Alien Abduction (C+)

"Fear the lights." No, seriously.

Brown Mountain, North Carolina is a wonderful place to go camping. Given its isolation, it's also a pretty cool spot to build your very own Unabomber cabin. The down side is that it's popularity is linked to a phenomenon known as the "Brown Mountain Lights," which occasionally appear at night and are classified as UFOs. Local legend says that when the lights show up, people disappear.

Following Alien Abduction's introduction, which is a pastiche of "found" video footage, news stories, and interviews, the film begins to document the Morris family's camping trip to--you guessed it--Brown Mountain. The film is created by an autistic boy, Riley (Riley Polanski), who seems to use the camera as a way to connect with and interpret the world around him. I've heard of similar cases, so I had no reservations about the film's reasoning on this subject.

The rest of the family include's Riley's mom Katie (Katherine Sigismund), his dad Peter (Peter Holden), his older brother Corey (Corey Eid), and his older sister Jillian (Jillian Clare). They set out for Brown Mountain in high spirits with Peter's trusty GPS to guide them. They make camp, do some hiking, and sit around the campfire. It's pretty idyllic, and the kids don't even squabble appreciably.

That night in the kids' tent, Riley is unable to sleep. He attempts to awaken Corey who tells him to close his eyes. The boy hears or sees something that causes him to leave the tent, and Corey and Jillian follow. In the distance, they see some funky lights doing some really funky things, and Riley and Corey make sure to get it all on film. The next day, they tell Peter and Katie about the lights they saw. If it had been me, I would've awakened my parents at once, or at least shown them the video. Peter seems somewhat skeptical, but everyone shrugs it off.

The family leaves their campsite and continues on to the next one. In the process, Peter's GPS sends them in an odd direction. Given that he trusts the GPS implicitly, he doesn't question where it's sending him. Time passes and the windy road and the prospect of being lost begin to take their toll on Peter, who gets pretty cranky as a result. To make matters worse, he's low on gas. Rather than turn around and go back the way they came, he continues on in the hopes he can find a gas station. Tempers flare after a crow hits the car, but everyone makes up and they continue on.

"Hey! We're lost! Can we use your intergalactic communicator?"

The family gets nowhere fast, passing a mailbox and, eventually, a mural/cross on the side of the road. A few moments later they find themselves at the mouth of a tunnel through the mountain. This wouldn't be such a big deal if the tunnel wasn't blocked up with many, many cars, their doors open, hazard lights on, and their contents strewn all over the place. Even more bizarre is that there are no people around. While the girls see to the call of nature in the bushes somewhere, the boys walk into the tunnel to look for signs of life... and boy, do they find them.

From this point forward, the movie turns into a frenetic cat and mouse game between the family (or what remains of it) and the alien antagonists. Riley continues to film as they return to the mailbox they saw earlier and follow a makeshift driveway to a cabin. They're greeted by Sean (Jeff Bowser), a reclusive fellow whose three favorite things are his guns, his dog, and his privacy. Though initially hostile, Sean reluctantly lets the family take shelter with him. Of course, no one is safe, and the movie rolls on to its conclusion.

That's a lot more than four and twenty blackbirds. Pie, anyone?

Overall, I liked Alien Abduction. The actors are all pretty good, though Riley is a bit wooden (this might be attributable to his autism). When the family is together they seem to genuinely care about one another, and their interactions don't feel out of character. Even Sean, the reclusive redneck, is well-placed and well-acted. The only thing I had an "Oh, come on now... really?" reaction to was when Peter announces that the family is low on gas and continues to press on regardless. Who in their right mind goes camping with their family and doesn't make sure the gas tank is full?

For a found-footage film, the special effects are adequate. The aliens look good at a distance and in silhouette, but the brief close-ups we get of them are plastic and rubbery. There's one or two relatively disturbing effects, but these take place late in the film and aren't overwhelming (meaning, they're subtle and unexpected when they do occur). The cinematography is fine, and is occasionally layered with effects that suggest interference of some kind. This acts as a sort of hint that something bad's about to happen.

Plot-wise, Alien Abduction doesn't break any new ground, but it does tell a decent story and the characters' reactions to their predicaments aren't unrealistic. There isn't much that hasn't been done in the found footage horror genre these days, so I can forgive certain cliches and stereotypes as long as they're done well. There's the standard "running away" footage and scary encounter footage that you'd expect, but the motion-sickness inducing shakiness isn't too bad.

