Movie Review: The Raven

“Deep into that darkness peering, long I stood there, wondering, fearing, doubting, dreaming dreams no mortal ever dared to dream before. . .”

Edgar Allan Poe is without a doubt the father of the American horror genre and modern horror as a whole. His dark dreams of insanity have fueled our nightmares for years, and worked as the inspiration for other great writers to come. From H.P. Lovecraft, to Stephen King, most beloved horror fiction today can trace its ancestry back to the stories and poems of Poe. So you would think a fictional film about this master of the macabre would naturally be, well, macabre. Sadly, you would be wrong. At least if said movie is the 2012 mystery/thriller The Raven.

Admittedly, I wasn't expecting very much from the movie in the first place. It's pretty clear that it's just the first in what's likely to be a long line of films trying to cash in on the recent popularity of movies like Sherlock Holmes and books like Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter. Movies and books, in other words, that tell fun stories about our favorite historical figures (both real and imagined). In this case, the result is a half-baked, rushed, mediocre film.

The premise goes like this: A madman starts enacting famous death scenes from Edgar Allan Poe's most gruesome stories. With no clue where to start, and running out of time before the killer strikes again, young Baltimore detective, Fields, (Luke Evans) seeks the assistance of Poe to help solve the case.

The idea is actually pretty cool, and honestly I didn't hate this movie, I was just hoping for more. The movie isn't so much bad as it is disappointing. The first disappointment being the actor chosen to play Poe -- John Cusack. I don't know about you, but to me, Cusack is not the image that comes to mind when I think of the master of the macabre. While he plays it as well as he can, the entire role felt awkward and stilted. Poe never feels real, and he comes off as mildly skeevy. I'm sorry, but it has to be said, Cusack had no business going near that much eyeliner (which, let's be fair, would look strange on any actor. . .still not sure what they were going for with that). I just got this cocky pedophile vibe from the guy. Maybe Poe actually had that vibe about him, but it makes for a bad character. Sadly, Poe was the only character I didn't like.

This is pretty much the expression Poe carries throughout the entire film. . .I'm not kidding.

The second disappointment was all the CG! There wasn't a single REAL freaking raven in this entire movie. Just computer generated ravens. Like gore? This film has loads, but that too is all CG. Apparently the director couldn't be bothered to make up a few batches of fake blood. Or to cook up some decent CG effects. The result is a lot like spotting the zipper running down the monster's back -- it jars you out of the false sense of reality the film works so hard to create.

Worst of all is that the movie just wasn't all that dark. For a movie about the father of modern horror, there's nothing very horrific outside of a few bloody corpses. Unless you count John Cusack in eyeliner as horrific. . .and I sorta do.

In spite of its shortcomings, The Raven does do well at weaving the truth of what we know about Poe's life with the fictional mystery. You get the feeling that, maybe -- just maybe -- this could have really happened. It's also a pretty good mystery. Nothing worth shouting about, but pretty good.

Overall the movie was disappointing, but entertaining. It probably won't satisfy hardcore Edgar Allan Poe fans or the most dedicated horror movie fan. If you're looking for a decent popcorn flick, The Raven will do just fine.

Overall Score: 2 1/2 out of 5

UPDATE: Review Delayed Until April 30th

So you're probably wondering where the Monday review is? Turns out, werewolves. 



The next review will be up next Monday (April 30th). Sorry for the delay. Next Monday I'll be reviewing The Raven, so check back then.

In the mean time, if you know a movie you'd like to see reviewed, comment here and I'll check it out.

Thanks for your patience.

Movie Review: The Cabin in the Woods

It's always nice to find a horror movie that can be scary and entertaining, without taking itself too seriously. Sometimes horror fans don't want a deep story, sometimes we just want to have some good ol' fashioned fun -- why else would slasher flicks be so popular? No, relax, The Cabin in the Woods is certainly nothing so cliche as a slasher, but it is extremely entertaining. The first genuinely "fun" movie I've watched all year.

