what really happened."

I loved the storytelling here. You see the horrific outcome via some footage that was posted to YouTube and some interviews speaking about the events gravely, but you don't know what happened other than something went very wrong and people died.  When additional footage is recovered, the tale unfolds in classic, found footage style.

The film has some really chilling visuals, even for a horror hound like myself. I found myself pulling for the characters even though I knew they didn't make out alive at the end. I was invested and concerned and I was freaked out more than a few times. Many of the situations were very creepy and well executed. I was happy about the whole situation. :::grin:::

 

The acting felt real and the relationships seemed honest which really helped to sell the whole story. The fact that GoPro camera's where mounted as a safety precaution for the haunt nights sold the reason why they had so much good footage. And, documenting the haunt build for future advertising and the like made constant taping understandable. 

I'm not usually a found footage fan, but this one was super solid and didn't bother me at all.  The storytelling was the thing that really locked it in for me. We're right there in the thick of the story, investigating along with the people in the movie to try and sort out what happened. Clues drift into place as the movie rolls along and you twist and turn along with it as opening night looms ahead.



I have not felt the same way about a film like this since I originally caught The Blair Witch Project when it came out in the theater or when I curled up with Lake Mungo for the first time. I was completely invested in the film, story, and characters.

All in all, Hell House LLC had a fun story with some grand scares and chills. It is a new Halloween Fave for me that I plan to own very soon! I loved it.  A fantastic first feature length film for Director Stephen Cognetti. I can't wait to see more!






Which brings me to 21 Days......

Now, I usually don't bash films if I didn't enjoy them taking the tack of, "If you don't have something nice to say, don't say anything at all." But, seeing as this came on the heels of Hell House LLC, it was an interesting juxtaposition of what works and what doesn't that might be beneficial to filmmakers.

This was Kathleen Behun's first feature as well and I'm looking forward to see what she does in the future. I would assume that a found footage feature might be a bit easier to do as a first film with a smaller budget - especially when you only have three people in one location, but it might have other limitations for sure. Juggling time between three people in a house requires some careful planning. I think she pulled that off along with making the single location interesting and engaging.

21 Days tells the tale of a house that people can't last more than 21 days in. Things are so disturbing within the house that occupants usually end up fleeing - leaving all their belongings behind, and if they don't, they go mad.

From IMDB:
"Three filmmakers embark on a paranormal challenge by barricading themselves in a house so haunted, no one has been able to live in for more than 21 days."

The house had an interesting lore behind it. The movie had all the usual scary tropes in there as well. Things in mirror reflections, doors slamming, stuff appearing....the usual. But, there were a few things that 21 Days had that grated on my nerves a bit.

The acting and writing were not at the same level as Hell House LLC, which instantly took me a little further away from what was going on. While LLC had a documentary feel that was super strong, 21 Days felt like a movie made to scare. Not that there's anything wrong with that. It did have a Paranormal Activity aura around it.

I jokingly put of a tweet while watching the third act that said, "The last 21 minutes of 21 Days was filled with shaking cameras, screaming, and darkness." Up to this point, things were relatively forgivable, but even my wife said, "God...that woman just keeps screaming frantically. I hate that," as she was walking through the room. The panic in LLC seemed genuine and the fact that there was a huge crowd involved really helped to set the scene at it's finale. But, 21 Days only had three people bottled in a house. They tried to have emotional spikes and heated interactions (handled expertly in LLC), but they just came off as script readings when all is said and done.

Now, don't get me wrong - there are some cool things in 21 Days as well that I'm sure will freak out someone in the mood for a haunted house flick. The scenes that took more time and subtlety played out really well and had me looking for little nuggets here and there on the edges of the screen. However, the film's final act crumbles into camera's being carried around by running people and he house becoming darker and darker until at one point there's a solid black screen with someone talking. The scene brightens a bit to reveal the big finish and there's a fun post credit scene, but I wish they had found some way to avoid the shaking cameras and screaming a bit.

At one point, someone is even filming with their iPhone and they drop it in a panic. The phone drops, but it's almost like they've placed it on the floor. And, the framing is set perfectly when it's dropped -  spot on for catching the same character running to the door and banging on it to be let out. Have you ever tried to place your camera somewhere to get a family photo on a timer? It's usually SUPER hard to find somewhere that a camera can be placed for the shot. Yet this person drops the phone and gets the perfect framing? That's the kinda thing that completely removes me, but that I can see someone else not even thinking about.

But, all of this might have been different if I didn't finish Hell House LLC minutes before. I also think it isn't played for someone like me - 48 with WAY too many horror movies under my belt. I'm sure this film was a hoot for a younger crowd who are a lot less jaded about horror. I think I owe this film a re-watch.