"Beam me up, E.T.!"

In a nutshell, Alien Abduction is worth watching if you enjoy found footage horror flicks. It's scary at times, creepy at others, and shocking once or twice. Still, there are a few stretches of in-between time where the characters are allowed to display who they are, but this isn't anything new. In other films with less well-developed characters, this is definitely more of an issue. With Alien Abduction, I feel that it works pretty well, and there's always another crisis just around the bend.

Patrick: Evil Awakens (D+)

Everyone should have a living will. Srsly.

The fact that Charles Dance was performing in Patrick: Evil Awakens was the prime reason I decided to take a gamble on the film. If you're familiar with Dance, you'll know he plays Tywin Lannister on Game of Thrones. He's been in some of my other favorites, such as the much-maligned Alien 3 and Last Action Hero (one of my very guilty pleasures). The guy's a great character actor, and his performance in Patrick: Evil Awakens is no less genuine than any other movie I've seen him in.

With all that out of the way, I have to admit that Patrick: Evil Awakens had me scratching my head. Did it want to be campy? Did it want to be serious? Was that thick layer of cheese intentional, or was it put there on accident by a production crew that didn't really know what they wanted to do? To his benefit, Dance plays the part of Doctor Roget completely straight, with no attempts at camp. As for the cheese, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and assume it must have been intended.

The plot of Patrick: Evil Awakens revolves around Kathy Jacquard (Sharni Vinson), a nurse with a struggling marriage who applies for a job at a small psychiatric clinic that specializes in caring for brain dead patients. The physician who runs the facility, Doctor Roget (Dance), is supposedly performing cutting edge research to restore brain function in his patients. The other two employees are Matron Cassidy (Rachel Griffiths), who takes care of administrative duties and keeps the nurses in line, and the spunky Nurse Williams (Peta Sergeant), who befriends Kathy and shows her around town.

Doctor Roget's prize patient is the titular character, Patrick (Jackson Gallagher). Patrick's origins are a mystery to Kathy, though you can tell there's something going on behind the scenes between Patrick, Roget, and Matron Cassidy. Kathy, who's expected to assist Roget when he "treats" Patrick, becomes appalled at the methods the good doctor employs. She goes along with it until she finds she is able to communicate with Patrick, at first through a simple "once for 'no,' twice for 'yes'" system. Later, their method of conversing becomes somewhat more sophisticated... but you'll have to watch the movie to learn the details.

Kathy shares a moment (one of many) with Patrick.

Needless to say, Patrick is a lot more than he seems to be. As he grows more attached to Kathy, bad things begin to happen to anyone who is close to her. Matters get worse as time goes by, and Kathy is torn between her desire to leave her job or stay in an attempt to make sure Patrick is no longer subjected to Dr. Roget's experiments. The film is resolved in the occasionally tense climax, though the film's ending suggests that things aren't as clean cut as you might have been led to believe.

Overall, I wanted to like the movie. I nearly shut it off after the opening scene, as the cheese factor was somewhat elevated and I suspected the rest of the movie would be much the same. My thoughts turned to Charles Dance, however, and once he appeared on screen I decided to stick with it and give it a chance.

Perhaps my biggest complaint about the movie, outside of the cheese factor, was the score. The accompanying music was so loud, so overwrought, and so shrill at times, it made me cringe. There was nothing subtle about it. It was as if even the least-creepy revelations, when partnered with this cacophonous music, were supposed to scare me out of my wits. Not so, as annoyance trumps fright pretty much every single time.

Don't let Matron Cassidy catch you slacking off.

About the cheese I keep mentioning: It's there in droves. The thing is, Patrick: Evil Awakens isn't constantly cheesy or campy. Instead, it picks times to be cheesy that almost always feel inappropriate given the context. For instance, there's a part involving an individual and an elevator shaft, and it's a pretty tense moment. And then, WHAM! It's like someone's suddenly doused the movie with the contents of a fondue pot. I found myself laughing at some of this stuff, but not in a good way.

