When I heard that the writer and director of Pan’s Labyrinth was writing and directing a haunted house movie, I got excited. I looked forward to seeing the latest film from visionary Guillermo Del Toro. I couldn’t wait to see “his” ghosts; freed from his imagination and set loose on the big screen. To these ends, my wishes came true on Tuesday night, Oct 27. My visual appetite was satisfied, as was any desire I had concerning flair. It was a stylish film indeed. But alas, something was missing.
Let me being with what I liked about Crimson Peak. I liked the atmosphere. I liked the gothic manor and all its intricacies, seen and unseen. I liked the winding staircase and cage-like elevator. I like the unfinished roof and the atmospheric snow that flowed continuously into the house like background waterfalls. I loved all the props – the candelabras, the portraits, the piano. The music is appropriately haunting. The ghosts are great. Silky and spooky; they are like no ghosts I had ever seen on the screen.
I liked the overall tone – the Victorian/Edwardian formality in dress and speech. The film transported me out of the theater and into a different time period without any turbulence. It was nice to see a shout out to those glorious horror films of yore.
And the film is rich with symbolism. It’s poetic.
So much is good about the film. So it disheartens me to say that I left the theater feeling slightly underwhelmed. Why is this? It was the slow and unpromising plot. Actually, cancel that word “unpromising.” It was promising. The problem was that it made promises but failed to deliver upon them.
It teased out mystery where there was none. It built up false suspense and while the story didn’t leave viewers hanging, in the end it seemed to shrug apologetically for the fact that there was never a reason to hang at all.
It is difficult to provide examples without trudging into the storyline. But I don’t want to reveal too much, although the risk of spoiler contamination is very low. The young and handsome Thomas Sharpe arrives to New York from England with his sister. He is an opportunist and he tries to convince Carter Cushing to invest in technology that he has developed for mining clay. Carter turns him down. So Thomas and his mysterious sister will go back England, but not until Thomas woos away Carter’s daughter Edith. Carter does not trust Thomas. He says that there is something unlikable about him but he can’t explain what it is. But at least Thomas is friendly and charming, unlike his sister who is cold and expressionless. Thomas marries Edith and the three return to England to live in the spooky old mansion on top of Crimson Peak.
Here’s a hint as to how the suspense works in this film: if a character has a hunch (like Carter has with Thomas), he is probably correct. If a person appears evil, the person is evil. If there were a butler in this film, then the quip “the butler did it” would surely play out (There is no butler in this film.)
One might say, “Okay, so it’s a straightforward film. What’s wrong with that?” What’s wrong is that it starts viewers out on arcane paths, only to merge them into a plain old narrative of narrow storytelling. If you want to tell a straightforward, what-you-see-is what- you-get story, that’s fine. But don’t lead the viewers on with secrets and hidden histories. There are many examples of this kind of leading, but I won’t mention them, because I guess even a letdown can be a spoiler.
Imagine receiving a present. Not only is the wrapping paper beautiful, but there are bows and bells and pieces of candy attached to the box as well. Peel away all this and you find that the design of the box is appealing too. Inside the box there are decorative tissues and fluffy coverings that feel soft against your fingertips. Remove this covering and you find – tube socks. Happy Birthday. If this were a terrible movie with absolutely no depth, then my analogy would be a bit different. It would entail dazzling wrappings on a crappy, empty box. But it’s not terrible, it’s just, well, it’s tube socks.
Let’s end on a mostly positive note as I focus in on the ghosts. I’ll call this the “good, the blah, and the good again”
The good – The ghosts looked good. The CGI worked to the film’s benefit. The ghosts didn’t come off as cartoonish. They looked genuinely creepy.
The blah – We didn’t learn much about the ghosts. They were just sort of “there”, part of the background. Yes they scared the wits out of poor Edith on several occasions. But they didn’t contribute all that much too the overall workings of the story.
The good again – Kudos for allowing viewers the time to take in the ghosts! They didn’t flash rudely on the screen as did the ghosts of other modern ghost movies such as The Haunting of Connecticut and the remake of Amityville Horror. Rather, they traversed slowly and creepily. They peered around walls. They peaked out of closets. THIS is what “scary” is all about.
So that’s about it. I really, really, wanted to like this film. And I guess I did, but I just couldn’t bring myself to love it.
The Cat and the Canary features a dead millionaire, greedy relatives, a strange maid, a psychotic killer and…Bob Hope? Yeah its got all “them peoples” along with a creepy old house, a coveted inheritance, murder and mayhem, and a lot of hilarious one-liners from the nervous yet witty house guest Wally Campbell. You guessed it; Campbell is played by Bob Hope. It’s horror mixed with comedy.
Here’s the nuts & bolts of the story. The late Millionaire Cyrus Norman did not trust his heirs. No he did not! So he had these weird ass conditions concerning the distribution of his estate. The reading of the will does not take place until ten years after Cyrus’s death per his wishes. When that ten year anniversary finally comes, the prospective inheritors gather together in his huge home in the Louisiana bayous for the midnight will reading. Along with the lawyer and the maid, there are also three women and three men. The six are the last remaining descendants of Cyrus and candidates for the passed down fortune. One of the women , Joyce Norman, played by Paulette Goddard (former wife of Charlie Chaplin) wins the prize. But there is a catch – which brings us to the second odd stipulation of the will. If the sole heir, who in this case is Joyce, is proven to be mentally ill within 30 days of the reading of the will, then her claim to the fortune is forfeited and Cyrus’s estate gets passed down to a second heir. The identity of the second heir is withheld; the papers are protectively sealed in an envelope that remains in the possession of the lawyer. Now, we viewers know that there will be a mad rush to drive poor Joyce insane, and that this rush won’t be extended over a thirty day period. The tricks and misdeeds against the woman will all take place within the house over the next several hours by one or more of the scheming others that are desperate to lay claim to the inheritance. See, they are stranded there. They all came via paddle boat on the rivers of the bayou. The boat guy won’t taxi his boat after hours, so they all must spend the night in the creepy house. Spoooooky!
Oh yeah, the creepy maid says there are spirits in the house.
And oh yeah again, there is an escapee from the asylum running around the property.