The movie begins with a premise all horror fans are familiar with: Five relatively good-looking friends frolic off to a remote cabin for a few days of relaxation and general merriment. And once they arrive, as you might expect, they goof off, smoke some weed, and stare lustily at one another -- I know, I know, but bear with it for a bit. Because all isn't what it seems.

The trouble starts when the group -- during a game of truth-or-dare -- wander down into the damp, dark cellar. There they find all sorts of odd, creepy little gadgets: An odd puzzle-sphere, a ratty old wedding dress, a dusty conch shell, and so on. Before they can get too good a look at the rest of the trinkets, perpetually naive sweet-girl Dana (played by Kristen Connolly) finds an ancient-looking diary and calls the others over to check it out. It is the diary of a long-dead young girl, who was apparently tortured by her sadistic, uber-religious, redneck father. She promises they will return again, when the words that follow are read aloud. . .naturally, Dana reads these words aloud. Enter, antagonist.

Creepy dark cellar? I'M THERE!

Now, I'm sure you're wondering where this starts getting interesting. . .and. . .it turns out. . .I can't tell you. If I told you, it'd spoil it. But I assure you, the film turns all the classic horror movie tropes on their heads in a somewhat playfully mocking ode to the genre. All the scares you could want from a horror movie, and surprisingly, refreshingly, none of the expected twists and turns.

Not surprisingly in a movie that mocks conventional horror movie wisdom and style, my favorite character in this film is the weird, liberal, pothead, hunching hippy, Marty. (Fran Kranz) I know. But like I said, the film surprises you. This guy wins you over by easily being the most relatable character in horror-movie history. Point-in-case, from the trailer:

Kurt: "We should split up. We can cover more ground that way."

Holden: "Good idea."

Marty: "Wait. . .really?"

Yes, thank God, a voice of reason. No, Kurt, splitting up is not a good idea.

I've got plenty of praise for this film. I honestly think it's a must-see for any superfan of the genre. But as a political conservative and a Christian, there was some stuff I didn't like about the movie. Obviously, the nudity. But also. . .while the characters are great -- people that I wouldn't mind hanging out with myself, yes, even Marty -- they're all liberals (good girl Dana is reading books on Russian economic structures for heaven's sake!) with seemingly no religious beliefs whatsoever. The result was, while I liked them well enough, they left me feeling a little isolated. Amidst all the fun and gore and scares, there was an undercurrent of loneliness for me.

Overall, I really liked this film. I didn't LOVE it, but I liked it a lot. The thinking, conservative in me wishes there was more substance to the film. Something to cling to (like guns. . .or religion). But the horror fan in me couldn't have asked for a better film.

Overall Score: 4 out of 5

Guest Post: The Best Zombie Plan is Jesus

by Carol Peterson

Gone are the Ninja Turtle and Little Mermaid movies. Now that our kids are grown, our shelves are stocked with everything sci fi/blow up. And the genre that nicely combines both is zombie.

Over the years—eyeballing movies as I’m cooking dinner and moving my vision between the raw hamburger and the zombie guts—I’ve grown to love the genre. It’s fun to cheer for the good guys. You know, the ones still living.

We laugh as we watch them limp across the screen, moaning with outstretched arms. They look a lot like some people I went to college with the morning after.

“Hey, look it’s Joe—heading to Chem 101!”

One thing zombie enthusiasts know is that in real life, you need to have “a zombie plan.” A plan to prepare for the eventuality when the dead are out to get you. The cult classic take off, Sean of the Dead, shows this nicely when Sean and his friends set out for the pub as their plan to stay safe from the body-eating zombies roaming the countryside. Everything you need is at the pub—electricity, beer and friends.

My personal zombie plan includes a collection of wind-up flashlights and shampoo by the gallon. I also cook up batches of casseroles for the freezer. It’s nice to have something hot and cheesy to eat while zombies are pounding on my door. And if it’s delicious enough, those zombies might even go for the casserole over juicy moi.

