American Psycho (2000)

Based on the 1991 novel of the same title satirising the consumer mentality and capitalist agenda of the maze that was 1980s America, this film centres around the greed and narcissism that was cultivated by this culture. With 67% on Rotten Tomatoes, 7.6/10 on IMDb and 3.5/5 on allociné, this film showcases Christian Bale in a terrifying powerhouse performance, recognised by Bloody Disgusting’s list of the Top 20 horror films of the decade. Directed by Mary Harron and lasting 101 minutes, Reese Witherspoon and Willem Dafoe join Bale to make up the extensive cast, this film is a modern critique of a world which prioritises money and appearance over everything else.

Enter Patrick Bateman (Bale), successful broker, late-80s music enthusiast and unhinged psychopath as he guides the viewer through the film with a voice-over. We watch Bateman’s morning routine, from his facemask, shower gel brand and his workout routine. We are slowly introduced to his friends and fiancée (Witherspoon), all as superficial as he is and disliked by Bateman. Early on in the film, Bateman’s cool exterior is broken as he says to a bartender, who cannot hear him over the noise of the club: ‘you’re a fucking ugly bitch. I wanna stab you, then play around in your blood’.

***SPOILER ALERT***

Angered after Paul Allen (a co-worker) shows him up at the office with an imperceptivity better business card, Bateman brutally stabs a homeless man and his dog after lecturing him for being unambitious. At a Christmas party, Allen mistakes Bateman for another broker Marcus Halberstram and they arrange to have dinner. Bateman gets Allen drunk and leads him back to his apartment where he murders him with an axe to the soundtrack of ‘Hip to be Square’. After disposing of the corpse, he goes to Allen’s apartment and stages it to appear as if he had fled to London.

Detective Donald Kimball (Dafoe) later comes to Bateman’s work and asks him about Allen’s disappearance. That night, Bateman hires two sex workers, who he names Sabrina and Christie, and has sex with them both whilst looking at himself in the mirror. Afterwards, he opens up a drawer of torture equipment. Bloodied and distraught, the women leave the flat.

The next day, Luis Carruthers, a clingy colleague of Bateman’s, shows him his new business card. Enraged by what he feels is an inferior stylish man, Bateman attempts to strangle him in the bathroom of a restaurant. However, Carruthers mistakes it for a sexual advance and proceeds to declare his love for Bateman. Disgusted, Bateman leaves.

He invites Jean, his infatuated secretary to his apartment, where he talks to her whilst deciding on the means with which to kill her. However, he is interrupted by a phone call from his fiancée and asks Jean to leave. At lunch the next day, his fiancée attempts to convince him that he is not suspected, seemingly ignoring his increasingly unstable arguments.

Later, he invites Christie and his friend Elizabeth to Allen’s apartment, where they praise the location. He has a threesome with them, and murders Elizabeth in the process. Horrified, Christie runs and discovers various female corpses scattered around the apartment. Bateman chases her from room to room with a chainsaw in his white boxer briefs and finally to a flight of stairs, where he manages to drop the chainsaw onto her.

After breaking off his engagement, he attempts to feed a kitten to an ATM machine and shoots an old woman who tries to stop him. Hearing the gunshots, the police give chase, but Bateman defeats them by shooting their gas tanks. Entering a building, he shoots the security guard dead before hiding in an office and leaving his lawyer a desperate voicemail, detailing his hideous acts and admitting to their monstrosity.

The next day, he returns to Paul’s apartment expecting to find a crime scene, but instead finds the flat clean and on the market. After a bizarre encounter with the realtor where she insinuates that she had to clean the apartment, Bateman leaves. Meanwhile, Jean finds disturbing drawings in Bateman’s notebook at his office.

Seeing his lawyer at a restaurant, Bateman admits to his murderous past, which his lawyer scoffs at, stating that he had dinner with Allen in London mere days ago. Finally, Bateman admits to himself that he will continue to elude punishment, avoiding catharsis, and that his confession was for nothing.

***END OF SPOILERS***

Besides the intriguing plot and the potential for multiple interpretations, Harron directs American Psycho with skill, using shots of Batman’s reflection in mirrors to emphasis his fakery, and the narrated voice-over provides an otherwise hidden look into Bateman’s psyche with the direct address affronting the audience and making them his accomplices. Bruised vanity is also amplified, with Bateman overreacting to business cards and the other men competing over how stylish they are.

This film is also a study of human cruelty and willingness for the upper classes to sweep things under the rug in order to avoid scandal (or, arguably, the inevitable mental instability that obsession with consumerism breeds), as a string of mistaken identity leads to Bateman being confused with other people. This also suggests that all these people act, look and think the same and are indistinguishable from each other.

The gore is well-executed with make-up, and often it is subdued and done off-camera, which is effective and makes the scenes that are graphic much more shocking. Although I didn’t find it overly scary, the mentality of the wealthy upper-classes literally getting away with murder is about as creepy as it gets for me, and Bale gives an outstanding performance as the unhinged Bateman, adding to the disturbance factor. A horror film about Manhattan’s elite is quite original, as the setting is not a popular choice for the preferred isolation of the horror genre, which I found refreshing. Murder to the score of 80s upbeat music? Sold! And the weapons were varied and imaginative. Overall, this film is perfect if you’re looking for a well-made, visually pleasing and competently executed horror film with a bite of witty satire, this is the film for you.

***THE RESULTS***

Gore    8/10

Disturbance/Creepiness      9/10

Originality      8/10

Scariness (behind-the-sofa factor)      6/10

Music score     7/10

Weapons       8/10

Cinematography/direction      9/10

Setting     7/10

Script       8/10

Entertainment      9/10

Overall      79/100

Il faut parler de Kevin (2011)

C’est un film très particulier, mais essentiel pour le discours aux Etats-Unis au sujet des armes. Avant que j’aie vu We Need to Talk About Kevin, j’avais lu le livre. Ils partagent tous les deux les thèmes et en fait un certain style, dont je vais parler dans ce critique. La réalisatrice, Lynne Ramsay, répand des flashbacks et les scènes actuelles dans la vie d’Eva, et je vais parler des scènes dans un ordre progressif.

Une femme, Eva, se trouve dans un mariage urbain dans lequel son mari veut beaucoup un enfant. Elle est un esprit très libre : elle travaille pour une compagnie de voyage, et elle voyage souvent. Cependant, elle se mit d’accord avec lui à contrecœur, et elle tombe enceinte. Pendant sa grossesse, elle est inconfortable, et même quand elle accouche, la sage-femme la dirige « arrêter de résister ».

L’enfant est né, et les parents se nomment Kevin. Son père, Franklin, développe une relation très tranquille et contente avec lui, mais Eva le trouve difficile. Dans une scène, elle se tient debout au milieu d’une rue, tout près d’un chantier de construction, pendant Kevin braille piteusement dans la poussette.

***LES SPOILERS***

Le film suive plutôt la relation entre mère et fils, et la relation se transforme en une lutte. On voit Eva essaye de jouer avec Kevin, avec un bol. Elle le roule à lui, et il ne répond qu’une fois, comme s’il essayait de la moquer.

Franklin persuade Eva de déménager de la ville à la compagne, à une grande maison. Eva ne l’aime pas, mais elle essaye de trouver une espace pour soi-même. Elle orne son bureau des plans tropiques, mais Kevin détruit la pièce avec un pistolet plastique plein de l’encre.

Kevin, qui porte encore les couches, continue à tourmenter sa mère. Il se souille, et Eva change la couche. Après deux secondes de plus, il se souille encore. Dans une rage extrême, Eva le touche sévèrement, et elle lui casse le bras. Il la menace de révéler son secret, et donc elle est manipulé pour faire exactement ce qu’il veut.

Il devient malade, et pour un temps, il préfère sa mère plus que son père. Cependant, dès qu’il se sent mieux, il est encore impoli.

Kevin trouve l’histoire de Robin Hood, un paysan anglais qui vole les riches pour payer aux pauvres, très intéressante, et Franklin lui achète un arc et flèches. Lorsqu’il grandira, Franklin achètes des modèles plus fortes et professionnelles.

Eva tombe enceinte encore, mais cette fois elle est heureuse. Une petite fille est née, qui s’appelle Celia. Elle est l’opposée de Kevin, et Eva l’adore et la protège avec tout son cœur. Cependant, Kevin la traite avec la malveillance, et après un incident avec l’eau de Javel (un incident pour lequel Eva est accusée par Franklin), Celia est laissé aveugle d’un œil.