Despite the movie's flaws, the cast did a really good job. Dance plays an excellent villain, and I particularly enjoyed Peta Sergeant as the promiscuous Nurse Williams and Griffiths as Matron Cassidy. Most of the supporting cast is pretty good, too. There were some cringe-worthy moments, though, including one or two Vader "Nooooooooo!"'s. Those sorts of things always feel somewhat artificial to me, depending on how they're done.

As for effects, there's a good bit of practical gore mixed with some very obvious CGI set pieces. The quality of these effects is fine, but many of them are really over the top which only adds to the cheese factor.

Was it scary? Sort of, I guess. There are some creepy moments, and the setting--a hospital for brain dead patients who just sort of lie there and occasionally do things--contributes to these occasionally eerie sequences. The frights are often offset by camp, though, which (in my case) lessens the immersion for me, bringing me out of the movie and into the realm of, "Did that really happen?"

Better to pull the plug than wind up in Doctor Roget's clinic.

I'm conflicted about this one, make no mistakes about it. My gut wants to be brutal with my final rating, but my brain wants to give some credit for the things that Patrick: Evil Awakens got right. At the end of the day, I think I need to go with my gut on this one. Other viewers are certain to have different opinions, and that's totally fine. If cheesy horror is your cup of tea, you'll probably like Patrick: Evil Awakens. If you really like horrible horror scores, then this movie is pretty much solid gold. If you're interested in a more or less consistent fright film, though, you're probably better off watching something else.

Note: Patrick: Evil Awakens is a remake of another Australian film from 1978, Patrick (with no colon). The plot seems similar enough, but I wonder if the original is any better than the remake. It seems that remakes aren't just for American movie-makers these days.

Stevie (C)

Admit it. Imaginary friends are creepy.

Stevie is a movie I've passed over on NetFlix a number of times. I went into it expecting nothing and I came out having mostly enjoyed myself. Only now do I know that it was made for television, but I don't really mind. That's not exactly a negative in my opinion. It's a supernatural horror film with a decent atmosphere and a good cast. Though it does suffer from a couple of tired tropes (see below), and I saw the twist coming a mile away, I still liked it.

Claire (Catherine McCormack) and Adrian (Jordi Molla) are a childless married couple living in Spain--at least, I think so. They met in Los Angeles at a time when Claire's architectural career was really taking off, but something happened that caused them to move to what I can only assume is Adrian's birthplace given the nearby presence of his mother and sister, as well as all the Spanish accents. Adrian's mother has recently lost her husband, and she seems to be something of a bitter woman who clashes with Claire whenever they're in the same room together.

Though it's never really spelled out, one gets the impression that Claire can't have children, so she and Adrian decide to adopt an eight year-old girl, Isabel (Ida Jorgensen), through a social worker. Adrian's mother proves to be appalled by this decision, but her son remains steadfast in he and Claire's decision. Isabel proves to be a sweet child who has spent some time in an orphanage following the deaths of her parents. She takes to her new guardians well at first, but as the movie progresses, things begin to turn sour.

Supportive husband or bloodthirsty bounty hunter?

Isabel claims that a fourth person is living in the house with them, someone named Stevie. Adrian and Claire assume that Stevie is Isabel's imaginary friend and think nothing more of it. That is, until Claire begins to experience strange happenings that Isabel attributes to Stevie.

Adrian, who is now busy growing his own career, tries to be supportive, but he's torn between work and his family. He begins to suspect Claire is having mental problems, feeding off of Isabel's childish delusions (this is one of the tropes I spoke of earlier).

The mystery continues to unravel through a series of flashbacks to the couple's time in Los Angeles. Each flashback starts out in black and white and slowly transitions into full color, which makes them easy to spot once you get used to them. I won't give the details away, but suffice it to say the pieces begin to fall together fairly early, and observant viewers should be able to pick up on the subtext pretty early on. I think the climax could have been better, but it serves its purpose well enough.

The cast of Stevie is good, and they handle their roles well. Ida Jorgensen is young, and this appears to be her first (and last) role. Though she does well enough most of the time, her inexperience is occasionally apparent. If you can get past that, you won't have much trouble with the rest of the film.

"I'll put the girl's head in this box! Oh... wrong movie."