And oh yeah for the third and final time – wasn’t that funny how I linked the words “ten years after” to the famous rock band of the same name? Back up there at the beginning of the second paragraph, I linked….oh never mind! Read on.
This movie is a remake of the 1927 silent film of the same name. Furthermore, both films are based on the 1922 play by John Willard. The play reveals the reasoning for the title of the story. Cyrus West (not “Norman”, in the play his surname is West) says of his relatives, “(They) have watched my wealth as if they were cats, and I — a canary”.
I really don’t have much more to say about this film other than that I enjoyed it. But I must confess – this is the first Bob Hope film that I have seen. His humor might be dated, but to me it is fresh. In the film, the maid says to Wally (Bob Hope) something along the lines of “I sense spirits all around you” to which Wally says, “Can you grab a few them and throw them in glass with ice?” THAT is funny! Yes it is, don’t argue with me! Without Hope, this film would be only be so-so. Sometimes you just have to have “Hope!”
Here’s a side note: I saw this film on Saturday, Oct 17, 2015 on Svengoolie on MeTV. Sven’s the guy that shows me many of these old time haunted house films. I love “Da’ Sven” and you should love him too!
Do you have MeTV in your area? No, it’s not a cable station. It’s a regular station on terrestrial television. You over here, do you have MeTV? You don’t? Aww, I’m sorry. But wait you..over there… do you have access? You do? Great! Turn on Svengoolie on MeTV’s Super Sci-Fi Saturday night!
It seems as if every few weeks, there is a mass shooting. Every news cycle seems to contain some account of a guy who mows down several people with a gun. I have often wondered, “Did mass shootings like we have today occur ten or twenty years ago? Thirty of forty years ago?” I guess the answer is – yes they did occur, but maybe not with such a high frequency.
There was one such shooting in Amityville, NY back in 1974. Twenty-three year old Ronald “Butch” DeFeo Jr slaughtered his family with a .35 Marlin Rifle while they slept in their beds. He killed his parents along with his four siblings, ranging in ages from eighteen to nine. Ronald DeFeo currently resides in Green Haven Correctional Facility in NY where he is serving several life sentences.
What does one make of such a tragedy? The answer is: Movies, books. In short -The Amityville Franchise. I’m sorry to put it so bluntly, but it is what it is. In one platform or another, millions of people have come to know the haunted house that is the subject of The Amityville Horror. There were several books on the subject and many more movies. Too many movies. There have been fourteen for heaven’s sake!
The tragic tale of the DeFeos is true. It’s what happened afterward that is subject to speculation. What happened in the house a year or so later after the murders varies from source to source. Any understanding of what may or may not have occurred at 112 Ocean Drive is also contingent upon one’s belief in paranormal phenomena. If you believe in ghosts and demons, then it is quite possible you can believe the accounts of George and Kathleen Lutz who lived in the Amityville house several months after the murders took place. If you don’t believe in such entities, then it’s easier to dismiss their story as a hoax.
As far as ghosts and demons are concerned, I remain safely neutral. I’m not saying I disbelieve but, well, there just haven’t been too many occasions where a spirit has gone a floating across my path! Or, as my dad used to say when I asked him if he believed in ghosts, “Nah! I haven’t seen one of them in years!” In other words, I am not here to verify the accuracy of this tale. What I am going to do is judge the content and scariness of the story and not how well it translates into this thing we call “truth”. However, toward the end of the review, I will bring up various articles that aim at getting at “the truth” because the search for the facts are indeed a tale unto itself and part of the larger story.
The basics of the story are this – George and Kathleen Lutz, along with Kathleen’s three children, move into the DeFeo house. 28 days later, they flee, leaving behind all their possessions. They claim to have fled demonic activity. It is implied that the demonic manifestations that haunted them are the same forces that drove Ronald DeFeo to murder his family. After a while, they had their story published in a book written by Jay Anson. Following this was the 1979 movie.
I will begin with the book, then go on to review both the 1979 and the 2005 movie
Warning: There will be major spoilers ahead
Amityville Horror the book – by Jay Anson and George and Kathleen Lutz
Before reading the book, I was told that it would be much scarier than the movie. It had been a long time since I had seen the film, maybe thirty years or more. I don’t remember the film being all that frightening. Of course, I had seen it on terrestrial television; it was heavily edited. Finally, two weeks ago, I saw the uncut, original film. It was pretty creepy, but would the book be better?
Answer: yes. I do admit that I wasn’t super impressed with the first few pages. It reads like a logbook polished up with narrative. There are a lot of dates and times, sentences like “They moved in on December 23.” But this is the prologue, and it is necessary in order to summarize the timeframe. The rest of the book captures this timeframe in detail, day by day. It is a diary detailing the supernatural disturbances that haunt the Lutz family for 28 days as they try and fail to make a home out of colonial house on Ocean Drive.
The disturbances increase in both intensity and frequency until they have no choice but to flee.
The book also chronicles the plight of Father Frank Mancuso. He arrives at the Lutz’s early on to bless the house. Upon arrival, he is overcome with a sense of dread. He feels deathly ill. And he hears a voice that told him to “Get out!!” After this, Father Mancuso is plagued with a serious flu. It gets worse whenever George Lutz tries to contact him. When he calls, static often disrupts the conversation and the line goes dead. Then the flu symptoms increase in severity. Blisters appear on his hands.
Some of the disturbances that the Lutz family experienced include:
Cold spots
Unwarranted psychological stress
Windows opening and closing
Doors being ripped from their hinges
Gelatinous mass dripping from walls
Toxic smells
Ghostly figures
Here’s a breakdown on how the house affected some of the family members individually:
George Lutz – He is cold all the time, even when the house is warm. He is irritable, withdrawn, avoids going into work. He hears things, such as an invisible marching band traipsing through his living room. Prone to nightmares. His body levitates while sleeping.
Kathy Lutz – Felt the presence of a woman. On several occasions, felt ghostly arms wrapped around her; hands pressed against her shoulders. Saw her body mutate into that of an old crone. Her body also levitates while sleeping.
