Filipe Neto I'm getting convinced that horror cinema has been so exploited that it's getting more difficult to do something new or original. This movie reinforces that thought a little bit because it doesn't bring anything new but still works well enough. The screenplay is based on another case of haunting studied by Ed and Lorraine Warren, as well as other films like "Conjuring" or "Amityville Horror". But as in these films, this script has little reality and immense imagination for dramatic effects (well... truth about the actual case portrayed in this film is still controversial today). Despite this and the abundant use of clichés that we are tired of seeing in other films, it works, causing some scares and, above all, a pleasant feeling of discomfort and tension. The script is easy to describe: in order to be closer to the hospital where their child is treating cancer, a family moves to a new home in Connecticut. However, the house they decide to rent was used in the past as a funeral parlor, and there were also spiritist sessions and black magic.The family drama is very well introduced at the beginning of the film and is being developed in conjunction with the beginning of the strange events in the house, so we never get the feeling that everything was just a pretext to introduce a friendly family in a diabolical house ready to kill them all. In the middle of the movie we feel like we are very close to the end ... and that would probably be true if this movie were like many others, where the whole story is just a pretext for a mind-boggling journey of predictable scares in a weird house. It's not like this here... when we think it's all over, things really start to get interesting. The end of the movie makes use of a plot twist but it's not really shocking or unpredictable. Concerning the actors, I have to say that I hardly know them... Kyle Gallner is a good actor and shows talent, although he is still very young. Elias Koteas was also quite competent.

thelastblogontheleft It's got a basic premise that many of us could describe in our sleep. Family with a sick kid is forced to relocate and ends up renting a haunted house that used to be a funeral home. Turns out the people who worked at said funeral home did some really messed up things (necromancy, etc) and there's now a bunch of spirits attached to the house (on purpose) and chaos ensues. Sick kid has visions and sightings of said spirits that are chalked up to his cancer treatments initially but then all hell breaks loose.I have to say, when this movie started up I had high hopes. As repetitive and unoriginal as they can be, I tend to really like haunted house movies. And as bland and unemotional as the mother, Sara (played by Virginia Madsen) was, the son, Matt (played by Kyle Gallner) was actually pretty great. Beyond that… I don't have many good things to say about it.It's supposedly loosely based on a true story, a haunting that Ed and Lorraine Warren investigated at the home of Allen and Carmen Snedeker and their four children. There have been several people who have tried to discredit this story, so who knows if it's true or not. Plus the movie tended to take quite a few liberties so it's not all that accurate either.I thought that the special effects were super cheesy — every vision of carved up people just made me giggle. Most of Matt's "nightmares" were predictable. The parents' grief over his cancer was SO forced and stereotypical it hurt — there is literally a scene where the mom is clutching a rosary while screaming "YOU CAN'T TAKE MY SON!" and the dad is swigging vodka and smashing an electric guitar against an amp. The ectoplasm scene I think COULD have been cool but the overdone effects just made it comical.An unfortunate miss, since I think something more interesting could have been done with the plot.

Leofwine_draca THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT, a spook-house show crafted to crash in on the ever-present public appetite for ghost stories, single-handedly manages to cram in each and every haunted house cliché ever filmed and put it into just one movie. The storyline mixes slow-building suspense with dark and dank cellars, restless spirits, spooky seances, plenty of ectoplasm, possession, and everything else besides.Sadly, despite the 'true story' tag, none of this ever rings true. Instead it comes across as a bland and soulless piece of money-making, a film in which the enjoyment factor is sucked dry from the outset. With major characters suffering from cancer and the rest suffering from a 'lack of personality' crisis, there's absolutely nothing to enjoy here and nothing we haven't seen before.The narrative is so laboured and mundane that merely recounting it is a bore, while the whole haunted house genre has been handled much better more recently with the likes of MAMA and THE CONJURING (not great movies, either of them, but a darn sight better than this). A strangely wooden Virginia Madsen gives the dullest performance of her career, and even the reliable Elias Koteas can't improve things. Give it a miss.

mrmikey-112-132120 Virginia Madsen truly shines in this genuine creepy entry based "on the true story." Madsen's performance really works, as do the performances of Kyle Gallner as the cancer-stricken "hero" of the piece, and Elias Koteas adds another great performance in support as a fellow cancer patient and priest who shares some very interesting views on the hereafter that are actually pretty cool.The flick also features a solid script that doesn't go for cheap scares, instead, director Peter Cornwell relentlessly builds the suspense and tension, and ratchets up the scares and creeps quite effectively. Really enjoyable after all that brutal slasher stuff that's been bandied about lately, a refreshing change, and again, genuinely creepy.The only spoiler I'll add is this: the ending will truly surprise you. It did me, and truthfully, it's a very pleasing ending to the piece, so bravo all involved!