21 Days is solid and very worthy of a watch, but if you happen to do this same double feature, watch Hell House LLC AFTER watching 21 Days and not before. :::grin:::

Both of these should be added to your Halloween viewing list!

<><>

A Haunting in Connecticut 2

I checked out A Haunting in Connecticut 2: Ghosts of Georgia. No, I didn't loose a bet, I wasn't drunk and I'm not into self abuse. It just looked like it might have some redeeming value and it was streaming on Netflix, so what the hell.

"Dude, get over the name thing."

First, the damn name. This is a huge pain point for me - these movies that share a name with another film and little else.  





I, Robot - Yes, it's about robots and so is the original novel. That's pretty much where it ended. Why? They couldn't get the rights originally, so they started shooting another robot script...until the rights came through. Then, they just....blended the two scripts in a blender and shot what poured out. 

Last Exorcism..uh...Part 2   Did it really need to dovetail off? I mean, it has the same girl in it, but it could just be another ghostie, right? Anyway....

Well, this Connecticut film is the same way. Firstly...A HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT. CONNECTICUT!!!! Jebus - at least have it happen there if you're going to use the friggin' title! LOL  But....like I said....I moved on.


Things are simple here yet again. Family moves into a new home. Family has their own "ghosts" they are dealing with. Family starts seeing ghosts all over. Hot sister in law used to fly fighters for the Galactica. Oh...wait...sorry...got confused because Katee :::sigh::: Sackhoff is in it. (Battlestar Galactica) •ahem• Anyway...yeah...so...



Oh....yeah...ghosts all over the place. Kid talks to ghosts. Yadda yadda yadda. You know the drill. However this had a story that I found to be very interesting. I won't give too much away, but it has to do with the Underground Railroad, slavery and a "Stationmaster" that helped slaves escape. There was some actual meat to this storyline and it got me involved eventually. I wasn't just waiting for effects shots to pop up.

AND, the biggie - I didn't call it like I usually do. Usually I can call out exactly what's going to happen in these films. A fall, a stumble, a jump scare, etc. Some were hilarious when I got going. I felt like I was willing the film to unfold before me. (The Possession comes to mind) This film didn't do much of the simple stuff. It choose to rely on story to get it's points across. The only sad thing was there was so much story that they had to resort to a section of flashbacks and exposition to explain what was going on at one point. I forgave it, however, because I found myself saying, "Ooooohh....I get it...Huh!" out loud when it happened.

Now, don't get me wrong - this film isn't perfect. Not at all. There's still a lot of fluff in here and not even a special appearance from Cicely Tyson could lift it into the realm of "great".  The film got 5/10 on IMDB and a sad 26/100 on Metacritic. (Oddly, The Possession got a 45. I liked Connecticut better) I didn't expect ANYTHING from it and it actually managed to give a lot - I appreciated that about the film. There is a lot packed into the film and, unlike some recent "paranormal" films of late, I wasn't bored 10 minutes in and just CRYYYYYYING out for SOMETHING to HAPPEN! :)

If you want to see some ghosts, some rotted corpses and some TOOL-like rock video flash-cut ghost edits, then you may want to toss this film on one night and give it a go.

The Conjuring

 

I'll admit it, I'm a COMPLETE sucker for these movies. Give me EVERY DAMN TROPE IN THE BOOK and I'll eat it up like a glutton! Feed me the bumps in the night. Feel me the jump scares. Pull people, shove people and send things flying across the room and I'm so very happy.

So, it's not shocking that this trailer makes me happy. :)

James "GOT YA!" Wan is serving up more of his ghostly goodness with THE CONJURING. The man excels at this genre, freaking people out with everything listed above and more. I love his work. Even the original SAW was rather smart and well played. Insidious? "Fo-get  a 'bout it!" So good! The films are slick and well shot and rich with color, atmosphere and scares.



The thing that has me a BIT worried is seeing Chad and Carey Hayes (Whiteout and House of Wax) listed as the writers. To be honest, I have not seen any of their work, but many of the people who have...didn't dig it. ( House of Wax - 41/100 and Whiteout a SAD 28/100 on Metacritic Ouch. ) I only hope that Mr. Wan can steer them into the seas of righteousness and help them on their way to greatness with Conjuring! :)

In this "Based on True Events" tale, Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson play ghost investigators who are "lucky" enough to find Lili Taylor and her haunted houseful. But, will they live to tell the tale?!

Like I said, it's not necessarily "new ground" being broken here, but who cares if Wan does it right. (No, not trying to be funny - just worked out that way...)  The man knows how to set the scene and set things up for real haunted house fun, so I'm all in on this one even if life might call for me seeing it on Netflix instead of the big screen at the moment.

Check it!