Missy Lutz – Befriends a demonic pig named Jodie. George catches a glimpse of this pig through the window. Kathy sees its glowing red eyes
The book also has diagrams of each of the three floors of the Amityville house.
All in all, it is an excellent and scary read. And yes it is much scarier than the film, but the movie is pretty scary as well.
Amityville Horror the Movie – 1979 – Directed by Stuart Rosenberg
On Rottontomatoes.com, this film only has a 24% approval rating among critics. This surprises me. The Amityville Horror certainly isn’t the best haunted house film out there, but it’s not so bad. In fact I’ll say it’s “pretty good,” so long as “pretty good” stands for slightly less than “good.” The establishing shots of the house are excellent. Who can forget those creepy attic windows that look like jack-o-lantern eyes! I love the background music. Now-a-days, creepy music is often replaced by the sounds of electronic jolts and thuds. Nothing tops mood setting music such as this:
Who can resist those singing children and their haunting “la la’s”?
The book is better, but the film stands on its own. There are several differences between the book and the film and I will outline them later in the review. The book is able to cover more ground, but that is to be expected since the book has 300 + pages compared to the film’s 2 hours of footage. What the film is able to capture with its limited amount of time is done reasonably well. The mood is eerie, the characters are mostly well developed, especially Rod Stieger as Father DeLaney. Katherine Lutz’s character could have used a bit more development.
Amityville Horror the Movie – 2005 – Andrew Douglas
Yeah, this film isn’t all that good. I was enjoying it in the beginning and accepting of some of the “modern renovations.” I get it. People don’t have imaginations anymore. If a film is to be about ghosts, people want to see the ghosts, and they want them quick. So unlike the first film, there are a lot of shots of ghosts. Or should I say “flashes of ghosts.” They come and go quickly like a fast food meal. I enjoyed seeing the ghosts. I really did.
But as the film moved along, things went too fast. Too much noise and chaos, too much “in your face.”
Here’s something I have to mention. In the first film, George has an awesome line. In response to how he feels about purchasing a house where a mass murderer occurred, he says, “Houses don’t have memories”. He is proven wrong, but that sentence says a lot. Change the “don’t” to “do” and you have a four letter sentence that compacts so much and describes haunted houses to a tee. In the 2005 film the line is, “Houses don’t kill people. People kill people.” Cringe time! Save that slogan for the NRA.
Here are the different ways each medium deals with some of the story’s main themes:
Psychological Profile of family:
Book – Whole family is on edge, psychological strain. Both George and Kathy hit their children. Kids are restless
1979 film – Mostly focuses on George. House works on him, making viewers think he might kill his wife and children in the same way that Ron Defeo slaughtered his family.
2005 film – George goes insane, becomes psychotic. It is the George Lutz of the 1979 film on steroids. A major rip-off of The Shining if you ask me.
Father Mancuso
Book – Blesses house, hears “get out”, gets violently ill, flu and rashes. When he gets better, he talks to George and gets worse again. Often calls to George are interrupted with static
1979 film – Has a different name. Comes to bless house, attacked by flies (Flies don’t harm him in book). It’s Kathy that reaches out to the Father, not George. Father ends up going blind and left for a shell of a man
2005 film– Very little coverage of the priest. Blesses house, attacked by flies. Won’t come back. Phone calls back and forth are removed from this film.
Jodie
Book and 1979 movie – Imaginary friend of Missy, turns out to be real but only Missy can see her. Jodie is a pig. A demonic pig.
2005 movie – Jodie is a young girl, presumably a young sister of Ron DeFeo. Guess having a pig as a friend is too weird and abstract for the 2000 years, so in comes the little girl. “Bring back the pig.” I say. Now in the 1979 film, the pig is never shown, accept for the two glowing red eyes. In the 2005 film the little girl Jodie is shown several times. Still I vote for the unseen pig.
Babysitter
Book – there is no babysitter in the book
1979 film – Brief coverage of babysitter. She wears a dental retainer that covers half of her face. Jodie locks her in closet.
2005 film – Bigger deal of babysitter. She is a trampy stoner, and she teases her 12 year old boy seductively. She too gets locked in closet by Jodie.
Basement
Book and 1979 film – a secret red room is discovered. It emits bad vibes.
2005 film – more than a room. Passageway where George gets experiences flashes from the far back past. Indians were tortured in these hallways –tortured by a satanic priest named Ketchum.
Visual manifestations
Book – Pig and White hooded figure
1979 film – less visual manifestations than book. Mostly just eyes (red dots out window)
2005 film – Many- of Jodie the girl, of tortured Indian souls, of Ketcham.
So, is this a true story?
After the Lutz family fled the house, several paranormal teams investigated the house, including the famous Ed and Lorraine Warren. All of them claim to have felt some kind of unnatural presence. However, others have doubts. Locksmiths have investigated the house and have determined that the doors did not come off the hinges in the ways that the Lutz family has claimed. Also, in regards to the history of the house, long before the DeFeos – a history that is documented in the book – not true. The book claims that the house rests on a site where Shinnecock Indians had abandoned the mentally ill. But Shinnecock historians say this is false. Testimony from the real Father Mancuso has been sketchy.
It has been suggested by William Weber, lawyer for Ronald DeFeo, that the whole thing was a hoax. He said that he and the Lutzes concocted the story and were going to publish the book, but in the end, the Lutz’z sought Jay Anston to write the book.
On the other hand, Anston believes the story. In an afterword he says that there are just too many intricate details that couldn’t be made up. George Lutz died in 2006, but a year before his death, he stated in an interview that what happened to he and his family in the book was true.
In repsonse to some of the websites seeking to discredit the Lutz’s, George had developed his own sites:
The first leads to a page showing the house. When clicking on the links, there is a white screen with an internal server error. The second site leads to Yahoo – in Japanese!
What’s going on? Is it like with the phone line static – interruptions happening all over again? Are the demons fucking with George once again, preventing him from reaching out?