The zombie genre also addresses something we all face. Our desire to hang onto life as long as we can. If you’re the “walking dead,” then you are a tiny bit closer to conquering death, right?
Unfortunately, zombies are reanimated; they are not the dead returning to life.
That’s where Jesus comes in. Jesus died and returned to life; not as a zombie but as our Savior. His death and resurrection give us full assurance that, if we lean on Him, we have full assurance of eternal life with him.

Otherwise folks, our best hope to cheat death is to become a zombie. And if that happens, then you have to face people who are better prepared with wind-up flashlights, shampoo and casseroles!

Yep—the best part of a zombie plan is Jesus.

WHAT ABOUT YOU? Zombie plans are emergency preparedness plans. What would be the most important part of your emergency plan?

(Helpful zombie tip: make sure your zombie plan includes Twinkies. If you have a zombie-like expression on your face at this comment, you definitely need to watch Zombieland.)

[Carol Peterson runs a fantastic little blog, From Carol's Quill, which can be found here: http://fromcarolsquill.blogspot.com/ When she isn't blogging, Carol enjoys reading her bible, praying, and preparing for the inevitable zombie apocalypse. Our kinda woman.]

Movie Review: Julia's Eyes

H.P. Lovecraft said that the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown. Guillermo Del Toro explores his theory in the Spanish-made movie Julia's Eyes. Julia's Eyes tells the story of Julia Levin (Belén Rueda) as she investigates the untimely death of her twin sister, Sara. The police insist that Sara's death was suicide, but Julia isn't buying it. Though Sara suffered from a degenerative eye disease, she was awaiting surgery that might have given her back her sight. Julia, who suffers from the same disease, doesn't believe her sister would have killed herself when she was so close to regaining her vision. More than that, the song Sara had playing on her stereo before she hanged herself was one she absolutely hated. No, Julia suspects someone else was there. That Sara was actually murdered.

Considering the film is nearly two hours long, you've probably guessed that there's some truth to Julia's suspicions. Yes. It isn't long before she finds herself being watched from the shadows. Someone is following her. And worst of all, the stress is only speeding her vision loss. As her stalker gets closer and closer, her vision gets worse and worse.

The fact that the protagonist is gradually going blind was one of the biggest selling points for me. Viewers often get to see things from Julia's perspective, during which even brightly lit rooms provide plenty of scares. And it doesn't feel gimmicky. Thank God, the entire film isn't from that perspective. But those momentary glimpses are enough to make us feel as helpless as Julia. Not that seeing clearly helps much, either. Julia's stalker has an uncanny ability to remain unseen. So much so that one character calls him an "Invisible Man."

Whatever you do. Don't. Blink.

The biggest issue I had with the film was that the mystery wasn't all that complex. It doesn't take long to figure out what's going on, even with the occasional red herring tossed in. But that doesn't make things any less horrifying. No, no, be assured, this movie is terrifying from start to finish. Sometimes subtle in its creepiness, sometimes extremely brutal. (Remember the guy in Pan's Labyrinth who gets his face smashed in? That brutal) I can't express this point enough: This movie gave me chills.

Be warned, this movie includes a few extremely violent/disturbing scenes that almost seem to pay bloody homage to Italian horror film great, Dario Argento. If you love Italian horror, no problem, if you have a weak stomach or are prone to nightmares, you might want to give this one a pass. Other than that, there's an awkward scene filled with a bunch of old, naked, blind ladies. . .again, weak stomach, pass.

Overall Score: 4 out of 5

UPDATE: Review Delayed Until Wednesday

So you're probably wondering where the regular Monday review is? I'm sorry to say, for personal reasons, there's going to be a short delay.

Yes, those personal reasons. . .

We will have a review this coming Wednesday, and a guest post article up Thursday, so bear with us. In the mean time, if there's a scary movie you're interested in seeing reviewed, drop me a line right here and I'll see what I can do. Hope to hear from you.

See you folks Wednesday.