Apartment 143

Ok, I'll be honest here. I'm trying to figure out why I didn't hate this film. :)

There are several things making it difficult to love APARTMENT 143.

The first thing is having seen all the elements present in this films in previous horror films that were better. Haunting, strange images on video, camera mounted around that we the viewer observe from and jump scare set pieces. You've seen it all before, which isn't a bad thing when it's done well. These folks do fine in the presentation. It's just...fine.


The second major stumbling block is the strange and flat performance from Michael O'Keefe. He was pretty darn good at one point. THE GREAT SANTINI...CADDYSHACK...MICHAEL CLAYTON. But, in this it's like he's on something that inhibits human emotion. He mumbles lines blankly - not BADLY, just blankly. Like his soul has been removed.

And lastly, the story is strange. I'm not sure how else to state it. Strange. Strange in a, "Oh...hmph...ok...that actually makes sense and I didn't see it coming," way. A good thing seeing as I usually manage to guess what's up half way through the film.


But, I think this is where the Why don't I hate this film? comes into play. I don't hate it because of the story. We have a lot of those "seen it" elements in here from a story perspective as well. Kids with a single father items, paranormal investigators and the investigation of a possible haunting in a small and seemingly isolated apartment. ( Hell, my neighbors play the music a little too loud and I want to start banging on walls, but screams? )

But, the execution is good and the acting works. That's huge. We're not talking bad, D List acting school acting. These folks are pretty good. They take time (SEE: Ti West Time - I'm working on getting that minted) to let people chat from time to time. To interact with each other. And, it's actually someone interesting. The science in the film seems fine, though I thought the camera work by a hand held camera in a scene of utter chaos was a bit clean. It was appreciated, however. After V/H/S, my mind needed a bit of a verité break. :)

It's also interesting that this film's original title was EMERGO. Yes, I looked it up. 

Italian • Verb • emergo  • first-person singular present indicative of emergere

I had to laugh. Tossing a title like emergo on a film like this would be really hard to sell to the masses. Sure, I'd still hunt it down and watch it, but that's not going to be the norm.

So...seeing as APARTMENT 143 is on Netflix streaming right now, it's not a bad film to invest time into. I'd love it if you did and posted what you thought of the film here or on the Facebook page, actually. I'd love to know what other people think!




Talk to me. :)

HILL HOUSE films

Hill House has caused a lot of trouble for a lot of people  over the years. It rattles the soul and jars the nerves. Some people never leave Hill House...alive.

It started back with The Haunting of Hill House (1959) by Shirley Jackson. The story involves a scientist and three "research assistants" spending time in old Hill House looking into the things that go bump in the night there.

 







THE HAUNTING (1963) was a film based on Jackson's book. The film is rather well done. A simple, yet effective "Old, Dark House" tale directed by Robert Wise (The Sound Of Music, West Side Story, Run Silent Run Deep AND MORE!) and staring Julie Harris, Claire Bloom and Richard Johnson.  The film was made before big special effects and gimics, so all the thrills take place in camera with the use of odd angles and zooms and the like. This makes it more enjoyable for me than some of it's other incarnations. It has that fantastic, black and white play-like set up where people interact and exchanges may mean more than their face value. And the scares - a la 1963 - are enough to make you cringe a little. Especially if you put yourself into their shoes. Little things, unseen in the shadows and heard through the walls, add to the atmosphere and the thrills.

Julie Harris is fantastic. She's our main character. We follow her out of her horrible life and into Hill House. We hear her thoughts. We know she's not 100%...balanced. And the poor thing...   :)
 

THE HAUNTING a great, old haunted house film with some good twists and turns within it.

In 1971,  Richard Matheson took a pass at the tale with Hell House. Evidently, it's close to the original book, but has more violence and situations of a sexual nature. It makes sense seeing as it was written in the 70s. I think this was more of the take of the film made shortly after Matheson's book was written.

THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE (1973) was the first HILL HOUSE film I saw. It was featured on CREATURE FEATURES and I remember it sending shivers through me a bit as a child. Bob Wilkins assured us that the film was going to be fun and it was. Creepy music and a fantastic old house made this a fave of mine for years.
John Hough was the Director on this film and he holds a little space in my heart for his film ESCAPE FROM WITCH MOUNTAIN. It's funny, he was a Disney guy for a long while, but also directed TWINS OF EVIL and DIRTY MARY CRAZY LARRY. 