Whether true or not, the ghost story of Amityville Horror is indeed a good one. If it’s false, it is then a shame that the lives of the DeFeos were so exploited – real victims of murder – their tale being only a back story for a fiction Hollywood tale. When I think about it this way, I feel bad for even giving The Amityville Horror a moment of my time. But then again, tales will arise from tragedy, both real and fictional. There would be no Count Dracula without the real life Vlad the Impaler. So I suppose a good story is simply that – “a good story”, no matter where it comes from.
A young couple, Dan and Jessica, purchase a Bed and Breakfast. Their new home is one of the oldest houses in New England. It comes equipped with furniture. Some of it is rather strange, such as an antique birthing chair with blood around the seat’s rim. But they will soon learn that there are far stranger things occupying the house than bloody chairs. There are others living in the house. Excuse me, did I say “living?” Cancel that, for these occupants are no longer alive. These occupants are The Inhabitants.
The Inhabitants is an indie film from brothers Michael and Shawn Rasmussen, writers of John Carpenter’s The Ward. Admittedly, there’s nothing new going on in this film. It’s a familiar concept: a couple moves into a new house – there is something strange about the sellers – the couple tries to adjust to the new living arrangement and then spooky stuff transpires. Before anything real frightening happens, there exists the kind of foreshadowing that is common in haunted house film. Library books reveal the Inn’s history of witchcraft and murder. Yokels call the place “the witch house. Dementia-stricken Mrs. Stanton, former Inn owner, makes enigmatic remarks to the couple. (“Please take care of the children!” What children? The couple is childless!)
Despite the formulaic plot, the film works. It accomplishes what it sets out to do, which is to tell a creepy haunted house story on a limited budget with a minimal number of actors. The film uses its resources effectively and doesn’t try to needlessly branch out into story areas that are beyond its scope. For me this is better than a project with an unlimited budget that tries its damnedest to show off just how much resources it has by tossing in every technological effect known to man. The film does have its dull moments, but it’s effectively creepy and it captures the viewer’s interest. The filming of the house’s interior is done well. There is some interesting camera action; such as the shot of a bathing Jessica and her long and draping black hair disappearing over the tub’s edge as her body sinks underwater.
I recommend giving this film a watch. It may not exceed your wildest expectations, but it is creepily entertaining.
Where are haunted houses? By this I mean, in what kind of setting is one likely to find a creepy old house with ghostly shenanigans? Usually such houses are found in the countryside. Maybe they are surrounded by woods. Perhaps there is a nearby graveyard or two. Or they rest on the peaks of mountain tops. Heavy thunderstorms add to the eerie environment. Snowstorms trap haunted house inhabitants and seal them away in closed quarters.
How about a haunted house on an ocean beach? Hmm, sounds a little out of place. Beaches have sunrises and sunsets; the beautiful orange ball of light that makes its way across the sky is hardly a magnet for ghosts. They have calming breezes and welcoming waves. They are sandy spas of salt baths and sun tanning. They are – dens of spiritual activity? Really? What’s a scary ghost like you doing at beach paradise such as this?
The panhandle beaches of southern Alabama are the perfect setting for haunted houses; at least the beaches that spill out of the creative and macabre mind of Michael McDowell and into his book The Elementals. Okay, let’s narrow it down to one fictional beach in particular – Beldame. It’s a secluded area on a spit that extends off of the Gulf coast. It harbors three Victorian houses. These houses are reachable only via certain modes of transportation, such as a boat by way of water or a dune buggy by way of sandy terrain. At night it gets very dark. In the pitch black night, sometimes the only sign of activity comes from the sounds of the surf. But there are other things stirring, such as the elementals – spirits that have no form.
Beldame was the host of many summer retreats for two wealthy families linked in marriage and friendship. The grown children of The McCrays and The Savages remember their childhood summers at Beldame with a strange mixture of nostalgia and apprehension. It has been a long time since they have spent significant time at this hideaway. After the death and disturbing funeral of matriarch Marian Savage, they decide to revisit Beldame. Dauphin and Leigh Savage occupy one house with their maid Odessa. Luker McCray (brother of Leigh) lodges in the second house with his thirteen-year-old daughter India and his mother Big Barbara. The third house remains unoccupied (or does it?). It is uninhabitable – a large sand dune was swallowed a third of the house.
Out of all the inhabitants, it is Luker that is most apprehensive about the third house. His sharp daughter senses his fear. India soon learns that the third house is a depository of childhood fears and frightful memories for other family members as well. It has its stories. Too curious for her own good, India climbs the third house’s encroaching sand dune and peers into the bedroom window of the second floor. She sees things. Scary things.
This is a very captivating book. There are many things to love about this story. As an analytic reader, I noticed two themes in particular that captured my interest. The first has to do with the constantly shifting terrain. The families are surrounded by sand dunes; their shapes and heights varying depending on whatever forces of nature happen to be at work at a particular time. There exists the threat, perhaps not always evident to the fictional families but surely apparent to the readers, of being overcome by the dunes; of their homes going the way of that mysterious third house. Then there are the high and low tides that alter the state of the nearby lagoon. During high tide, the lagoon maroons the houses and Beldame becomes an island.
Things are in constant transformation. Nothing is as it appears – not for long anyway. Whatever it is, soon it will be something else. The third house. Things are not always the same with it. The sand drifts, both within and without, change. The furniture appears to change from one viewing to the next. Sometimes bedroom doors are shut and locked. Other times they are unlocked and slightly ajar. And how about those spirits within! Sometimes they are the spitting images of lost loved ones. Other times they are grotesque abominations of things that resemble humans. But in their natural state they are indeterminate in form and structure, their “shape” subject to environmental forces. These forces are the fears, memories and overall personalities of those that come within their lair.
Likewise, Beldame is a place where memories and dreams become blurred. Looking back at summer vacations past, some characters have trouble distinguishing whether certain things they had witnessed actually occurred of if they were only the byproducts of dreams or imagination. The nature of reality is in constant question. Reality seems to shift, change shape, just like the dunes of sand.
The sand, the wind, the storms, the tides…and spirits = elements that play a role in transforming the terrain; elementals.