Le comportement de Kevin s’est rapidement détérioré. Eva essaye de passer du temps avec lui, mais il la sabote, et il trouve des liens entre son comportement et lequel de sa mère.

Un peu avant son seizième anniversaire, Kevin enferme ses camarades scolaires dans le gymnase, et utilisant son arc et flèches, il les attaque. Désorientée, Eva le trouve dans le désordre à l’extérieur de l’école. Il se semble presque heureux.

Plus tard, Eva trouve Franklin et Celia chez eux, morts.

Eva vive toute seule, et elle travaille dans un bureau où elle est maltraitée par ses collègues, et dans un quartier où ses voisins la connaissent et la traite avec tension (par exemple, ils jettent le peindre rouge à sa maison). Elle est misérable. Elle évite toutes les mémoires et les personnes de sa vie précédente. La seule personne qu’elle voit régulièrement, c’est Kevin. Il est emprisonné, mais leur relation reste encore malsaine. Cependant, il dit à sa mère qu’il est perturbé par l’idée de la prison pour les adultes, au lieu de la prison pour mineurs dans laquelle il reste actuellement. Ils s’embrassent, avec un futur incertain.

***PAS PLUS DES SPOILERS***

J’adore ce film – sa politique, ses montages, et plutôt comment les comédiens se comportent pour vraiment capturer ces caractères. La réalisateur, Lynne Ramsay, communique subtilement avec les spectateurs dans les scènes qui se montent la couleur rouge, le bruit d’un arroseur automatique (qu’on apprend vient de la scène où Eva découvert Franklin et Celia sont morts), tous ces motifs redent ce film plus fort et plus intéressant.

La politique des armes dans la culture américaine est un débat très important, qui touche souvent l’histoire des Etats-Unis, et ce film exploite cette crainte. C’est ironique, la sagesse de Franklin environ son fils lui a détruit, comme il lui a acheté l’arc.

***LES RESULTATS***

Le carnage 3/10

Est-il troublant? 8/10

L’unicité 8/10

L’horreur 8/10

La musique 8/10

Les armes 6/10

Le mise-en-scène 9/10

Le cadre 5/10

Le script 9/10

Est-il divertissant ? 9/10

Le total : 73/100

We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011)

This is quite a niche film, but adds to the dialogue surrounding the easy access to weapons in America. I read the book before I saw the film, and to be honest I was doubtful in any director’s ability to pull off the style of the book – it follows Eva writing letters to her (supposedly) estranged husband Franklin. However, Lynne Ramsay, the director, really surprised me: the book and film are a lot more similar than I would have thought, although Ramsay does (rightly) drop the use of letters and tells the story without narration. What Ramsay also does is tells the story from a non-linear perspective. We follow Eva through the grieving process through flashbacks and current situations. However, just for simplicity’s sake, I’ll rattle through the scenes as if the film were linear.

Eva and Franklin are a happy urban couple. They live in the city, are financially secure, and Eva is fascinated with the unknown – she is the editor for her own travelling guides. So what could upset this fine balance? A baby.

Eva gives birth to a baby boy, all to the soundscape of a nurse telling her repeatedly to ‘stop resisting’. Kevin is born, and from the very start his relationship with his mother is unstable. He roars and roars during the day, so much so that Eva pushes the buggy right next to a building site to try and muffle his cries. She stands there in pure relief when she can’t hear him, but Kevin yells louder and she moves away.

Whenever Franklin gets back from work, Kevin is always a lot more receptive and calm, with no screaming. As a result, Franklin thinks that Eva is not handling her role as a Mother well, and Eva starts to resent Kevin.

As Kevin grows, Franklin decides that they need a bigger space. Much to Eva’s chagrin, he buys a house in the suburbs. She tries to settle in, and puts up maps all over the walls of her new office. However, Kevin disapproves, calling them ‘dumb’, and sprays the walls with ink from a toy gun, completely ruining the office. Eva loses her temper and smashes the gun underneath her feet. Later that evening, Franklin relays that Kevin is really sorry to Eva, and whilst Franklin believes it, Eva doesn’t.

Still in nappies, Kevin continues to torment Eva, soiling himself in front of her and making her change him. As she finishes changing him, he soils himself again. In a fit of rage, Eva grabs his arms and handles him roughly, resulting in a trip to hospital. Kevin doesn’t tell Franklin the truth, but he does manipulate Eva through her guilt and even more so through her desperation to not be caught, and forces her to do things that he wants.

Kevin falls ill, and throughout his illness is a lot calmer and wants Eva rather than Franklin, the opposite dynamic to which the parents are normally accustomed. Eva reads him Robin Hood and warms to him, but this development is short lived. As soon as he is better, Kevin goes back to his old ways.

His interest in Robin Hood develops, and Franklin buys him a bow and arrow and a target for special occasions, with the equipment getting more advanced as Kevin grows older.

Eva gets pregnant again, and holds off on telling Franklin as she doesn’t want an abortion, a deception which he is not happy about. A little girl, Celia, is born, and in the hospital Kevin flicks water onto her. Celia and Kevin’s relationship is perceived by Eva to be fraught, with an incident of a dead hamster in the sink and a particularly nasty ‘accident’ with bleach, which causes Celia to need a prosthetic eye and completely destroys her relationship with Franklin, with whom she constantly argues about Kevin’s sociopathic behaviour. Franklin decides that he wants a divorce and Eva is distraught.

A little before his 16^th birthday, Kevin locks his peers and classmates into his school’s gymnasium and opens fire on them with his bow and arrow. Confused, Eva waits outside the school with the other distraught pupils and adults, realising as Kevin emerges, a look of victory plastered on his face, that she needn’t have worried.

When she gets home, Eva discovers Celia and Franklin outside, fatally shot with arrows, a sprinkler gently watering the grass in the background.

Eva lives by herself in a rundown house in a shady part of town, in a job with which she seems dissatisfied, surrounded by creepy and unfriendly colleagues and neighbours which take it upon themselves to throw red paint on her house. She is scared of everything and everyone, and avoids any kind of social interaction, as if to punish herself more. The only person who she regularly sees is Kevin. She visits him at a Juvenile Facility. He usually seems as smarmy and sly as usual, but the final scene shows him scared of prison, as he is graduating to ‘big school’ after his 18^th birthday. Eva seems unimpressed, but at the end of the scene, she embraces him and he reciprocates, leaving their future uncertain.

Gun control is a huge topic in the US at the moment, which is why this film is so important. Granted, it isn’t about a school shooter, but it does talk about children absorbing this culture of violence and implementing that in their life. However, it also explores whether a person can truly be born evil, or whether it has something to do with their upbringing. I am not convinced that Kevin would be anything other than a sociopath, although the way Eva was reluctant to have him to start and continues down that route to ultimately end up very very close to hatred does not help him move away from his sociopathic nature. Ironically, it isn’t Eva who he kills, but his Father and sister. This suggests either that he has a morbid fascination with Eva or he wants to torture her by taking away the two people she truly loved.

***SPOILERS END HERE***

I love this film – it has a great political and psychological message, the style is beautifully achieved by director Lynne Ramsay and the way that the actors played their roles is truly wonderful to watch.

Ramsay does a great job with subtly bombarding the audience with subliminal messages: the colour red follows Eva around, Kevin’s target in the same shots as Eva and the background noise of the sprinkler to mount the tension. These motifs help the film drop hints about the ending without completely ruining the film – the plot unfurls like a delicious chocolate treat from a wrapper, and the ending packs a real punch as it is implied subtly throughout the whole film without resorting to the ‘ending-scene-starting-the-film’ trick.

Gore 3/10

Disturbance/Creepiness 8/10

Originality 8/10

Scariness (behind-the-sofa factor) 8/10

Music score 8/10

Weapons 6/10

Cinematography/direction 9/10

Setting 5/10

Script 9/10

Entertainment 9/10

Overall 73/100

Fantômes contre fantômes (1996)

J’ai regardé ce film il y a peut-être deux ou trois ans et je m’en souviens que c’était mieux qu’il soit. Le réalisateur, Peter Jackson, est le même de Brain Dead et The Hobbit. C’est un mélange de la comédie et l’horreur, et il a gagné 64% sur Rotten Tomatoes, 7.2/10 sur IMDb et 3.6/5 sur allocine. Ces résultats sont moins ou plus moyens, mais les critiques sont positives malgré des faibles résultats au box-office. Je l’aime, mais je ne suis pas sure pourquoi : il a une charme non spécifié.