Movie Review: Absentia

Horror fans are well aware that there are many, many fates much worse than death. Writer/director Mike Flanagan reflects this sentiment in a uniquely profound way in his indie horror film, Absentia. Absentia tells the story of two estranged sisters, Callie and Tricia (played by Katie Parker and Courtney Bell) who unwittingly stumble upon and begin to unwravel a horrifying, centuries-old mystery linked to a slew of seemingly unrelated disappearances.

The movie begins with Tricia, pregnant, coming home to find her sister Callie sitting on her doorstep. Callie has finally returned from her self-imposed exile, to help her sister as she mourns the loss of her husband who has been missing for years now. Tricia will soon sign the documents to declare his "death in absentia," and is understandably having a difficult time doing so. As the time to sign the documents draws nearer, Tricia begins to catch quick glimpses of her husband, lingering in the dark shadows of her small, suburban home. It would seem he might still be alive, somehow trapped by an unknown force. And Callie begins to understand that he may not be the only one. Turns out, a lot of people seem to vanish in this area. Most folks brush it off as the result of living in a bad neighborhood, but Callie doesn't think so. She believes something may be kidnapping people from their homes and nightly strolls, and spiriting them away to some world beyond our own.

Admittedly, I was a little apprehensive about watching an indie horror film. Anything with "indie" tagged onto it is likely to bore me to the point of begging for a quick and merciful death. In my experience, most indie stuff tries to be more profound than it actually is -- and by God, the more awards the things have the worse they usually are! But I was bored, and I needed an excuse to sit down, eat too much ice cream, and stare blankly at the television screen. (I had used up all my other excuses) That excuse came in the form of Absentia. And you know what? I'm very glad it did.

Absentia is not remarkably creepy, but what it lacks in scare-factor, it makes up for in atmosphere and character. Even better, Flanagan has deftly woven a supernatural thread through what feels like a very grounded film, using a familiar childhood fairy tale to do so. It works brilliantly.

It wouldn't be horror without a long, dark, tunnel with a light at the end!

The product of a kickstarter campaign, typical Hollywood tropes are notably absent from the film. The film makes no attempt to be edgy or controversial. There's no excessive swearing, no explicit sex, no violence for the sake of violence, no anti-Christian sermon.

That last thing is something I want to emphasize: No Anti-Christian Sermon. I don't know anything about Flanagan's own religious beliefs, but the single Christian in the film, Callie, is presented fairly. In fact, she may just have been one of the most genuine Christian characters I've seen in any horror film. She's not without her faults, she swears more than she should and is a struggling drug-addict, but any negative light cast on her is done so in a sympathetic manner rather than an antagonistic one. Even so, she makes up for these flaws with her sincere devotion to God and the Christian way.

One particularly charming scene that showcases this is when she remembers seeing a homeless man on her daily jog. She had promised to bring him something to eat. On her way out, plate of food in hand, her sister asks what she is doing. She starts to explain, then simply says, "It's a Christian thing." And no, she doesn't poison the food. And no she doesn't throw it in the homeless man's face or tie it to a fishing line to bait the man into a church. I bet you don't believe me. I can see that doubtful look on your face right now. But I assure you, it's true. Callie is a Christian lady worth cheering.

On the flip side, being an indie film the director felt it necessary to have at least a couple boring/melodramatic scenes placed here and there throughout the film. I mean, c'mon, isn't that to be expected? Wouldn't it be a betrayal to all indie film makers if those scenes were absent here? Of course it would. And truthfully, the film is pretty darn bleak. Many of the character-focused moments, apart from the supernatural bits, serve only to remind us how freaking depressing our lives really are. How untrusting, confused, and disillusioned we are. Yeah. . .heavy. . .but again, par for the course. So we can forgive these few faults, can't we? Yeah, I think so too. Which is why I'm giving Absentia:

Overall Score: 3 out of 5

Commentary: The Beauty of the Grotesque

Mention that you are both Christian and a fan of horror, and folks often react with shock.  Eyes widen,  jaws drop, and all that lovely stuff.