The second theme concerns the surrealistic nature of Beldame. It is a magical place – a coveted haven. The history of Beldame is a history of tragedy at the expense of the The McCray and Savage families and yet they all seem to share a certain unexplainable nostalgia for their land on the spit. Time seems to stop when they stay in these houses along the ocean side. The have no clocks, they follow no schedule. When the sun is right they lie on the beach. When the sun is to strong they seek shelter in the house. They live day to day following the lead of elements. Their occupational worries disappear. And yet, it seems as if Beldame is a place to go to die. Perhaps it is like an outpost of the netherworld –timeless, tranquil at times, spiritual, and of course, deadly.
On top of all this, The Elementals also serves as an anthropological account of well-to-do southern families. The characters are filled with life and beautifully tarnished with quirks. Their expressions are humorously raw.
According to Vicki Brunson of Examiner, the book had been “out of print for years”. The book I borrowed was a used copy that my friend purchased from Amazon. However, it appears that The Elementals has been re-released through its publisher Valancourtbooks.
Sadly, author Michael McDowell passed away in 1999. He is a favorite of Stephen King and the writer of famous screenplays such as Beetlejuice and The Nightmare Before Christmas.
“The Home” is a modern day orphanage in rural Appalachia. Disturbing things are occurring within the resident buildings of the compound. There’s the God-fearing, fire and brimstone director who gets off on fantasies of spanking the children. Then you have a mad-scientist of a doctor who performs experiments on children. Let’s see, is there anything else unorthodox about this institution? Oh yeah! Ghosts roam around from time to time.
Some have seen a strange man in an institutional robe wandering the halls inside the buildings or wading into the pond at the far end of the complex. He is the subject of ghost stories – the stuff of institutional legend. All communities have such myths, spread through the overactive imaginations of children. Except the staff begins to see this man as well. People then begin seeing a woman with holes in her head where her eyes used to be. Her eyes are now embedded into the palms of her hands.
One ghost. Two ghosts. More?
By the book’s end there will be too many spirits to handle. While leading up to this plethora of phantoms, the plot peels away the layers of a conspiracy involving The Home’s administration and a mysterious organization called The Trust.
Let’s back track.
Freeman Mills, twelve year old, is Wendover Home’s latest charge. He has been diagnosed with a host of conditions: bipolar disorder, antisocial behavior, and on and on. One day one he meets with Francis Bondurant, the self-righteous director of Wendover, who, in lieu of treatments based on psychiatric “mumbo-jumbo” favors introducing the problematic children to the strong arm of the Lord. Like with all his charges, he believes Freeman just needs to “mend his sinning ways.” From the beginning, readers see this man for the rat that he is and feel for the children in his care. If only this were as bad as it gets. It gets worse.
Bondurant proves to be somewhat of an impotent weasel. The resident psychiatrist is the bigger threat. Dr. Kracowski takes children to Room 13 for “therapy.” His therapy is a bit unorthodox. It involves strapping the children to a chair and administering electrodes to the brain. He calls it Synaptic Synergy Therapy, and believes his treatment will realign and harmonize the neural pathways. He boasts that this SST can cure everything from bipolar disorder to anorexia. But it does more than that. It awakens as extra sensory perception within its subjects.
This is where The Trust comes in. They (whoever “they” are) want to be able to harness the power that comes from ESP. They fund and supervise Kracowski’s treatments. When readers are introduced to members of the Trust, suddenly Dr. Kracowski doesn’t seem so bad anymore. In the end, they unleash more paranormal mayhem than they bargained for. Machines in the basement generate electro-magnetic waves needed for the SST. Are these machines unintentionally breaking down the door between the living and the dead?
Though new to Wendover Home, this procedure is not new to Freeman Mills. His father was a forerunner in developing these experiments. He experimented on his own son. Accused of murdering his wife, Dr. Mills is taken away and Freeman is now a ward of the state. Due to a long history of these treatments, he has the keenest ESP of all the children. All except his friend Vicky. Two cynical kids with hatred for the adult world become the hero and heroine of this tale.
This is a page-turning novel. There are many interesting characters and readers get to know about the strange happenings at The Home from multiple points of view. There are many themes throughout the book, including the age-old war between science and religion. I’m guessing that some thin-skinned religious reader out there will whine about how religion is “negatively portrayed.” Likewise, I’ll bet there’s some hypersensitive secularist reader that will bitch about how this book misrepresents the goals of science. I’m making these assumptions based on some of the reviews of Nicholson’s Red Church. Some complained that the book was too religious while others moaned about how the novel was sacrilegious. For me, any book that divides in such a way deserves a good reading, for it has enflamed the passions of readers. This is what good art does.
That’s how Lou Costello calls out to his friend Bud Abbott whenever he is in trouble. Of course you knew that. I mean, everyone knows about Abbott and Costello, right???
Okay, maybe not. Young readers might not have a clue about these two comedic geniuses. Not quite on par with Laurel and Hardy, but still they held their own. Bud Abbot is usually the straight man while Lou Costello is the butt of the jokes. They first came on the scene as radio entertainers in the late 1930s and thrilled radio audiences with their “Who’s on First?” bit. Soon they were making movies, several of which were horror comedies.
To appreciate the movie Hold That Ghost, one has to appreciate the antics of Abbott and Costello. I do appreciate their humor, but this might be my least favorite of the frightfully funny films that they made.
Here’s a brief synopsis. Through some rather strange circumstances, Chuck Murray (Bud Abbott) and Ferdie Jones (Lou Costello) inherit a rural tavern from a deceased mobster. They get stranded at their new “home”, along with four other people, including Joan Davis who plays a kooky radio actress. Another tag along is gangster and lawyer Charlie Smith. Rumor has it there is money hidden somewhere in the house/tavern and Charlie wants the money. The tavern hasn’t been used for some twenty odd years; it is dusty and sheets are draped over the furniture. In other words, it looks like the typical inside of a haunted house.
I’m leaving a lot out in this description. But who cares, you get the drift – several people are forced to spend the night in a house that might be haunted, one of whom is criminal with ulterior motives. A familiar plotline, but with Abbott and Costello, it’s done in a humorous way.
