Share chazzmom2003's profile
chazzmom2003
chazzmom2003's stats
- Review count1
- Helpfulness votes0
- First reviewFebruary 7, 2012
- Last reviewFebruary 7, 2012
- Featured reviews0
- Average rating5
chazzmom2003's Reviews
Overall rating
5
/
5
A proper scare!
PostedFebruary 7, 2012
chazzmom2003
from Minneapolis, MN
I had to go alone. I took my Delta airline blanket - just in case. I had read the book and, of course, there are certain plot lines that are completely different than the book. I don't think it took away from the story and in some ways they actually made the characters more sympathetic. It's always hard to watch a thriller when you care about the characters.
The actors were, I thought, believable in their roles. They played fear and downright terror without going too far. One line at the top of the film bothered me, when Arthur Kipps looks at his son and tells him he looks so much like his mother. Seemed trite and unnecessary. Radcliffe has a very distinctive look and this beautiful child has red hair (and really does look like his mother, who was the director of the production of Equus Radcliffe starred in a few years back). It seemed superfluous since the little boy really looks nothing like Radcliffe.
The tension was perfection, I thought I knew when I'd see the ghost and then when I didn't, I'd loosen up and BAM! there she was! That was fun!
I loved the film. I had fun having the bejeezus scared out of me. The ending was a bit of a surprize and I'm not sure how I felt about it since it was so different from the book, but I'll let you come to your own conclusions about it. I'd be interested in reading the script for the stage play that was made of this to see how they compare.
Also, and this wasn't really addressed in the novel, either, I wonder how old the woman (whose paperwork Kipps is sent to go through) was when she died. Seems to me, with a ghost in my house that was so angry with me, I'd tip the eff outta there. How long did she survive in that house? Just a thought.
The story of these tormented people is the reason to see this film. There's not a lot of gore (which I prefer) and lots of psycho tension (which is always scarier).
The actors were, I thought, believable in their roles. They played fear and downright terror without going too far. One line at the top of the film bothered me, when Arthur Kipps looks at his son and tells him he looks so much like his mother. Seemed trite and unnecessary. Radcliffe has a very distinctive look and this beautiful child has red hair (and really does look like his mother, who was the director of the production of Equus Radcliffe starred in a few years back). It seemed superfluous since the little boy really looks nothing like Radcliffe.
The tension was perfection, I thought I knew when I'd see the ghost and then when I didn't, I'd loosen up and BAM! there she was! That was fun!
I loved the film. I had fun having the bejeezus scared out of me. The ending was a bit of a surprize and I'm not sure how I felt about it since it was so different from the book, but I'll let you come to your own conclusions about it. I'd be interested in reading the script for the stage play that was made of this to see how they compare.
Also, and this wasn't really addressed in the novel, either, I wonder how old the woman (whose paperwork Kipps is sent to go through) was when she died. Seems to me, with a ghost in my house that was so angry with me, I'd tip the eff outta there. How long did she survive in that house? Just a thought.
The story of these tormented people is the reason to see this film. There's not a lot of gore (which I prefer) and lots of psycho tension (which is always scarier).
Yes, I recommend this movie.
Share:
0points
0of 0voted this as helpful.