Fantômes contre Fantômes commence dans une maison typiquement hantée : une fille et une mère sont torturées par un fantôme créé par des images de synthèse. Un médecin, Lucy, les visite, et voit que la mère est une grossière et que sa fille timide a pris parti dans une fusillade avec son petit-ami Johnny Bartlett (qui a été électrocuté) quand elle avait 15 ans (il y a 30 ans).

Pendant ce temps, Frank Bannister (joué par Michael J. Fox) est viré d’un enterrement. Il conduit de façon erratique, et il percute une barrière avec sa voiture. Le propriétaire, Ray, est en colère et impoli. Frank part.

*DES SPOILERS*

Lucy est troublée quand elle revient chez lui : son mari, Ray, dit qu’elle doit l’oublier. Tout à coup, des choses bizarres commencent – une poupée anime et le lit lévite. Paniqués, ils contactent Frank qui est exorciste. Frank l’arrêt, mais il voit un numéro sur la tête de Ray et il part.

Frank conduit en vers chez lui, et quand il arrive, deux fantômes sortent de sa voiture – il est révélé que Frank peut les voir et que les fantômes travaillent avec lui pour gagner de l’argent. Frank habite dans une maison délabrée qui est plus horrifiant que la maison hantée au début du film.

Au milieu d’un autre exorcisme, Frank est montré un article dans lequel il est représenté comme une fraude. Il se plaint, et il commence à voir l’imagerie de la mort partout. Finalement, il voit l’esprit de Ray, qui dit qu’il est mort après quelque chose que a semblé une crise cardiaque.

Ray persuade Frank d’aller voir Lucy, et dans un restaurant Frank communique les souhaits de Ray. Lucy révèle que son mariage n’était pas forcement heureux, et elle et Frank partagent un moment tendre. A cause de ça, Ray devient furieux avec Frank et il part. Dans la salle de bain, Frank rencontre un figure noir et semblant la grande faucheuse qui tue un autre homme dans la salle.

*BEAUCOUP DE SPOILERS*

Quand Frank fuit, la police déduit (faussement) que Frank a tué l’homme. Il est arrêté, et détenu dans le poste de police par un enquêteur fou (nommé Dammers). Lucy arrive, et Dammers raconte l’histoire de la marie de Frank : ils ont construit la maison ensemble, mais après un argument dans une voiture elle a été tué. Dammers pense que Frank est le responsable à cause d’un numéro ravagé sur le front de la marie qui a été fait par un couteau de Frank.

Lucy ne le croit pas, et elle est attaquée par la force noire. Frank l’arrêt, et Lucy l’aide à échapper. Il lui dit qu’il doit avoir une expérience de sortie du corps pour arrêter la force noire et Lucy est d’accord avec lui. Elle l’apport à l’hôpital où il est gelé dans un frigo pour 30 minutes. Il trouve que la figure noire est Johnny Bartlett qui a commis le crime terroriste il y a 30 ans. Au même temps, Dammers capture Lucy et les deux lutte contre Bartlett et Dammers jusqu’à Frank se réveille.

Lucy va voir Patricia : elle est convaincue qu’elle est en danger. En arrivant, elle découvert que Patricia travaille avec Johnny et que sa mère est mort en haut. Il y a une poursuite, et Lucy et Frank fuient avec les cendres de Johnny à la chapelle de l’hôpital abandonné qui a été l’endroit pour le crime de Johnny et Patricia.

Frank voit des visions de ce jour dans l’hôpital, et Patricia, Johnny et Dammers les poursuivent. Patricia tue Dammers accidentellement, et Frank est rendu compte que c’était Johnny et Patricia qui étaient coupables pour la mort de sa marie, les numéros sur le front et les morts dans sa ville.

Patricia étrangle Frank, mais son esprit et les esprits de ses amis fantômes sont capables de condamner les esprits de Johnny et Patricia à l’enfer. L’esprit de Frank est retourné à son corps, et il tombe amoureux de Lucy.

*LES SPOILERS ARRETENT ICI*

Dans ce film, il y a peu de carnage. Ce n’est pas fait dans la même façon de Funny Games ou The Others où le carnage est insinué mais pas montré, donc je pense que ce manque de carnage semble d’être infantile.

Personnellement, je trouve les caractères de Patty et Johnny très troublants : le moyen dans lequel ils interagissent est tendre mais complètement dérangé. De plus, la représentation de l’enfer est vraiment effrayante malgré qu’elle soit montrée pour seulement quelques secondes : il est dépeint comme des créatures semblant des serpents et des entrailles.

Ce film est assez original, en particulier le traitement du terrorisme et des fusillades. Aussi, le film a créé des règles nouveaux pour les fantômes, par exemple que les esprits peuvent blesser l’un et l’autre et aussi des êtres-humains.

L’horreur dans Fantômes contre Fantômes est faible : la seule scène que j’ai trouvée terrifiante était la vision dans l’hôpital. Cependant, tout le reste n’était pas du tout effrayant.

Fantômes contre Fantômes a une partition orchestrale qui est saugrenue et puissante, qui nous rappelle à Harry Potter. Ce n’était pas une surprise, car c’était Danny Elfman (The Nightmare Before Christmas et Batman) qui l’a créée.

Il y a une variété des armes dans ce film comme une hache, un couteau et un fusil de chasse. Cependant, je ne les trouve pas inventives.

Le CGI dans ce film est très mal, mais pour le temps je pense que c’était le mieux que possible. La cinématographie est très bien faite : pour mettre l’accent sur la culpabilité de Frank qui pense souvent à la mort de sa marie, il y a beaucoup d’imagerie des voitures.

Le cadre change beaucoup, mais on peut explorer dans les cadres différents grâce aux scènes de poursuite. Cependant, malgré les numéros des cadres, il y a beaucoup qui sont stéréotypés.

Le script n’est pas si amusant : ce film semble un suit d’un film de Ghostbusters, mais au lieu d’une parodie il se trouve très sérieux avec un script moyen. En fait, c’est un script banal.

Pour toutes ses imperfections, je trouve ce film très divertissant, avec des temps forts comme les rôles de Patty et Johnny, la représentation de l’enfer et la musique.

*LES RESULTATS*

Le carnage 4/10

Est-il troublant? 7/10

L’unicité 6/10

L’horreur 5/10

La musique 8/10

Les armes 6/10

Le mise-en-scène 7/10

Le cadre 6/10

Le script 5/10

Est-il divertissant ? 8/10

Total : 62/100

The Frighteners (1996)

Directed by Peter Jackson (Brain Dead and The Hobbit) and starring Michael J. Fox (Back to the Future), this horror-comedy is rated 64% on Rotten Tomatoes, 7.2/10 on IMDb and 3.6 on allocine. Its poor performance in the box office doesn’t overshadow the praise that it has garnered from critics and the cult following that it has accumulated over the years. I found this film theoretically flawed but pleasantly mind-numbing to watch.

The film opens at a typically haunted-looking house, with a woman and her mother battling an entity that comes out of the carpets and mirrors. Lucy, a physician, is called to the house and is greeted icily by the mother. She treats her daughter, Patricia, and learns that the mother emotionally abuses her and says that she is ‘not to be trusted’, after Patricia’s dubious involvement in a massacre that took place 30 years ago with her then-boyfriend Johnny Bartlett. Johnny was executed by the electric chair and now Patricia lives with her Mother.

Meanwhile, Frank Bannister (Fox) drives erratically away from a funeral and crashes into someone’s fence. Ray, the owner of the house, comes out and angrily demands that Bannister pay for a replacement. Bannister gives him his card and drives away.

Later, Lucy returns home to Ray (who happens to be her husband). Suddenly, the house seems to come to life: the dolls start to move and the bed levitates. Panicked, they call Bannister who shows up and performs an exorcism until he is kicked out (he seems to get kicked out a lot). He drives home to a half-finished house (which is creepier than the first house), and two ghosts get out of the car and one appears in the house. It is revealed that Bannister can see the dead after having a car crash which resulted in his wife’s death.

After being called to perform another exorcism, Bannister is shown an article which slates him for being a conman (which, in effect, he is). He visits the editor of the newspaper to complain, but after being ignored he walks down the street to be greeted by the ghost of Ray. It seems that Ray was killed by what felt and looked like a heart-attack, despite being a health freak.