I enjoyed Jordi Molla's acting (you may recognize him as Santana in the third Riddick movie), especially considering he's playing a loving husband as opposed to a space merc scumbag. Talk about night and day.

At the end of the day, I don't regret watching Stevie. As I said, it does get pretty creepy at times, though it might have been better with a little more supernatural weirdness sprinkled in. It's an average film, and though I called the twist early on, it's a twist I've never seen done before in other movies. If you're hungry for another ghost flick, you might enjoy it so long as you keep your expectations in check.

The Last Days on Mars (B-)

"The search for life is about to end."

The Last Days on Mars is one of those rare movies that I might consider purchasing on Blu-ray. Though it seems that plenty of people have a lot of bad things to say about the film, I, for one, was pleasantly surprised by it. It may not be the most original movie ever produced, but it was competently filmed, the special effects were good, and the cast--at least in my opinion--was excellent. Of course, this sort of thing tends to happen when I go into a movie blind with nothing in the way of expectations, so... there's that.

A manned mission to Mars is nearing the end of its six months on the red planet with very little to show for it. The film begins with two astronauts, Vincent Campbell (Liev Schreiber) and Rebecca Lane (Romola Garai), picking up a third, Kim Aldrich (Olivia Williams), at her research site. Kim's lack of discovery enhances her normally acerbic demeanor, and she reluctantly returns to base with her two comrades. No one seems to like her very much, which isn't surprising given her bad attitude.

After the three return to base, Marko Petrovic (Goran Kostic) convinces the mission's leader, Charles Brunel (Elias Koteas), to allow him to return to his own research site to fix a damaged sensor. Brunel reluctantly agrees and sends Richard Harrington (Tom Cullen) along with him. This angers Kim, as she was forced to leave her research behind and return to base. She accesses Marko's terminal despite the protests of Lauren Dalby (Yusra Warsama) and discovers the real reason he was so hot to get back to his site.

"Marko did what? Man, that guy is such a jerk."

It is revealed that Marko has discovered some kind of bacteria, and despite his story about the sensors, was secretly returning to get a sample. By the time Brunel calls Marko and Harrington to put the kibosh on things, the sample is already being collected. Even as he holds the sample aloft in victory, the ground beneath Marko gives way and he falls into a pit, presumably dying in the process. Brunel and Dalby show up to help Harrington, but without the proper gear they're unable to climb down into the pit to retrieve the body.

Brunel leaves Dalby to watch over the site while he and Harrington return to base. By the time he returns to the site with Campbell, Lane, and the mission psychologist, Robert Irwin (Johnny Harris), in tow, there is no sign of either Dalby or Marko to be found. Though Campbell is lowered into the pit, all he finds is a strange, fungus-like mass growing at the bottom.

If this synopsis seems overly granular so far, I agree with you--there are a lot of characters to keep track of in a short amount of time. Once Campbell explores the pit, though, all hell breaks loose back at base, as Marko and Dalby have returned on foot. The two have been infected by the Martian bacteria, and it's turned them both into extremely violent space zombies.

"Pack your bags. We're leaving soon unless zombies attack."

From this point on, The Last Days on Mars is more or less a traditional zombie flick, albeit set on Mars. Stark differences from the norm are that environmental issues are definitely a factor, and there seem to be no weapons of any consequence available to the astronauts. The survivors try to stave off the zombies repeatedly without much success. As for the zombies, they're intelligent and apparently capable of using their hosts' memories and knowledge to overcome their intended prey. They're also very durable, fast, and nothing seems to slow them down (though they are all somewhat unsteady on their feet).

The movie careens towards its conclusion, with the ultimate finish being left up to the viewer's imagination--thought not in a bad way. There should be enough closure here to satisfy most people. I could see it going either way, honestly.

The Last Days on Mars's budget was apparently very low at 7 million pounds (approximately $11.8 million), but it wasn't obvious to me. The sets, props, and effects were well-done, in my opinion. I felt it was more entertaining than Europa Report (which I haven't reviewed yet). Liev Schreiber impressed me with his characterization of Campbell. He doesn't play a superman, but rather an ordinary guy with genuine flaws and emotions. I've always been a fan of Elias Koteas, and I really enjoyed Olivia Williams' performance (and I would've liked to have seen more of her on screen).

Dalby, post-infection. She just wants to be friends.