Hold That Ghost was their first horror comedy. But for me, it was their last , meaning that I had seen all their other scare-laugh pictures before I got around to seeing this one. I think I have been spoiled by the ones that have come later, mainly the “Abbott and Costello Meet…” movies. This duo has met them all; Frankenstein, The Mummy, Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde, The Invisible Man, etc. etc. etc. I like all the “Meet” Movies, and since they came later, maybe Abbot and Costello had the benefit of learning from experience and perfecting their act, a luxury they did not have when making Hold that Ghost. But I don’t know if this adequately explains why I prefer the “Meet”s to Hold that Ghost. All the movies feature the running gag of Costello being at the butt of the jokes. He witnesses something odd and terrifying and by the time his buddy Abbott arrives at the scene, everything is back to normal, so Abbott accuses his pal of “seeing things”.
In Hold That Ghost this happens several times. Costello hangs his jacket on a coat rack in his bedroom, which activates a lever that transforms the room into a speakeasy’s delight. From out of the walls come the roulette tables, bars and other prohibition era delights. Of course, Costello doesn’t see the transformation; he only sees the new set up. Scared out of his wits, he runs to get Abbott. By the time he shows up, it is a bedroom again, because somehow Costello reset it before running to fetch his friend. Later in the movie, Costello sits with Joan Davis. He sees a candelabra slide across the table. Joan is looking away and misses it. It happens again and again and soon Abbott comes in and scolds his panic-stricken friend.
This happens in Abbot and Costello meet Frankenstein. Costello sees Dracula rise from his coffin. When Abbott comes along, the coffin is empty. Costello runs into the Frankenstein monster. Abbott sees him not! So am I saying that this kind of bit was funny in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein but not Hold That Ghost? I hope I am not saying that, because the gags are virtually the same and Hold That Ghostcame first! Maybe I wanted the house that they inherited to be a little more ghostly and less automated (i.e. the opening of secret passages). Most of the ghosts were men hiding underneath sheets. Yeah, yeah, I get it; this is supposed to be funny. But maybe I wanted more humorous encounters with the supernatural. I…I just don’t know. It’s not a bad film. Maybe it’s even good. Maybe it’s…I don’t know.
Well, since I’m not providing a very thought-provoking review (“Maybe it’s…I don’t know”…yeah, that’s an intelligent analysis for ya!), I’ll fill up some space with little bits of trivia:
Since World War II was right around the corner, films about the military were in demand. Abbot and Costello had already come out with Buck Privates in Jan 1941, and Oh Charile (The original title for Hold That Ghost) was due out next. But, they held it back so that they could follow up with another service orientated comedy – In the Navy. I wonder – was this film renamed Hold That Ghost because the film’s release date was postponed for a few weeks? (The film being “held back”.)
The film has performances by Ted Lewis and his Orchestra and The Andrew Sisters. Kind of awkward for a haunted house movie, but since the Andrew Sisters performed in both of the preceding service films, maybe the producers thought that these singing sisters were going to be a staple for A & C films. Thus they added in the performances after the film was already shot.
I already mentioned that Joan Davis stars in the film. But did you know that Joan Davis is the same Joan in the TV sitcom I Married Joan? What’s that? You’ve never heard of I Married Joan? Let’s move on then.
Shemp Howard stars in this film. Please tell me you know who he is. Please?
Most reviewers praise this film. Who am I to go against the grain? I have included a link to the film. I don’t know how long it will be available, but while it’s there, watch the film and decide for yourself whether this is a good film or not. Hold That Ghost – Abbott and Costello
If you have read any of my other reviews, then it should be obvious that when it comes to film techniques of horror movies, I prefer the old skool, atmospheric style to all the modern flashy pizzazz. I like establishing shots that capture the haunted house and sit long enough on the screen to embed the place into my mind. I like shadows to slowly creep around the corners. I like a patient camera that captures a ghost leisurely trespassing across a room. Sounds and music are for the background and they should set the mood with careful effort.
Before watching this movie, I had a hunch that The Haunting in Connecticutwould have none of the aforementioned style. And I was right – it most certainly did not. I had based my hunch on taglines or reviews that were largely negative.
“35th boo scare in as many minutes,” (Nick Rogers, Suite 101.com)
“A run-of-the-mill spooker that often opts for Dolby jolts and Avid farts over character investment” – (William Goss – Cinematical)
The Haunting in Connecticut is loaded with high-octane scares. Ghosts come and go like annoying flashes of light. Their appearances are usually accompanied by loud, “jolting” sounds. (Good word choice, William Goss!) Through the eyes of the protagonist as he becomes possessed by a spirit, movie viewers see glimpses of haunting scenes from a long time ago. These glimpses flash on the screen back to back as if there was some kind of editing contest that awards the greatest number of shots within a 30 second sequence.
As I already mentioned, I am not a fan of this style of filmmaking. However, from the beginning, fully aware of my bias, I was hoping that underneath this not-so-subtle style, I would find something that I liked about the movie. Underneath the flashes and jolts, will there be some redeeming qualities? I did find things that I liked, but what I found was not enough to redeem the film. In addition, I also found more things I didn’t like as well.
Matthew Campbell is a teenager that ails with cancer. He and his family live in New York, but Matthew is receiving special treatment from a hospital in Connecticut. To avoid the continuous long drives, they rent out a house in Connecticut. The family can’t afford much, and the rent is too cheap to pass up. There’s a reason for the cheap price – the house used to be a funeral home. And some not so groovy stuff happened in this funeral home back in the day.
From day one, Matthew is seeing ghosts. Or is he hallucinating? No one else in his family is experiencing anything unusual. The medication he is taking for his cancer treatment is experimental. Hallucinations are one of the side effects. But there might be something else going on that explains why he is the only family member to experience these hauntings. At the treatment center, Matthew meets a pastor who is also suffering from cancer. He confides in him about what he sees. Reverend Nicholas Popescu understands. He explains to him that only people like them can understand. They are dying and therefore are living “in the valley of the shadow of death”. Those “in the valley” are most susceptible to ghostly encounters.