Ray persuades Frank to visit Lucy and later to take her to a restaurant to try to communicate with Ray. He gets angry and leaves after Lucy admits that her marriage wasn’t a happy one and she and Frank start getting closer. Frank goes to the bathroom and sees a dark figure, resembling the Grim Reaper, morphing out of the walls and mirrors and squeezing the heart of another man in the bathroom who had a number on his forehead. Frank flees, but the authorities find him and deduce (incorrectly) that he is to blame.

Frank is thrown into a holding cell and interrogated by Dammers, a paranoid creep who is convinced that Frank is the culprit for his wife’s death due to one of his tools being used to carve a number into her head (despite the fact that anyone who has the motor uses of their hands could operate that tool). Lucy visits Frank and is attacked by the Grim Reaper. Frank stops it and they manage to evade the police and escape. Frank persuades Lucy that he needs to have an out-of-body experience in order to defeat the force.

They drive to the hospital where Lucy works and Lucy puts him in the freezer after giving him drugs to slow his heart rate. Dammers shows up and abducts Lucy while Frank battles the force. It is revealed that the force is the dead Johnny Bartlett, killing people all over town and carving increasing numbers into their forehead as was his hallmark during the shooting in the hospital 30 years ago. Before Frank can defeat him, he is brought back by Lucy.

They go to find Patricia who, unknown to them, is still in love with Johnny and is able to see his ghost. Patricia goes on a murderous rampage alongside Johnny’s ghost, chasing Lucy and Frank through the house until they manage to trap Johnny’s spirit inside his ashes jar and escape. They need to take him to sacred ground to send his spirit to Hell, and Lucy points out that there is a chapel nearby in the abandoned hospital that was the scene of the shooting 30 years ago.

They are chased through the hospital by Dammers and Patricia while Frank sees visions of the hospital during the murders. Patricia accidentally shoots Dammers just before he opens the urn, releasing the spirit of Johnny. Patricia strangles Frank and he goes up to Heaven to see the spirits of Patricia and Johnny, who he pulled up with him, be swallowed up into the aching chasm of Hell.

Frank is returned to Earth after being given a blessing by his wife, and he and Lucy fall in love.

*END OF SPOILERS*

There is little to no gore in The Frighteners, which doesn’t work in its favour (as it does in other films such as Happy Games or The Others). Here, it just serves to make the film seem like a childish sequel to Ghostbusters (except spectacularly un-funny).

For some reason, the most disturbing thing in this movie to me was the disturbing relationship of Patricia and Johnny – especially the flashback scene. The depiction of hell as well was particularly creepy – the snake/entrails plunging into the fiery pits were jarring (although not as jarring as Michael J. Fox’s acting).

The Frighteners is quite original, especially in its treatment of the ghosts: their rules of physics are quite interesting, in that they can harm each other and humans can harm them.

However, the only scary thing about this film was the terrible CGI. The only other thing that came close was the flashback scene, which was more disturbing than downright scary. There is also no tension or suspense in this film, which doesn’t help the build up to any ‘big’ scare.

The music was left in the capable hands of Mr Danny Elfman (The Nightmare Before Christmas and Batman). The orchestral score was beautifully whimsical and reminiscent of the same spooky-magical score of Harry Potter.

The characters used a variety of different weapons like an axe, a knife and a shotgun. However, none of them were particularly inventive or scary.

The cinematography is very well done: there is a lot of imagery of death and cars, which reflect the guilt of Frank. I also liked how the ghosts morphed out of mirrors and under wallpaper or carpet.

There are a lot of settings in this film and they change a lot, but surprisingly the audience is able to explore quite a lot thanks to action shots of people running through buildings. However, most of them had the typically ‘haunted’ look, and the creepiest one (Frank’s dilapidated, half-finished houses which could have offered so much in the way of imagery and symbolism) was hardly explored at all. Bad job, set design crew. You could have done so much more.

The script was pretty ‘meh’ with lots of bad dad jokes and nothing that really stands out. Nothing is ground-breaking or inventive and I felt like the film coasted on the CGI and action shots.

For all its flaws, this film was kind of charming, with the highlights being the performances from Patty and Johnny, the depiction of Hell and the music.

*SCORES*

Gore 4/10

Disturbance/Creepiness 7/10

Originality 6/10

Scariness (behind-the-sofa factor) 5/10

Music score 8/10

Weapons 6/10

Cinematography/direction 7/10

Setting 6/10

Script 5/10

Entertainment 8/10

Overall 62/100

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

The fact that I am writing this review from memory says a lot about this film; I have seen it more times than I can count. Shaun of the Dead, a rom-com-zom directed by Edgar Wright is a BAFTA nominee and sparked the cult trilogy: the Cornetto trilogy. It has been awarded a 76/100 from Metacritic, an 8/10 from IMDb and 91% from Rotten Tomatoes. This 99-minute little beauty of a film crams in everything it can to keep you entertained,  but miraculously without feeling like it’s overkill: comedy, romance, bromance, action and, to top it all off, zombie attacks. Personally, this is one of my favourite films of all time, but it lacks the emphasis on horror.

The story starts out as a buddy-comedy. Shaun and his childhood best friend Ed live together with little to no future prospects: they both lack ambition, sense and have not grown out of their attachment for each other. When Shaun fails to organise something special for his three-year anniversary, his girlfriend Liz decides that enough is enough.

Devastated, Shaun and Ed spend a night drinking in their favourite pub (the Winchester), where some horror elements develop: a ‘drunk’ at the door moaning, a couple that are spotted in the distance with both of their heads seemingly broken and a man shuffling down the street responding to the raucous singing of Shaun and Ed. These indicators are simultaneously given weight with the disturbing music, but also dismissed by the humour.

*SPOILERS*

At home, Ed and Shaun have an argument with their flatmate, Pete, who was bitten earlier in the evening, who instructs Shaun to ‘sort [his] fucking life out’. Shaun obliges, and before going to sleep writes a list of what he needs to do.

The next day, Ed and Shaun wake to find a ‘drunk woman’ in their back garden. A struggle ensues and she is pushed onto a sharp, rusty umbrella stand. When she gets back up again, the camera zooms into the wound and follows it as she moves upwards and even captures the other character’s faces of terror. Another zombie, a bear-like man, is discovered right behind the two (serving as one of the few jumpscares in the film). They are defeated with a bats after basically everything in the house being thrown at them as weapons (to varying degrees of effectiveness).

Sitting down in the living room, they flick through channels: the apocalypse has happened overnight, with the country descending into panic and anarchy. As they are advised to lock all windows and doors, they realise that they have left the front door open…again. A male zombie is in the room, dressed like a groom. He is taken down with a glass ashtray.

Shaun’s Mum Barbara rings and reveals that Philip, Shaun’s stepdad with whom he has a strenuous relationship, has been bitten. After this, Shaun and Ed plan to rescue both Liz and Barbara and hole up in the Winchester to wait it out. Shaun finds a zombified Pete in the shower and the other two leave.

They go to pick up Barbara and Philip and Shaun tries to persuade Barbara to leave Philip behind. She refuses, and as they leave the house, Philip is bitten again by other zombies. They are headed off by Shaun, but the damage has been done. They arrive at Liz’s in Pete’s car to find the outside of Liz’s flat plagued by zombies. Shaun valiantly climbs up to Liz’s flat when she refuses to let him in. He persuades Liz and her friends (David and Dianne) to come with him, with Liz affirming that it is not because she wants to get back together.

In the car, Philip explains that he wanted to be the role model for Shaun and that he always knew Shaun could do great things. After a heartfelt speech, he dies in Shaun’s heartbroken arms, and they all evacuate the car as his corpse reanimates and continue on foot.

They perilously march through the wilderness of London suburbia, encountering Shaun’s old friend Yvonne and a parallel group of her own. They part ways, but before getting to the Winchester, an old man in his pyjamas attacks and is subdued by the group. The group finds the Winchester surrounded, and they decide that the best way to get to their Utopia is to mimic the actions and blend into the zombies.

Engulfed by the crowd of undead, they manage to avoid suspicion until they try to enter the pub. One zombie notices, and that spreads like a Mexican wave, aided and abetted by Ed answering a call on his mobile. In panic, David breaks a window, and Shaun risks his life to draw the zombies away.

