House at the end of the street Review

I have come to learn what was once described a "Horror" genre is now a word that is well and truly deceased. We think Horror and reminisce on classics such as A Nightmare on Elm Street, The Thing and many others I am sure to think of once I sign off! Suspense thriller is now a descriptive genre that has been around for a while, but I still find myself phrasing horror. The fact the majority of poor Suspenseful horrors have torched us over the years, I think I am finally ready let go of a genre that will always be remembered for its recognition through-out the 70's and 80's.

In terms of the review ahead, let's start off by referencing the quotes in the image above; The following movie is NOT deeply scary with a twist that is far from awesome but is in fact decent, a word equivalent to acceptable where I come from.

 What seems an ideal family dream home, Elissa (Jennifer Lawrence) is the first to find conspicuous events surrounding the landscape of their new home and the rural town within. Her mother Sarah (Elisabeth Shue) is desperate to remain optimistic and sees the move a fresh start from a troubled past we know little about.

Elissa is more than a little helpful after learning a murder had occurred in their new home, leading to flirty chats between herself and ideal genre heartthrob Ryan (Max Thieriot), the son and last remaining member of the murdered family. The long time suspect is Ryan's younger sister who, since the killing has never been seen. While a myth of the demented sister lurking the backyard of the woods, we see Ryan is holding her on basement arrest to savour himself of any further troubles.

With the plot praying on a routine escape from the enslaved sister, most of the movie focuses on a developing relationship between Elissa and Ryan, despite the despicable weight from the locals. Just like your basic romance concept, the mother isn't happy for obvious reasons, Elissa wants to be with him so there is nothing anyone can do. The film gets to the point where you forget there is a girl being starved in Ryan's basement. The movies backbone is depending on the occasional fright from the sister while trying to balance a chemistry of love that blends together like Tabasco and tea!

There is a twist that you feel quite privileged to have witnessed first off, but give it time. You ever find leaving a movie and thinking "yeah, somewhere in the back of my mind I enjoyed parts of the flick", but the more you think about it, clever twist or not, the majority of the film was rubbish. There is more suspense slash horror in the Gremlins, honestly.

Note; The House at the end of the street is indeed at the end of a drive-way surrounded by a concept of creepy woods. You won't find a street associated with any house in this film.

So with an old school introduction that was quite pleasing in terms of scary, it quickly changed course trying to develop something completely different to what the trailer had revealed. A twist at the end does not make up for the first 95 minutes.

Overall; A typically mundane attempt at a tiring genre. Just another cheap concept that although supplied an okay twist, the overall suspense and characters involved where downright careless. Wait for Sinister!

The Thing Review 2011

The Thing. Not John Carpenters cult classic, but an apparent prequel to the original. Let's face it, last year when myself, as well as most heard of a new release of the Thing? automatically I thought, okay, another horror remake. Horror remakes, or any remake if you like have an awful habit of staying a float in the sink for a good hour or so before quickly releasing the plug as we watch, happily, as it flows down the drain! It surprised me a couple of days ago before seeing the movie that they had set it out to be a prequel to the first. That was the reason I decided to push myself into seeing it without having to judge it based on John Carpenter's version.

So here we go. Kate Llode (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) is a graduate student who some how finds herself tagging along side a Dr Sander Halvorson, who's played by Ulrich Thomsen. The two, also accompanied by a group of scientists and pilots are held together at an Antarctica Research facility (a couple a miles from the 1982 base might I add).

It becomes clear that Dr Sanders is after something not yet known to the rest of the crew. The movie eventually lifts off after they discover the alien life form frozen in one giant ice cube! The find quickly lights up the eyes of Sanders as he sees this as a great discovery that could possible get his name down in history. Himself and the scientist pitch an idea of moving the alien from outside into a Lab inside were they can run some tests and try discover what exactly they are dealing with.

Kate, who seems paranoid over the idea of running tests on the alien creature quickly makes it known to Sanders about her feelings and safety. We get introduced to Carter (Joel Edgerton) who is a pilot for the facility. Kate turns to Carter after failing to talk to Sanders out of his plans. According to Dr Sanders, they have made the discovery of a life time as he fails to understand why Kate is blind to that.

A good half hour into the movie was all it took for the Thing to be left alone. The crew had left it out back, still in the ice cube. I am guessing to let the ice melt? Then Boom! the Thing is released and goes on a rampage. The idea of it's agility to kill and transform by embracing human cells is quality. It was nice to see it keep the same isolated scene...kind of like in Alien? Were in space it said no one can here you scream? yeah, kind of along the lines of that. But not as amazing...obviously. The idea of any group of people being picked off one by one by anything always makes for an entertaining movie.

The CGI in the Thing, was in fact horrific. There was one part, without saying, that was pretty decent, but the rest was hideous. In modern day effects in movies, especially one that's supposed to involve a gruesome looking alien? they should have done miles better with the look of the Thing. I did not want to rub off the original too much, although I might have had already, but the director labelled it a prequel? A lot of what you see in this is exactly what you will find in the 1982 version.

As for characters, there is no one in this movie that you grow to like, or even dislike. They are all quite anonymous. Joel Edgerton, who is clearly supposed to be the equivalent to Kurt Russel's character just never takes off. It is fair to say Joel is the best actor in the movie, but in fairness most of the characters never got a look in. My point is there was never a character in the movie you find yourself rooting for. Maybe the Thing? but that's it.

Overall the movie stuck to some important spectacles of the original. The chilling base isolated in the middle of the Antarctica definitely succeeded in adding horror to the movie. I was delighted to still hear the creepy tune that plays through-out the movie. There were scenes I did find myself jumping to, to be honest. The cinema can do that to you sometimes!

So fans of the 1982 classic might find this movie hard to avoid. I would advise them to see it to judge themselves. The Thing is also for any horror fans just looking for a good scare mixed with the entertainment of watching humans get splattered! This was in no way a bad movie, but unfortunately fails to be anything other than mediocre.

I believe, if this was meant as a prequel? it should have been giving a title, with a title. So instead it is just the Thing? just like, the Thing in 1982. But hey, don't be fooled...apparently it isn't a remake.

A horror movie that is worth a watch, but don't expect to remember it after your next movie of choice.