   Yup, that's the look.

Now maybe some small part of this has to do with the fact that horror and gratuitous nudity are often thought to go hand in hand.  Yes, if I had a dollar for every time I've explained, "But I don't like that part," I'd have...well, about 10 dollars or so, since I'm not constantly revealing my love of horror to new people who don't already know that, but you know what I mean:  That some people think that if you like a genre or a movie, you must like everything that goes with it, and obviously in modern horror there are certain things, whether it's racy sex or just bitter and cynical implications, that don't exactly scream "Christian."

But I think that this suspicion of Christians enjoying horror runs deeper than that, that there is something more basic behind the shock people feel if a devoutly religious movie goer reveals a love of watching monsters and maniacs chasing their prey (um, fictionally, of course).    It's simple.  People wonder what business Christians, with our talk of love and light, have watching the horror genre, which is not exactly known for its wealth of sunshine and kittens; "What fellowship has darkness with light?" and all that.  

Now, I could respond that some horror works have inspirational themes, that there is artistic merit and beauty to the cinematography, or that certain rare films reach farther than scares and into the world of philosophy and "meaning of life" statements.  That's all true; but let's be honest.  Most horror fans, even among Christians, enjoy even those stories or movies that are derivative, dark, or make no particular statement at all.  

How can we justify this? 

Because scary stories and gritty tales are an expression of our sense that God doesn't make mistakes.  

Wait, what?!

Okay, let me explain with an anecdote.  Once upon a time, there was a fellow (me, in case you're wondering) who was browsing a religious forum.  He clicked on a topic that seemed pleasant enough, about the "beauty of God's creation," where people were free to talk about how the existence of cute critters and beautiful scenery reinforces the belief in God.  Then, into this pleasant stroll through cyberspace, wandered a wise guy who posted a giant picture of a huge tarantula, like right up in its big-and-clearly-ticked-off-about-to-eat-you grill, evidently taken at point blank range by a brave, brave photographer who didn't fear getting his hands bitten off.  

The wise guy's argument, of course, was "Well then how do you explain things like this?"  Fortunately, someone else in the conversation, after giving Mr. Wise Guy a well-deserved reprimand on the part of all the arachnophobes (no, he didn't give a warning before the picture, and yes, he was probably mean and sadistic and giggling with glee on the other end of cyberspace), said that yes, in its own way, even that was beautiful.  And that is what horror is all about:  Recognizing the beauty of the things that give us the heebie jeebies, and celebrating the existence of all that goes bump in the night...because, even if things like gargantuan spiders and fish with faces straight out of an H. P. Lovecraft story are the cause of sleepless nights and endless paranoia, some part of us recognizes that it's good that they exist.  Somehow, even if we don't like scary things, God created them, and some part of the human person recognizes that they "fit" into this world.  

True enough, there are ugly things in horror stories that we shouldn't celebrate literally.  Murder, witchcraft, and man's inhumanity to man are obviously not God's creations, and are results of the Fall that we should mourn, not celebrate.  And horror that delves rather explicitly into these things should probably be in the "has a redeeming or at least meaningful message" category.  But it's just as true that in many horror films, even the human maniacs are more like forces of nature than evil people.  Jason Vorhees is more of an animal in human form, than a man.  The killers in Dario Argento's vintage films are often not even shown until the end, further detaching them from humanity.  

So no matter whether the scary thing in a movie or book is a human or a monster, they often represent our fears of scary things that happen naturally:  Beasts and abominable looking nasties that make you wonder if God Himself doesn't like telling scary stories, and he titles them "hellgrammites" and "angler fish", etc. etc.  Horror brings us face to face, in a "safe" way, with the fact that on some level we like the thrill that comes from knowing scary things are out there.  It makes us feel more alive somehow.  It makes the world more interesting.  In other words, we recognize the "beauty" of them.  It's a different kind of beauty than, say, rainbows and prairies, but it's there in its own way.  In fact, the very people who insist that Christians shouldn't enjoy scary things are only agreeing with that internet wise guy who thought the existence of scary, "ugly" things is incompatible with the existence of a good God.