He returns later to mutiny among the ranks; David tries to belittle Shaun’s leadership to the deaf ears of the others. Once Shaun returns, there is a sense of calm before the zombies return: and this time, it’s serious. As they attack, the group pulls together, but there are far too many of them. It is revealed that Barbara has been bitten, and Shaun is heartbroken for the third time in 48 hours. He is tasked with shooting her before she reanimates, after an argument with David. David gets hold of the riffle and attempts to shoot Shaun, and is pulled through the window by the mob of zombies, torn limb from limb. Dianne attempts to save him, but is lost in the crowd.

The remaining three try to fight but there are just too many. They escape down to the cellar after one bites Ed. Terrified, they talk about suicide, but only have 2 bullets. They discover a way out but Ed is reluctant to leave, saying ‘I’d only hold you back’ to Shaun. They part, and Shaun and Liz are elevated to street level, where within seconds an army attack, including Yvonne, is organised against the zombies. They are rescued, and the film ends with them happily in Shaun’s house together, with zombie Ed in the shed, always a sympathetic undead shoulder to lean on.

*END OF SPOILERS*

The gore in this film is understated: to be honest, Wright could have added more in to heighten the horror aspect. However, the snippets of gore that are included are incredibly inventive and well-shot, such as the scene where Shaun and Ed are shot through the hole in a zombie-woman’s stomach.

I can’t say that this film is disturbing – to me, the most important element of a good horror film. This film is mostly funny zombie moments and interaction with the characters. However, there are some seriously disturbing shots in the background of the storytelling: a person in a body bag sits up and thrashes around and a man picking up and putting a pigeon in his mouth. These shots are only for a few seconds, but trust me, they linger with you.

The originality of this movie is a lot of its appeal: it is a film that is rewatchable and as you do, you catch more subtle hints or shots or dialogue. In my book, it gets the most quotable horror movie award, and for God’s sake, it’s a zombie horredy, what more needs saying?

The scariness isn’t actually a huge factor until the very end, when the last members of the group are trapped in the cellar. The dialogue gets a lot darker as the characters try to accept their fate, but this scariness is not present throughout the movie: some might argue that therefore it can’t be as effective as it should have been, but I say that the whole movie was built around the bond between the characters and the audience, and because of this their imminent doom is a lot scarier as the audience ends up caring deeply for them.

The music score is fantastic: a mixture of Queen and composed music. This film would not have been suited to an orchestra, so they made the right choice there.

The inventive shots and the fast pace of the movie helped it to never be boring, and the direction of the characters was insightful and touching in many parts, helping to make the movie much more than just any sleazy horror film.

Despite the banality of the suburbs of London, the setting of this film ranges from the back gardens, which are given an almost rain-forest vibe, to built-up areas like Liz’s flat. The zombie outbreak there is an interesting choice, as in most horror films the horror happens somewhere remote, but it is refreshing to have an urban setting that has a believable reason as to why the authorities can’t respond.

The script is very funny, insightful and totally believable, which makes the characters totally three-dimensional. The acting is also to a very high standard: Simon Pegg and Nick Frost (Shaun and Ed) are especially riveting, and I couldn’t keep my eyes off them.

The weapons used range from blunt objects that you would find around the house to firearms. I enjoyed the inventiveness of these, but thought that none of them were particularly badass.

This neat little movie has kept me thoroughly entertained over the last decade and is a fantastic blend of all the elements that shouldn’t work but do, with a wonderful script, killer performances and tons of heart.

*THE RESULTS*

Gore 7/10

Disturbing 5/10

Originality 9/10

Scariness 7/10

Music Score 7/10

Weapons 8/10

Cinematography/direction 9/10

Setting 8/10

Script 9/10

Entertainment 10/10

*Overall*

79/100

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

J’écris cette revue par cœur, donc ça veut dire quelque chose de l’impression sur moi de ce film : je l’ai vu plus fois que je peux compter. Réalisé par Edgar Wright, ce film a gagné une nomination d’un prix de BAFTA (un prix anglais assez prestigieux) et des résultats hauts de Metacritic, IMDb et Rotten Tomatoes (des sites anglais pour analyser des films). Un film de 99 minutes, Shaun of the Dead inclut presque tous les aspects pour vous divertir sans faire un film d’excès. A moi, ce film est l’un des meilleurs, mais je ne suis pas sûr s’il y a assez des éléments d’horreur pour être un vrai film d’horreur.

L’histoire commence comme un film de comédie entre les deux personnages principaux : Shaun et Ed habitent ensemble à Londres. Ils sont paresseux et enfantins, avec un futur limité, et ils dépendent toujours sur l’autre. Quand Shaun oublie à organiser quelque chose spéciale pour célébrer son anniversaire avec sa petite amie, elle décide qu’elle veut rompre la relation.

Désespéré, Shaun et Ed prennent un verre dans leur bar préféré – le Winchester (un type d’arme en anglais). Chez eux, il y a une lutte contre eux et leur colocataire (Pete) – Pete a été mordu par des ‘camés’. Il exprime que Shaun doit régler sa vie.

La journée après, Shaun et Ed se lèvent et trouver une femme ‘bourrée’ dans leur jardin de derrière. Il y a une lutte, et elle est poussée sur un porte-parapluie – cependant, elle ne meurt pas, elle se relève, avec un grand trou dans son estomac. Il y a aussi un homme découvert dans le jardin. Shaun et Ed lutte contre eux, et avec deux battes, ils sont victorieux. Ils s’assissent dans le salon, et la télé leur dit que l’apocalypse est arrivée presque dans la nuit, avec tout le pays paniqué. Un homme zombie entre par la porte ouverte, et les hommes l’attaque, victorieux encore.

Shaun propose un plan : ils vont sauver sa mère (en tuant son beau-père qui a été mordu par une malade) et Liz, son ex petite amie, et ils vont se cacher dans le pub local. Ils vont en vers la maison de sa mère mais ils sont menacés quand ils sortent de la maison, et son beau-père est encore mordu.

Le groupe arrive à l’extérieur de l’appartement de Liz et ses deux amis, David et Dianne. A l’intérieur, il explique qu’il faut qu’ils fuient avec lui pour être sauvé. Ils sont persuadés, et ils échappent. Dans la voiture, Phillip, le beau-père de Shaun, lui parle de son difficulté de gagner son respect. Cependant, après ce discours, Phillip meurt et il se transforme en zombie, et le group sort de la voiture fermant Phillip le zombie à l’intérieur.

Le groupe est maintenant exposé, et il décide d’aller au bar discrètement en traversant les jardins des maisons pour essayer d’éviter les zombies. Un zombie tend une embuscade, mais il est arrêté par Shaun. Dianne, une actrice, les enseignent comment imiter le zombie pour infiltrer le groupe des monstres à l’extérieur du bar. Malheureusement, les zombies sont rendus compte qu’ils sont humains, une fenêtre du bar est cassée et Shaun est forcée de les éloigner de loin.

En attendant Shaun, les autres restent dans le pub, et David fait une révolution contre Shaun : il dit que Shaun n’est pas un homme honnête ou fiable. Shaun revient, mais les zombies aussi, et ils trouvent le groupe caché dans le bar quand le juke-box est activé par Ed. Le groupe travaille en équipe avec un pistolet, mais c’est révélé que Barbara a été mordue par un zombie. Shaun est forcé de la tuer quand elle se transforme, mais il y a une lutte parmi le groupe, et David essaye de tirer au pistolet sur Shaun. Il ne marche pas, et les zombies sont capables de lui tirer quand il est debout près de la fenêtre. Dianne le suit, mais elle disparait parmi les zombies.

Ed est mordu par un zombie Pete, et les trois vont en bas, mais ils ne peuvent pas trouver un chemin pour échapper. Il n’y a que deux balles, et trois personnages. Ed décide d’être mangé, et les deux autres discutent comment se suicider. Cependant, ils découvrent une trappe qui va en haut, et ils le prennent. Ed reste en bas avec l’arme, et il y a un discours bref et tendre entre les deux hommes.

Quand le couple arrive en haut, ils voient l’armée et des tanks qui sauvent la race humaine.

Un temps après, le couple habite ensemble, et il semble très heureux. La télé raconte l’histoire comment le virus était contrôlé et que les zombies sont maintenant principalement bénignes et utilisés pour les sales boulots. Le film termine quand Shaun visite l’abri de jardin où on se trouve Ed le zombie et ils jouent ensembles des jeux vidéo comme plus tôt dans le film.