At this point, I was in. I was on the road toward viewing this movie as more positive than negative. Of course I knew Matthew wasn’t hallucinating. Or may the ghosts were somehow a byproduct of both the medication and his tiptoeing excursions among the shadows of death? I was intrigued and very much drawn into the whole valley of death concept – One foot in the mundane world and the other in the spectral plane. I imagined this experience to be kind of like a person half-asleep and seeing shards of a dream within the wakeful world. Add hallucinations into the mix along with a house that has a haunted history and one has the makings of a good story.
But then the film strays from mystery gets bogged down in formula. Soon the family begins to experience disturbances and this cheapens the plot of Matthew’s lone plight. Matthew and his cousin (or is it his sister? I forget) take it upon themselves to do library research about the house and its previous owners where they sort of have a Harry Potter and Hermione moment. Or are they Nancy Drew and some Hardy boy? Whichever. All I know is that it was lame.
The Haunting in Connecticut is loosely based on a book, In a Dark Place: The Story of a True Haunting (1992) , written by Ray Garton along with “real” paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren. (See my review of The Conjuring, which featured this “dynamic duo or the paranormal” as characters.) However, Garton has claimed that the accounts written in the book are unreliable and anything but true. So what you are getting with this film is a story loosely based on a book, which was loosely based on reality. A lot of “loosely” stuff going on here. Maybe this is the reason that it did not have a tightly themed plot?
The “tome” that is the subject of this review should sit on the shelf above the fireplace. It should lure the eyes of visitors to its spine and provoke them to call out “What is that?” Then its owner can proudly say, “It’s an anthology of haunted house stories. It is The Mammoth Book of Haunted House Stories.”
The best platform for this anthology is the old-fashioned hard cover book (if that option exists.) It is not a book that needs to be read cover to cover. But it should always be on display in the den or reading room, no more than a few steps away from the easy chair. That way, whoever just happens to be sitting there before the lit fireplace with a snifter of Brandy will have this anthology at his/her beck and call.
Grab the book and pick a story, any story that you think is to your liking. Then read and enjoy.
I did none of those things. I bought it through my Kindle app. I read it from beginning to end, forcing myself to complete the stories I didn’t enjoy. Our house is not set up with a “reading room” or den. Mostly I read this from my bed before going to sleep. We have no fireplace and we have no Brandy. But oh how I prefer my original albeit fictitious scenario!
Despite not having the proper environment for this anthology, I enjoyed it much. Okay, so I didn’t like every story. The components of any given anthology will not satisfy the reader 100% of the time. That’s just the way it goes.
Compiled by British author and anthologist Peter Haining (2 April 1940 – 19 November 2007), The Mammoth Book of Haunted Houses is a collection of short stories and novellas from primarily British authors, many of which stem from the gothic tradition. It includes stories by famous authors such as Bram Stoker, Arthur Conan Doyle, H.G. Wells, Virginia Woolf, and Stephen King. Some of the stories are personal favorites of horror legends of film, such as Boris Karloff Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing and Clive Barker.
Haining himself claimed to have lived in a haunted house, so perhaps there was a certain level of personal significance attached to this project. He certainly had a fun and interesting way of introducing each story. Each tale begins with a page that is meant to resemble log entries in a real-estate transaction book, if such a thing exists. These intros look something like this:
Prospectus
Address: The country, city and sometimes neighborhood where the story takes place are mentioned here.
Property: Structural details are taken from the story and summarized here,
Viewing Date: Year the story was published
Agent: Biographical detail of the author. Sometimes this section contains other details such as a mentioning of famous people who admire the story.
The book is divided into seven sections – seven varying categories of haunted house tales.
Each section is comprised of stories that relate to the specified category. The seven categories are:
Haunted Places: Stories Of Fact And Fiction
Avenging Spirits: Tales Of Dangerous Elementals
Shadowy Corners: Accounts Of Restless Spirits
Phantom Lovers: Sex And The Supernatural
Little Terrors: Ghosts And Children
Psychic Phenomena: Signs From The Other Side
Houses Of Horror: Terror Visions Of The Stars
Finally, there is an appendix of full-length haunted house novels alphabetized by the authors’ last name. From Anson, Jay (The Amityville Horror) to Young, Francis Brett (Cold Harbour) with many greats in between, it provides a paragraph synopsis of each list entry.
All in all, there are forty-two stories in this anthology. (To see a complete list of all the stories, go here!) I’ll briefly summarize three that I found to be quite enjoyable.
First is the first. That is, it’s the first story in this collection. Written in 1859 in the gothic tradition, it is a tale about a fellow who has a strong desire to spend a night in a haunted house. He gets his wish and experiences all sorts of phenomena. Walking footprints, furniture and doors moving and opening on their own accord, phantoms of light, dark shadowy substances that invoke a sense of dread, swarming ghostly larvae that the author describes as “…chasing each other, devouring each other” “shapes without symmetry” “movements without order.” The protagonist develops an interesting theory regarding the source of these manifestations.
Here are some interesting bits of trivia concerning that author. Edward Bulwer-Lytton sat in the British parliament and was the Secretary of State for the colonies. He coined the popular quip “The pen is mightier than the sword” and the famous opening line staple, “It was a dark and stormy night.”
I am not familiar with Fay Weldon. According to Wikipedia, she is an “English author, essayist and playwright, whose work has been associated with feminism.” Her work often “portrays contemporary women who find themselves trapped in oppressive situations caused by the patriarchal structure of British society.”
From what I gather, Waldon is not associated with the horror or paranormal genre. However, she has given the genre a rather unique and stylistic contribution with Watching Me, Watching You.
The ghost of this story is not the traditional apparition. It may not even be literal. It is the ghost that haunts all houses. It is the ghost of sorrow, of longing, of regret. And yet, doors open, knickknacks fall from shelves, and presences are felt. The same ghost haunts two different women, one is the ex-wife of a struggling writer, and one is his current wife. The ghost leaps from one woman’s shoulder to the other. Later, the ghost is able to teleport from house to house. Sometimes it remains in a house but goes to sleep for long periods of time. Other times it causes disturbances, only to be expelled from the premises, thrown out of a window inside a sigh. Finally, the ghost learns to travel outside of time, only to reappear at different crossroads of their lives.
Watching Me, Watching You is beautifully written. I recommend it highly.
