Silent House
But then came the ending. Oh Lord, the ending. If this had been a simple "woman in distress" thriller, the filmmakers would have had something. But, oh no. They have to turn the tables on us, and throw in a twist in the last 10 minutes that turns everything on its head, and sends the movie spiraling down a path from which it never recovers. I am so sick of twists. Why can't thrillers just, you know, thrill? Why can't we just have a simple, well executed movie about a teenage girl trapped in a house with some dangerous people, which Silent House wants us to think it is until the final few minutes? Why does every thriller try to be more than what it initially is? When a twist ending is successful, we're surprised, and look back on everything we've watched differently. When it is not successful, we feel cheated. I haven't felt this cheated by an ending in a very long time.
The movie is a remake of a film from Uruguay, unseen by me. Elizabeth Olsen plays Sarah, a teenage girl who is helping her father, John (Adam Trese), and her uncle, Peter (Eric Sheffer Stevens), repair their dilapidated and boarded up old home with the intents to sell it once the work is finished. The old house serves its purpose well for a horror movie. Not only are all the windows and doors boarded and locked, but there's no electricity (meaning the characters have to wander down dark corridors with lanterns), and cell phone service is poor. Uncle Peter leaves the house after an off-camera argument with Sarah's father, and now Sarah and John are in the house alone. That's when Sarah starts hearing strange sounds coming from upstairs within the house. A brief investigation reveals nothing, but when Sarah is left alone in her room, she suddenly hears a loud thud from outside her room. When she calls out for her dad, there is no answer. He seems to have disappeared without a trace, although blood can be seen on the floor in one part of the house, and there seems to be someone ominous lurking about the house, just out of frame and out of Sarah's line of sight.
We literally follow Sarah every step of the way as she tries to uncover what happened to her father, and who is in the house with her. Directors Chris Kentis and Laura Lau (Open Water) shoot the entire film with a handheld camera, following the action as it unfolds. There are (seemingly) no edits, giving the illusion that the events up on the screen are occurring in real time. It's an interesting gimmick, though the sometimes shaky camera work will likely send those with weaker stomachs running to the bathroom. But in a way, this also helps with the tension for most of the film's running time. For the most part, we are seeing only what Sarah sees. Sometimes, we catch a fleeting glimpse of the intruder (or intruders) stalking about the dark hallways of the house. It also helps put the audience in the shoes of its heroine, since we are never really aware of something that she is not.
I liked the tension that Silent House is able to raise. We know that someone is in the house, but we never quite get a good look. The way the movie created tension, as well as its simple yet effective atmosphere, reminded me a lot of the early works of John Carpenter or Wes Craven. Throw in the strong lead performance by Elizabeth Olsen, and I was ready to embrace this movie. I think that's why the ending ticked me off so much. Here was a movie that was working perfectly well, and they just had to throw in something to say "Things are not what they seem". This story doesn't deserve the ending we get. It deserves a tight, suspenseful climax where young Sarah has to fight for her life. Instead, we get some random weirdness that made my heart sink. Surely they weren't going to throw away everything that had worked up to then. And then, my fears were realized. This movie does indeed throw away everything, just so it could fool us.
Find related merchandise on Amazon.com!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home