***SPOILERS S’ARRETENT ICI***

Le carnage dans ce film est sous-estimé, je crois qu’Edgar Wright aurait pu l’utiliser plus pour augmenter l’aspect d’horreur. Cependant, les scènes dans lesquelles figure le carnage sont créatif et bien filmé, par exemple quand Shaun et Ed sont filmés dans l’estomac d’une femme zombie.

Ce film, au moins pour moi, n’est pas troublant, ce qui est l’aspect le plus important d’un film d’horreur. Shaun of the Dead représente plutôt la relation entre les caractères et le traitement comique. Cependant, il y a des moments comme un cadavre dans un sac mortuaire qui ranime et un homme sur le point de manger un pigeon qui me trouble beaucoup, malgré ces moments courts.

Je peux le regarder plusieurs fois, peut-être chaque jour, et grâce à l’unicité je peux toujours trouver quelque nouvelle chose d’intéresse. La relation entre Shaun et Ed donne toujours quelque chose d’autre, aidée par le script vraiment excellent, qui fait des tournes circulaires qui sont toujours intéressantes à suivre. Il y a tant des citations de ce film qui sont connues parmi les fans d’horreur, et c’est un film avec des zombies qui touche, qui fait rire mais aussi qui fait peur et la tristesse. Absolument unique.

La situation ne me fait peur qu’à la fin. Les zombies sont plutôt inoffensifs, mais dans cette scène les personnages sont pris au compte que c’est vraiment une situation inévitable, et le discours devient beaucoup plus sobre. Cependant ce sens de terreur n’est pas présent dans le film entier, donc comme juste un film d’horreur, ça ne marche pas, mais ce film, avec ses plusieurs genres, réussit à créer un projet qui traite un homme et ses relations malgré une apocalypse des zombies.

La musique est extraordinaire : un mélange de Queen et de la musique originale. C’est une bonne décision par Edgar Wright, parce que la musique orchestrale ne conviendrait pas au ton du film.

Aidé par le rythme vite ce film n’est jamais ennuyant. La réalisation par Edgar Wright est vraiment géniale, en particulier les moments émotionnels de la relation entre Ed, Shaun et Liz, ce qui est très différent d’autres films d’horreur.

Malgré la banalité des banlieues de Londres, le cadre n’est jamais ennuyant, parce que le groupe des personnages doivent atteindre un bar que Shaun et Ed croient va le sauver. Alors, le cadre bouge plusieurs fois des jardins aux appartements. Avoir les zombies dans un cadre urbain me plaît beaucoup, parce que c’est un peu différent.

Le script donne aux Simon Pegg et Nick Frost la capacité d’agir avec une sincérité complète, et ici ils sont sublimes, en particulier Simon Pegg, qui est drôle, aimable, qui grandit en tant que personne pendant le film.

Les armes sont variées, des objets contondants aux pistolets. J’aime les variations et je pense que c’est inventif, mais en fait aucune arme n’est vraiment exceptionnelle.

Ce film très bien fait me plaît chaque fois que je le vois malgré ses genres mélangés, avec les performances incroyables des acteurs principaux, un script exceptionnel et un supplément d’âme.

*LES RESULTATS*

Le carnage 7/10

Est-il troublant? 5/10

L’unicité  9/10

L’horreur 7/10

La musique 7/10

Les armes 8/10

Le mise-en-scène 9/10

Le cadre 8/10

Le script 9/10

Est-il divertissant ? 10/10

*Le total*

79/100

House on Haunted Hill/La Nuit de tous les mystères (1959)

Ce film est le plus vieux que j’ai critiqué ; il a gagné 6.9/10 sur IMDb, 96% sur Rotten Tomatoes et 3.2/5 sur allocine. C’est un œuvre de suspense plus qu’un film de terreur à cause du temps qu’il a été fait : les effets spéciaux sont vieux, certes, mais c’est un film admirable et vraiment atmosphérique. Vincent Price, un acteur connu pour ses représentations dans les films d’horreur, a le rôle majeur, et le film continu pendant une assez courte 95 minute.

Frederick Loren (joué par Price), un homme affluent, et sa marie ont organisé une soirée pour eux et cinq autres personnes, qui sont invité de passer une nuit chez eux pour 10.000 de dollars. Au début, une narration de voix-off introduit les personnes qui sont invitées : Lance Schroeder (pilote d’avion qui a besoin de l’argent) ; Ruth Bridges (journaliste et un joueur pathologique) ; David Trent (psychiatre, a fait des recherches à propos de l’hystérie, et décrit comme un homme cupide) ; Nora Manning (elle soutient une famille entière financièrement) et Watson Pritchard (montré au début en parlant directement avec la caméra pour dire qu’il y avait des meurtres là).

L’immense manoir est établit par des plans de caméra cinématographique : énorme, en pierre blanche et froide. La musique est orchestrale et le chœur est presque spectral. Les gens se rencontrent, mais ils sont choqués quand une chandelière se balance et tombe quand ils entrent.

***DEBUT DES SPOILERS***

Silencieux, M. Loren regard l’action. Il et Mme Loren se discutent : elle proteste qu’il n’y a rien de leurs amis, mais il dit que les invités tous ont besoin d’argent. C’est dit qu’il a eu 4 femmes, et ils semblent d’être vraiment mécontents.

Dans l’autre salle, les invités explorent. Pritchard trouve un couteau et il y a des pièges partout dans la maison. M. Loren entre, et Pritchard prie de partir mais M. Loren dit que les portes sont fermées pour la nuit. Pritchard est convaincu que la maison a 7 fantômes.

Le groupe explore la maison, et une impression sanguine au plafond coule sur la tête de Ruth. En bas, ils découvrent une salle avec une trappe et des tonneaux. L’ancien maître de la maison, M. Norton, a été électrocuté, et pendant sa vie il a expérimenté avec le vin mais sa femme n’était pas impressionnée donc il l’a poussée dans la trappe dans laquelle il y a d’acide. Ouais, un homme évidemment délicat.

Nora et Lance reste en bas pendant que le groupe aillent en haut. Ils explorent et Lance est entraîné dans une salle.  Nora voit une ombre qui souffle les bougies, et elle voit l’apparition d’une femme que le fait courir. Elle trouve les autres et ils descendent encore où ils trouvent Lance avec une blessure sur le front. Seuls, Lance dit à Nora qu’il y a eu une présence avec lui en bas. Ils trouvent que les murs sont creux, et Nora voit l’apparition sinistre encore (avec du maquillage bon fait – épouvantable).

Nora rencontre Annabelle, et Nora est montrée sa chambre. Annabelle semble d’avoir soupçons à propos de Nora, et elle l’avise de rester avec le groupe et pas seule, parce qu’il y a du danger partout (apparemment).

Annabelle rencontre Lance et ils partagent des tensions sexuelles, et elle dit à lui discrètement qu’elle méfie son mari. Quand elle part, elle voit une ombre et elle tombe sur le sol. M. Loren le trouve et il tire sur ses cheveux abusivement pour faire se lever.

Pendant ce temps-là, Nora ouvre une boite de musique dans laquelle elle trouve une tête décapitée. Elle fuit, et quand elle arrête, une main couvert sa bouche. Elle fuit encore en vers le salon, où elle trouve deux fantômes : les concierges. Ils sont enfermés dans la maison sans les concierges qui avaient les clés.

M. Loren présente des accessoires de fêtes dans des cercueils : des armes remplies. Annabelle le refuse. Ils vont en haut pour voir la tête coupée, mais elle n’est plus là. Elle est offerte un ‘sédatif’. Le médecin (Trent) ordonne à M. Loren d’arrêter de lui faire peur.

Plus tard, le groupe trouve Annabelle morte, d’une pendaison. Elle est bougée à sa chambre.

Nora trouve Lance dans sa chambre et elle demande à être cachée : elle a peur de M. Loren. M. Loren frappe sur la porte, et Nora se cache pendant ils discutent et ils vont en bas. Elle reste dans la chambre, toute seule.

M. Loren visite Annabelle, et Pritchard entend que Loren descend sa marie. Loren le trouve, l’étrangle et l’avise de n’entrer plus encore dans cette chambre-là.

Le groupe avoue qu’il soupçonne M. Loren et il sépare. Lance trouve une trappe et il est enfermé dans la salle. Les lumières s’éteignent où Nora se cache, et une corde l’enroule. Elle cri et voit une figure spectrale d’Annabelle. Elle s’enfuit, évidemment bouleversée, mais elle est attaquée encore par une main monstrueuse et entend un piano qui joue sans joueur.