So the next time you hear someone say:  "I just don't see why a Christian would enjoy watching something dark like horror," you can think to yourself "I just don't see how a Christian could think that God messed up when He made the dark and scary things" and enjoy your movie guilt free.  And then, go hug a puppy or something to fend off the nightmares.  Or not...if you're brave enough...or scared of puppies.

                                                             

Movie Review: Playback

Every once in a blood-moon horror is graced with a true masterpiece. Something that either redefines the genre, or reminds us why we fell in love with the old ghoul in the first place. Sadly, Playback is not one of those works. No, no. Playback is the kind of film that reminds us that Hollywood typically has no idea what it's doing when it comes to what makes great horror.

Playback's story centers around a group of teens, led by the dashing young Julian, (played by Johnny Pacar , who, by the way, actually played his role pretty well) researching a decades old massacre that occurred in their town. And by researching, I mean, making an offensive indie horror film of it for their journalism class. Admittedly, the murders were bizarre and pretty creepy: Harlan Diehl filmed the murder of his parents and topless step-sister in their small, rundown farm house, the cops arriving just in time for him to finish off his topless step-sister, but sparing her newborn baby. Did I mention the step-sister is topless? You've been warned!

Sadly, the original video is the best part of the movie horror-wise, and it's over pretty quickly. Now, as you might expect, digging up old, bloody history like this doesn't sit well with any of the older folks, particularly Julian's mom. But Julian, ever the hardened journalist, keeps digging deeper. He enlists the help of creepy tech-geek Quinn (portrayed by Toby Hemingway), but when Quinn uncovers some of the original tapes, the spirit of Harlan Diehl, somehow trapped within the film, possesses him. Quinn's descent into madness is swift, as he gains the ability to reach into the minds of others through cameras and will them to do his bidding. As you can imagine, things get pretty ridiculous from there, the the movie begins to feel more like dark science fiction than horror.

My biggest complaint, however, is about the only Christian character in the film, Deedee (played by the lovely Jennifer Missoni). (And by Christian, I mean she is considered "innocent" [or naive] and wears a cross. . .which the director feels the need to emphasize) No, no, thank God, she isn't your typical Hollywood bigot-Christian. She doesn't stone any gays or molest any little boys. It's just. . .she's a complete idiot. I want to say airhead to be a little more lenient. . .but idiot seems more than appropriate. And of course, a film about mind-control wouldn't miss out on a chance to have a hot Christian chick do a strip-tease for a pervy cop. (Yes, there's a perverted cop who plays a fairly pointless role . . . and yes, he's played by Christian Slater . . . oh Slater, what happened?) All that said, Deedee isn't necessarily an unlikable character either. . .nope. . .just dumb.

Deedee's clueless expression after being asked her age

The film wasn't an entire letdown though. The acting is pretty good, and while uninspired (Deedee), the characters are all quirky and interesting enough that you want them to survive. And I'll admit, the last fifteen or so minutes of the film did have me on edge -- there's some good suspense there if you're willing to wait for it.

In the end this was a kind of fun movie to watch, but nothing new or notable. . .oh, and did I mention the topless step-sister?

Overall Score: 2 out of 5

Movie Review: Don't Be Afraid of the Dark

If you're a fan of horror and dark fantasy, and you haven't heard of Guillermo del Toro, you may just be a hermit. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) I'm tempted to end the review here by saying: "This is a Del Toro movie. Watch it." But since we're here, I might as well give you some details.

Don't Be Afraid of the Dark tells the story of a cute but creepy little girl named Sally (played by Bailee Madison), when she moves in with her estranged father and his girlfriend Kim (Katie Holmes) who are in the midst of renovating a lovely rustic mansion. The mansion once belonged to a famous painter . . . who went mad. Of course the history of the place is quite a bit more colorful (and gory) than just that, but I bet you already figured that out. And guess what? They all three get to live there while they're working! -- what could possibly go wrong?