First published in Cavalier magazine in 1973, it was later part of his King’s collection Nightshift. This is an excellent piece. Its allure is due to King’s greatest skill set – character development. The protagonist, Billings, consults with a psychiatrist and tells him the sad and rather strange tale of how all three of his children were murdered by the Boogeyman. Billings displays all the essentials of a multi-dimensional character. What makes this an even greater feat is that King accomplishes this in such a small amount of space. Billings comes alive with all the shortcomings that come with being a human – prejudices, psychoses, and ignorance. All this is subtly and effectively captured in his mannerisms and speech patterns. Hell, remove the boogeyman and leave this tale as a case study of Billings and it would still be a masterpiece.
The Mammoth Book of Haunted House Stories deserves to be sold in a classic-bound edition. This edition should sit proudly on my shelf among my other hardcovers of classic design, including Dante’s Divine Comedy and H.P. Lovecraft’s The Complete Fiction. But I’m not even sure it exists in hardcover. Sadly the book is not on display in my living room. It hides within my e-reader like a shy ghost that’s too frightened to come out from behind the wall and haunt the house. I have a feeling that the ghosts of these tales will haunt me unless and until I purchase a hard copy. I need to do this. Soon.
The Stanley Hotel in Estes Park, Colorado is known for its haunted history. Freenlan Oscar Stanley and his wife Flora opened this lavish resort hotel in 1909. Stanley wanted a luxurious retreat in this otherwise desolate mountain region. It is still around today. In fact, it is rumored that Mr. and Mrs. Stanley still haunt this hotel. Paranormal investigators visit frequently, testifying that this hotel is indeed a hot spot for paranormal activity.
Does this hotel sound familiar? What if I told you a famous writer stayed at this hotel one night in the 1970s. He was so inspired by the environment that he wrote a novel about it. The novel was about a haunted hotel that was isolated from civilization in the snowy mountains. The writer renamed the hotel. He called it The Overlook Hotel. This writer is Stephen King. This book he wrote is called The Shining.
The Stanley Hotel offers all the luxuries of any high-class hotel and a whole lot more. For instance, it hosts night ghost tours and paranormal investigations. It is also the meeting spot for various ghostly conventions including The Stanley Hotel Writer’s Retreat. Horror writers converge for a long weekend. The 2016 retreat is being held in October. It will offer several packages, some if which include a meet and greet with other authors, editing workshops, tickets to a masquerade ball, and ample writing time. There are different packages at different prices.
I looked into the Stanley Hotel Writer’s Retreat of 2016. It is too expensive for me. The packages do not include travel, room and board. But it got me wondering – what would it be like to attend a writer’s retreat in a humongous “ghostly” manor? I think it would be wonderful. Quaint and inspiring.
Maybe author Scott Nicholson has attended such a retreat. If not, then he has done the next best thing- he was written about one. When reality fails the imagination prevails. Whether or not his story about an artist’s retreat in the seclusion of the mountains is inspired by a real life experience, it is a vivid telling nonetheless. It seems similar to the Stanley retreat in some ways. But in his tale it’s goodbye Colorado and hello North Carolina. Both manors are haunted by the ghost of its founder. Whereas the ghosts of FO and Flora Stanley are harmless apparitions that sometimes play the Steinway piano or watch over the billiards room, the spirit of Ephram Korban is calculating and malevolent and his presence is not always as obvious as the hall-roaming ghost. He hides within the many self-portraits that hang on various walls. He comes into being via the authors that write out ancient spells, the painters that capture his presence on the canvas, and the sculptors that bring his form to life.
Creative Spirit is a story about the coming together of writers, painters, photographers, musicians and sculptors. They are gathering in the picturesque setting of Korban Manor as a means of fostering their creativity in the company of like-minded individuals. Unbeknownst to them, there is more to this gathering. The spirit if Ephram Korban thrives on creativity. He siphons the “creative spirit” of others in the hopes that he may live again. He is assisted in his goals by some of the Manor’s staff. Some of them are ghosts. Others have outlived the average life expectancy, kept alive by the powers that lay within the Manor- the powers of Korban himself. Together they will all participate in the ceremony that welcomes in the Blue Moon of October. Hmm, now don’t you get the feeling something else will be welcomed in as well?
This is a chilling ghost story with insightful metaphors and colorful description. This description pays of well in the telling of the season. Autumn – a ghost lover’s favorite season! From the crackling of the fires to the layout of the land (“Nature’s greatest sculptor – Time”), Nicholson settles the readers in as if they were the guests of this retreat. Nicholson even fires up the often-neglected sense of smell as he describes the autumn aromas. All this in an environment where ghosts haunt the fields and outlying forests, where witches dwell in nearby shacks. How can a lover of ghost stories ask for anything more?
It is a dream of mine to attend a writer’s retreat at a spooky old mansion. If such a dream is never fulfilled, that’s okay. I attended the artist’s retreat at Korban Manor vicariously and it was a fulfilling experience. Best of all, I made it out alive. Not all of the guests can say that!
When I heard that the writer and director of Pan’s Labyrinth was writing and directing a haunted house movie, I got excited. I looked forward to seeing the latest film from visionary Guillermo Del Toro. I couldn’t wait to see “his” ghosts; freed from his imagination and set loose on the big screen. To these ends, my wishes came true on Tuesday night, Oct 27. My visual appetite was satisfied, as was any desire I had concerning flair. It was a stylish film indeed. But alas, something was missing.
film transported me out of the theater and into a different time period without any turbulence. It was nice to see a shout out to those glorious horror films of yore.
mysterious sister will go back England, but not until Thomas woos away Carter’s daughter Edith. Carter does not trust Thomas. He says that there is something unlikable about him but he can’t explain what it is. But at least Thomas is friendly and charming, unlike his sister who is cold and expressionless. Thomas marries Edith and the three return to England to live in the spooky old mansion on top of Crimson Peak.
The “tome” that is the subject of this review should sit on the shelf above the fireplace. It should lure the eyes of visitors to its spine and provoke them to call out “What is that?” Then its owner can proudly say, “It’s an anthology of haunted house stories. It is The Mammoth Book of Haunted House Stories.”
The Books of Daniel 