Roddy McDowall, Gayle Hunnicutt and Pamela Franklin star and they do a great job bringing the characters to life. The film sports more effects and more thrills. And, more sexual naughtiness as found in films of the 70s. Poor Pamela Franklin goes through quiet a series of mishaps. And the story is fleshed out differently with more mystery behind it in many ways. There's something wrong in Hill House - affectionately referred to as HELL HOUSE - and it involves ghosts for sure. And, more science and more psychics. The team is still the same, but more is made about their abilities and they bring WAY more equipment with them to check out the house.
After seeing THE HAUNTING, I'm not sure which I like more - the old, dark house feel or the "There DEFINITELY is a ghost here!" feel this 1973 version has. I think they are both good in their ways, but if you want more punch, this is the version for you.





THE HAUNTING (1999) is fine. It's just...fine. It's a classic example of "more is not necessarily better". You have some heavy hitters in this film. Liam Neeson, Catherine...ZETA-Jones, Owen Wilson and Lili "Nutty" Taylor all do their best with the inflated script and try their best to be scared by the effects, but it's just...too much of everything. Too much attention placed on scares, too many special effects and not enough haunted house simplicity. You move through the movie and are beaten about the face and neck with effect after effect and it's distracting. Of course, if you like your scares generated by a computer, you'll love this film. It managed to take everything I loved about HELL HOUSE and added exclamation points, bells, whistles and fire to them all.

All in all, I put my money on...well, the books first - I plan to pick them up. Books always give a lot more than films. But, see THE HAUNTING, then watch THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE. You'll be happy you did. It's a great double feature!

THE HAUNTING TRAILER

THE LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE

THE HAUNTING

And, if you've seen the Tarantino / Rodriguez film GRINDHOUSE, you've seen the fantastic parody of the HELL HOUSE trailer. I love it!

DON'T

Paranormal Incident - Review

A while back, we posted a trailer for Paranormal Incident and kinda had a giggle about it. NETFLIX has it available for streaming viewing, so I figured I'd toss it on and give it a go.

A few moments into the movie I knew exactly what I was about to see - hungry, young actors and actresses (some willing to bare their...assets...) acting like they are real people in front of the camera...cinema verité style...hunting for ghosts. Yeah...it's kinda awful and it hurts a lot.  Someone saw THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT and was aiming for it a little. But...yeah...it's kind of a miss on most of the acting. They memorized their lines and are "acting school"-ing their way through the movie. Onward.

I couldn't spend time watching this film, to be honest. I've seen them before and, when I don't fast forward through, I get SO ANGRY that I wasted time on it. So...fast forward....

• 25 minutes in, we're watching fake, After Effects aged films and hearing more bad dialog done in post. 

• 32 minute mark we're seeing the handheld, night vision camera stuff and hearing noises. 


• 47 minutes in we have a bad fight between a couple. 


I could not spend more time on the film and I just started looking for scary, screaming parts at that point. They were hard to find and a bore when I did stumble onto one.

Then...there is the stringer plot of an interview taking place four days after "the incident" that was a strange, sad X Files play. Even worse, it made the film even more silly and explained nothing.

Poor writing and bad acting can be pulled through if you get other stuff right, but these folks didn't. They have hand held cameras in the hands of the "investigators" and security cameras stationary through the asylum, but somehow we also have footage from the "ghost eyes" of chasing folks down halls and the like that had me wondering "Who the hell is filming THAT footage?"

In short, the lover of genre ghosty films of any kind should watch this, but everyone else should avoid it and watch something else. Maybe THE WOODS or THE HAUNTING or LEGEND OF HELL HOUSE....anything else, really.  :)

Sorry, guys, I was really pulling for a sleeper hit.

Poltergeist videos

Ok....now...I've spent my fair share of time on YouTube looking for cool ghost videos. There are some neat one's on there for sure, but most look fake. There are some cool exceptions to that rule, of course.

Like this fun nugget - the infamous PANTRY GHOST - http://youtu.be/H8f5vdFOEh4

MELLOWBIRD has some rather cool videos up, however. If they are fake, they are REALLY well done. I've spent some time trying to figure out how the "magic" could be done if they are fake, but several of the videos are just logistically impossible to target. Strings and things could make things fly around, but the positioning on several of the objects that move would make the task of faking their movement really difficult.

So...the jury isn't out on these. What do YOU think?
http://www.youtube.com/user/mellowb1rd

CLICK TO GO TO YOUTUBE

CLICK TO GO TO YOUTUBE

It seems like he has some backlash and that people are out to prove these are fake. If they are fakes, he's done a great job with them. 

The Anti-Mellobird folks can be found here: 

http://www.disclose.tv/forum/mellowb1rd-s-fake-poltergeist-videos-t22436.html

It seems like their biggest issue with him is the fact that he's making money off of ads, but the videos are fake. Is this any worse than people making money off of clicks gained when they use a picture of a cute girl in a bikini as their thumbnail, but she doesn't actually appear in the video?

I find the MELLOWBIRD videos to be highly entertaining - fake or not. 

(Though, I do hope they are real!)

<>