It isn't long before Sally hears the walls calling her name, calling her into the basement to play. What's in the basement, you ask? Something that shouldn't exist. Something very hungry, that has been locked away since the house's former caretaker met his untimely end. But I won't spoil it for you.

Don't be Afraid of the Dark is darkly enchanting from start to finish. Those looking for atmosphere will not be disappointed.

More than that, the film focuses plays on the feelings of isolation, frustration, and general disillusionment felt by any child who has gone through having their parents divorce -- and that's where it really shines. We love Sally, but more than that, we feel sorry for her. She's forced into a new home and life, she may just be getting a new "mom," and on top of all that, something in her new home-sweet-home wants to eat her.

There are some fairly creepy moments in this movie, although fans of grittier stuff won't find much to appreciate in the film's more whimsical execution. The only truly disappointing moment in the film comes in the form of a twist at the very end. It isn't that it was contrived. . .just that I had to go online to figure out what it meant!

The movie is Christian safe (as far as horror can be "safe"). Nothing blasphemous. No on-screen sex. Very little swearing. I'm not suggesting you let your six-year-old watch it, (oh God, please, don't) but you'd be hard-pressed to find anything offensive here.

Overall? Watch this movie. You won't regret it.

Overall Score: 5 out of 5

Movie Review: The InnKeepers

Few horror fans can pass on a good ghost story. Haunted houses, cars, people, pets, inhabit campfire tales throughout history and span every culture. It's safe to say that people love a good ghost story.

 

For a long time it seemed like psychological horror -- in the misguided tradition of "science replaces God" -- had replaced the classic ghost story. In a lot of ways, it still seems that way. Ghosts in movies and books are almost always projections of the protagonist's guilty conscience. But every once in a while Hollywood releases a movie that pulls no punches, and makes no apologies for believing in the supernatural. These films tell us ghosts exists, that the things going bump in the night are not just in our imaginations.

 

The Innkeepers does its part in keeping the oh-so cherished traditional ghost story alive. It tells the story of two hotel employees -- Claire and Luke -- who moonlight as paranormal investigators. The hotel is about to close, and is now mostly deserted, leaving the pair with one final weekend to find evidence of the supernatural.

 

The movie does a lot of things right. It keeps it simple and it takes its time. There's no rush for scares, so the first quarter of the film is spent introducing us to the protagonists and pumping up the tension. Sara Paxton plays the role of Claire brilliantly -- it's easy to find her charming (in a dorky sort of way) and extremely relatable. That isn't to say she or any of the other characters are not without their quirks, resulting in some genuinely hilarious scenes. Anyway, in the beginning, things are relatively mundane. Nothing to see here, folks.

 

The real trouble begins when Claire -- spooked by an earlier event -- asks for help from a psychic ("healer") who is staying as a guest at the hotel. (Yes, heads up, there is a little mumbo-jumbo in the film. Nothing overtly offensive, but if you're uber-conservative that might be important for you to know.) And as we all well know, you never get a psychic involved in a ghost story, crap always hits the fan when some creepy old lady starts chatting up the spirits. (I can only assume that ghosts are extremely introverted and would prefer to be left alone) Suddenly the supernatural activity -- and the suspense -- crank up a level.

 

I shouldn't have to tell you this is probably a bad idea

 

 

The film isn't without its flaws, however. It's a little too simplistic, and folks seeking something extremely original will be forced to look elsewhere. Beyond that, there are some questions that seem to go unanswered -- the movie makes one particularly intriguing promise that it never fulfills. The worst part is that while the tension is well drawn, when things finally do go south, it seems to happen too quickly. The horror seems to be over before it begins. And the final scene leaves us wanting. . .

 

Overall The InnKeepers is a fun, sometimes funny, and delightfully creepy movie that I'm glad I watched.

 

Overall Score: 3 out of 5