Le médecin et M. Loren se retrouvent, le médecin rapporte qu’il a entendu des pas d’une personne et un piano (mais pas les cris ?!?!!). Ils décident d’explorer pour trouver la personne : le médecin va en bas et dans la chambre d’Annabelle. Elle se lève : tout le temps, elle a joué le rôle d’une morte et le médecin, son amant, l’avait aidé pour faire une ‘crime parfaite’. Ils ont l’intention d’assassiner M. Loren en rendant Nora folle, et elle va devenir si instable qu’elle tuera M. Loren.

Nora est en bas, et M. Loren descend, mais elle est hystérique et elle le tire. Elle fuit.

Cependant, Annabelle va en bas et la porte ferme au derrière d’elle. Un squelette émerge de la trappe d’acide, et le chasse. A la fin, elle marche à reculons dans la trappe. C’est révélé que M. Loren a opéré le squelette et qu’il a su qu’est-ce qui passait avec sa marie et son amant.

***FIN DES SPOILERS***

Ce film est un des films d’Hollywood pendant l’âge d’or, et on remarque qu’il a été fait pendant l’époque d’Hitchcock et ‘Les Diaboliques’ a été fait 4 ans avant, donc ce film mit l’accent sur la tension et l’atmosphère plus que le carnage et les effets-spéciaux.

Il y a peu de carnage et il est très vieux, mais il ajoute à la cinématographie et le maquillage est très efficace et parfois épouvantable.

Ce film est troublant à cause de l’élément de mystère dans l’histoire, et tous les trucs ajoutent l’un à l’autre pour créer une atmosphère inquiétante. Les caractères M. Loren et Pritchard en particulier sont joués troublants par les acteurs. Aussi, la technique noir et blanc utilisée est un composant effrayant.

L’intrigue est assez originale : cependant, il est très similaire à l’une de Les Diaboliques. La réalité, la trahison et la folie sont les thèmes clés.

Premièrement, ce film fait peur. Les éléments choquants incluent des fantômes, des meurtres et des caractères peu fiables. Le point culminant est un tour de force, et pendant la durée du film, les situations bizarres accumulent pour faire le plus peur que possible. Le peur ici est un sentiment d’une ruine imminente au lieu de jumpscares qui sont si populaires actuellement.

La musique est troublante, avec un orchestre et des chanteurs d’un chœur. La musique originale est fantastique et a un air d’un hymne. Cependant, elle est très forte dans quelques endroits.

Les pistolets comme les armes sont un peu impersonnels, mais j’aime le fait que tous les personnages en ont un. En outre, il y a une cuve d’acide, ce qui est si cool !

La cinématographie est presque parfait : les plans de la caméra sont variés et inventifs.

Malheureusement, le cadre manque la créativité de la cinématographie. La maison grande est typique du genre d’horreur, avec des toiles d’araignée partout et la maison délabrée. Cependant, parce que c’est un film des années 50, le cadre typique est facile de pardonner, et il est encore effrayant malgré son cadre.

Le script est un peu faible, et les caractères femmes sont vraiment désagréables, mais Vincent Price et l’acteur qui joue le rôle de Watson Pritchard sont magnifiques, malgré le script. L’histoire est assez originale, cependant il semble très proche l’histoire de Les Diaboliques, comme j’ai déjà dit.

En générale, ce film est divertissant : il est assez court, donc il ne devient pas ennuyant. La cinématographie est l’aspect le plus agréable et la musique aussi, et comme un film d’horreur il est très efficace. Ce que j’aurais voulu changer, c’est le scripte et les acteurs.

Le carnage 7/10
Est-il troublant? 8/10
L’unicité 8/10
L’horreur 7/0
La musique 7/10
Les armes 6/10
Le mise-en-scène/la cinématographie 8/10
Le cadre 6/10
Le script 6/10
Est-il divertissant ? 7/10

70/100

House on Haunted Hill (1959)

This is the oldest film that I have reviewed so far – it has scores of 6.9/10 on IMDb, 96% on Rotten Tomatoes and 3.2/5 from allocine. It’s a film of suspense which builds to a twist finale rather than a jumpscare-fuelled ride through an outplayed scenario which is what the horror genre seems to be becoming today (she says with just a hint of cynicism). Warning: if you are bored by old but well-done makeup, slow-burners and little to no action until the last few scenes, this is not the film for you. But this film is a shining example of how slow-moving horror movies which value tension over action work so well. Vincent Price stars and the film has quite a short running time of 95 minutes.

The film opens with 5 people heading towards a house with the view to spend the night: their hosts are the illustrious Mr and Mrs Loren, who have offered each a cash prize if they all manage to spend the whole night in what they call their Haunted House. The guests include: Watson Pritchard, a paranoid and unsettled man who claims that 7 people have already been murdered in the house; Lance Schroeder, an air pilot who needs the money; Ruth Bridges, a compulsive gambler; David Trent, a doctor who has explored the medicinal reasons behind hysteria and who is said to be greedy; and Nora Manning, a professional woman who supports her entire family.

***SPOILERS***

They all ride up to the big white-stone mansion with iron black gates with orchestral, ghostly music playing in the background. Once inside, they introduce themselves – none of them know each other. The chandelier swings and comes shattering down, causing the guests to throw themselves out of its way. Mr Loren (Price) watches from an upper floor, unseen.

Loren goes back into his room to speak to Annabelle, his wife. It is revealed that he has had 4 wives, and there is a definite Addams family vibe, only much darker. Annabelle resists coming out of the room to welcome the guests.

Loren introduces himself to the guests, and Pritchard begs him to call off the party. It is stated that the caretakers, who lock up and take the keys with them every night, leave at midnight and there will be no way out until morning.

The group goes on a tour, which is disturbed when blood drips onto Ruth from a stain on the ceiling. They venture down to the cellar, which is full of barrels and a trap door. Loren states that a Mr Norton (a former owner of the mansion), was killed by electric chair after pushing his wife into the vat of acid under the trap door.

Nora and Lance stay downstairs and have a conversation which ends with Nora being spooked by a shadow and running back upstairs, calling for the others. They come down with her and find Lance with a cut on his forehead. Lance and Nora agree to go back down again. They find that the walls are hollow, and a woman ghost surprises Nora. There is a very unexpected close-up of the ghosts face – sexy.

Nora runs into Annabelle upstairs and she is shown her room. Annabelle seems to be suspicious of her. After, Annabelle meets Lance and shows him to his room. There is some sexual tension there, and Annabelle confesses that her husband is planning something.

Loren finds Annabelle in the hall, and pulls her hair to get her to submit. Woah. Abusive, much.

Nora opens up a seemingly innocent music box in her room and SURPRISE there’s a severed head inside. She staggers off by herself, and a hand is put over her mouth. She bolts from the mystery-groper into the drawing room. The doors open to show the woman and man ghost, who are the caretakers. The guests start to panic as they realise there is no way out.

Loren shares out ‘party favours’: guns in mini-coffins. Everyone takes one, except Annabelle who makes a moral objection. The group goes to investigate the severed head/music box, but it has disappeared. Trent angrily tells Loren to stop frightening Nora after she leaves.

***SERIOUS SPOILERS***

The group divides until Nora screams: Annabelle has been hung from the stairwell and is dead. They take her down and put her to bed.

Lance finds a cowering Nora and hides her in his room as she is convinced that Loren choked her. Trent knocks on Lance’s door and the men leave, Nora concealed in Lance’s room with no-one knowing her whereabouts.

Loren sneaks into the room where Annabelle is lying. Pritchard overhears him slating her, and is threatened by Loren when he is discovered.

The group tells Loren that they suspect him, and everyone separates. Lance is locked into a room, while the lights go out in his room, scaring Nora. A rope feeds itself through the window and winds itself around Nora’s legs. Nora sees a ghost (Annabelle) through the window and she scrambles to get away. A monster hand reaches around a door and she flees. She finds an empty room, but the piano starts to play without a pianist and she is forced to run again (also, there is a lot of screaming in this sequence. Like, a lot).

Loren leaves his room and Trent finds him, saying that he has heard an organ playing and ‘someone walking’ (but no screaming?!). They separate to search on the two floors. Trent goes into Annabelle’s room and she sits up! Turns out, she wasn’t dead (what a faker) and that they were lovers, working together to frame Lance for Annabelle’s murder and commit the ‘perfect crime’ as they plan that the now hysterical Nora will be ambushed by Loren and shoot him on sight. It is revealed that Trent is the one that has been attacking her.

Here’s where it gets convoluted… Loren ventures downstairs and is shot by Nora. Trent disposes of Loren’s body in the acid vat. Annabelle comes downstairs, and the door closes behind her. She looks into the acid vat, to see a skeleton emerge. She is obviously terrified, and she accidentally backs into the vat. However, it is then revealed that the skeleton was operated by… Mr Loren?!?! DUN DUN DUN.

And that’s it. That’s the end.

***SPOILERS END***

Okay, so due to the lack of special effects because of the time period in which this movie was made, there is little to no gore (which is not necessarily a bad thing). It actually adds to the suspense, and when you do get a full-screen of gory ghost, you really jump back.

This is a very creepy little film. Shot in black and white, all the aspects feed into each other to work together to make the atmosphere suspenseful. The excellent props and unexplained events keep you guessing until the very end.

The film is quite original, although bears a striking resemblance to Les Diaboliques, a French film made 4 years earlier (hmm). However, in the English-speaking world, the power struggles between the characters are very interesting and there are loads of layers to the interaction of the characters and their actions.

The very last shot of the film was very scary and for some reason, really struck a nerve with me. However, I didn’t get this feeling all the way through, although I do appreciate the feels that instil a creeping feeling of dread rather than scare after scare until you are numb to them.

Dissonant, orchestral and ghostly music provides the perfect backing track to the film, although, I assume due to editing problems, the sound suddenly gets very loud during one particular part of the film, which is irritating.

The weapons are guns, which I personally always feel are impersonal and uninventive, although I did like that each character got one. Also, the vat of acid is really cool.

The cinematography is almost flawless: the sweeping, grand establishing shots are beautiful and there are a lot of different angles used throughout the film. I especially love the end shot (as I have said beforehand), and the shots where all of the guests are being introduced at the beginning, all sat in a car and all quietly terrified.

I felt that the setting let the film down a bit: a huge mansion, filled with dust, spiders and severed heads? Yawn. Although, that being said, that is not entirely fair, as this film is quite old and therefore has been emulated many times by the more current horror market. The fact that the mansion is white is quite interesting, though.

The script is not fantastic: for example, the ending is really not clear (and not in the Inception kind of good way), and the characters, especially the female ones, are totally unlikeable and portrayed as paranoid morons. However, it does have a good twist (even if that twist was featured in an earlier film *cough cough*).

Overall, this film is an enjoyable way to spend 95 minutes. The music and the cinematography are the highlights, with the script and the setting being the least strong aspects.

***RESULTS***

Gore 7/10
Disturbance/Creepiness 8/10
Originality 8/10
Scariness (behind-the-sofa factor) 7/10
Music score 7/10
Weapons 6/10
Cinematography/direction 8/10
Setting 6/10
Script 6/10
Entertainment 7/10

Overall: 70/100

From the Dark (2014)

I had no idea at all what this film was about. I saw it on Netflix and on a whim I decided to watch it. I was surprised afterwards with the quite low scores of 24% from Rotten Tomatoes and 4.7/10 from IMDb, especially as this was a film from Conor McMahon, the same director as the British horredy Stitches.

The plot follows closely the relationship between an Irish couple, Sarah and Mark, who are on their way to the countryside to spend a romantic getaway together. Winding down unknown Irish roads, Mark manages to get them lost. The car gets stuck in the mud and the couple is unable to move it. Mark decides to go and look for help while Sarah stays in the car with an unknown presence nearby.

Mark stumbles across the countryside and over a muddy trench to a farm, and finds an unresponsive old man in the kitchen. Mark gets back to the car and finds Sarah, who he leads back to the farm to attempt to help the man. However, when they get there, he attacks them.

***SPOILERS START HERE***

The man is able to bite Mark, although Sarah quickly finds out that he has adverse reactions to light. Using the lights in the house and from her phone, Sarah staves him away for as long as she can until she spots a tractor outside. The almost hypnotic Mark who has been reduced to a babbling mess is tasked with shining a light outside so that Sarah can get to the tractor safely.

Halfway through their daring escape, the light from the house goes out. Sarah is able to get in the tractor although she is attacked by the man (read: vampire) and turns the tractors merciless beams on him, turning him to stone and running the vehicle through him, shattering him completely.

Elated, she drives the tractor up to the door of the house, and grabs Mark from the loft. When he sees the lights, Mark becomes hysterical and shatters them angrily with his fists. He is incapacitated by Sarah, but left vulnerable, another vampire appears from the night. They are chased through the house and Sarah locks them in a bathroom. She finds a ring on Mark’s person, and recalls a conversation where he said that he would never get married.

Mark starts to transform into a vampire and Sarah realises that she must kill him. He bits her finger, and once in a secure space she removes in and uses her blood to lure him into the space. She manages to kill him with lights, and his stone body crumbles in her hands when she touches him.

However, her hardship doesn’t end there. Another vampire starts to chase her through the farm, and although she escapes, she stumbles and falls into the trench between the farm and the car, breaking her ankle. The vampire finds her and they struggle, with the vampire seemingly biting her. She manages to push him off and finally kills him.

In the light of dawn, the trench reveals a cemetery of vampires frozen to stone.

***END OF SPOILERS***

Firstly, I’d like to point out that the film has a tiny budget, obvious from the miniscule cast and Niamh Algar (Sarah) carrying the entire performance. The monsters are exceptionally thought-out, with a sort of From Dusk Til Dawn sort of appearance: long pointed teeth and bald heads, although this film portrays the vampires as cunning and smart despite their muteness, and although I don’t usually find vampires scary, this film turned that on its head.

I would have liked to see more gore in the film, as I felt it was treated with a bit too much delicacy. For example, during one scene Sarah must remove a finger which has been bitten, and the actual removal of it is done off screen. It is almost as if wounds and cuts don’t phase the characters, least of all Sarah, who continues on with almost superhuman calm and quick-thinking whilst being tormented by monsters for the entire evening. This is mainly down to the directing – I would have liked to see some panic – even if it was only for a split second. It seemed as if it was a walk in the park for Sarah, and not vampires coming out of nowhere in the Irish countryside to kill her and the man she loves.

The creepiest thing about this film is the concept of the vampire. The vampires are breathtakingly scary, and the thing I find scary is that they aren’t mindless zombies as some vampires are portrayed: more originally, they are more than able to think and even outwit the humans, as well as their strength. The setting had a capacity also to be creepy, as farms in the middle of nowhere often are, but I found that it was barely explored except in the first ten minutes and briefly in one chase scene through some stables and barns.

Light is used as a way to combat the monsters, to keep them at bay and to eventually kill them. However, this becomes problematic when the director uses minimal lighting and the action onscreen becomes basically obscure. I understand why it was done, although a bit more lighting would have really helped in some places without spoiling the mood.

What’s more, in some places, despite the short run time, the film tends to drag. For 90 minutes, I would expect the atmosphere to be tense and run smoothly, keeping a steady pace which will only sometimes decrease, and only ever intentionally. However, this film drags unintentionally: there is so much in this film (3 monsters coming one after the other) and endless battles that they become monotonous, and towards the end you can’t help but look at your watch.

What I really liked was the director’s decision to use the minimum amount of music. To heighten the tension during long scenes of action dramatic orchestral music is used effectively, but the music is not the star of this show unlike many other horror movies which rely on music to do the scaring.

The weapons are primarily variations of light, although a tractor is also used, which is amazing! However, situated on a farm, I would have thought that many more weapons could have been thrown together out of necessity: after all, I’m sure a swift shovel to the face would have at least slowed them down.

The script is a bit unnatural between the couple, and I don’t really find their relationship believable. However, there is virtually no talking between the first 20 minutes and the rest of the film – which I thanked my lucky stars for!

Overall, I found the film entertaining for what it was worth, bearing in mind the tiny budget, with a strong performance from Niamh Algar and several very well-executed ideas including the detail of the creatures. However, the character of Mark (not necessarily the performance of him), the poor writing and the film’s weird pacing let it down.

****THE RESULTS****

Gore  5/10

Disturbance/Creepiness  6/10

Originality  3/10

Scariness (behind-the-sofa factor)  6/10

Music score  7/10

Weapons  6/10

Cinematography/direction  5/10

Setting  4/10

Script  4/10

Entertainment  7/10

Overall  53/100