Though we don't get much chance to get to know some of the other cast members, most of them felt like real people to me. The exceptions here are Marko, who comes off as a rather shallow and egotistical jerk, and Dalby, who doesn't really get much screen time before she's transformed into a bloodthirsty space critter. Despite this, I think that first-time director Ruairi Robinson does a lot with very little at his disposal.

So the credits have rolled and The Last Days on Mars is behind me. Was it a completely original story? No, of course not. Did I like it anyway? Yes, I did. It's currently available on NetFlix, and at just 98 minutes long, you have very little to lose by giving it a chance... unless you're not a fan of zombie flicks. And in the end, no matter what you think, you can be thankful it isn't Apollo 18.

Sinister (B)

"Once you see him, nothing can save you."

My friend Paul and I were talking about horror films the other day, and he endorsed Sinister. I hadn't seen it when it made its theatrical run, but the premise was interesting. After my friend's praise, I decided I'd rent it through Amazon and see what the fuss was about. While I wasn't blown away by Sinister, it's certainly entertaining, creepy, and well-acted.

Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) is a has-been true crime author. After the amazing success of his first book, Kentucky Blood, his star has dimmed. His next two books flopped, with one of them contributing somehow to a killer going free. He's determined to write his next masterpiece so that he can reap the rewards that come with another runaway success--fame and fortune. Especially fortune.

The film opens with a snippet from a home movie on super 8. Four people, bound and hooded, are slowly killed as they hang in a tree. As the rough footage ends, Ellison's story begins. He and his family have moved to a house in Pennsylvania and are unloading the moving truck. Though Ellison is mum on the topic to his wife, Tracy (Juliet Rylance), we learn that the house they're moving into is the same house where the murders took place. In total, four family members were killed, with the fifth--a little girl named Stephanie--missing and presumed dead.

While stowing stuff in the home's attic, Ellison finds a mysterious box that was apparently left behind. Inside the box is a super eight projector, as well as several film reels. The reels have innocuous names--"Pool Party," "BBQ," "Lawn Work," Sleepytime," and "Family Hanging Out"--and are dated from 1966 to 2011, a span of forty-five years. He takes the films and projector to his office and begins to view them, one by one, and discovers they each detail the graphic murder of a different family.

All he really needs is some popcorn and a Coke.

Shaken by the videos, but unable to help himself, Ellison begins to investigate. As he does so, his son, Trevor (Michael Hall D'Addario), begins to experience night terrors, something the boy suffered when he was much younger. Other strange events take place, mostly while Ellison works through the night. He begins to piece more and more clues together, and with the help of a local deputy/fanboy (James Ransone), light is shed on even more details concerning the other four murders.

Sinister is a tense film, creepy at several points, and it takes a couple of unexpected turns along the way. Even with the depictions of several murders, the content isn't particularly graphic. Despite the movie's R rating, much of the gore is implied. I suspected the film's twist about half the way through, but the validation of my suspicions at the end wasn't unpleasant. Though not a found-footage film in its own right, the film reels certainly add that element to the overall narrative.

There isn't a bad actor in the bunch here. Ethan Hawke is, as always, excellent, and his character motivations are solid. As he slowly becomes more and more unhinged by the events that take place, he remains a human being rather than a caricature. Juliet Rylance is also very good, and James Ransone's unnamed deputy ("Deputy So and So") adds a little brevity to Sinister's serious tone. An uncredited appearance by Vincent D'Onofrio was something of a surprise, too, given I had no idea it was him.

Family Hanging Out, '11

If I had one complaint about Sinister, it's the movie's constant darkness. Ellison often moves through the house, never turning on a single light, in search of an alleged intruder. Though I expect it was meant to add to the creepy factor, the lack of visibility really annoyed me at times. Watching someone walk through the dark once in a while is one thing, but it started to feel overused towards the middle of the film.

Sinister is a solid supernatural horror flick with a great cast. Though the story is somewhat derivative, it has a couple of unique twists that set it apart from similar movies.

Grave Encounters 2 (C-)

It's just his funny way of saying hello.

As you might know, I have a soft spot in my heart for "found footage" movies, even though I've sat through a bunch of really bad ones. Though flawed, one of my favorites is Grave Encounters, a film which documents a team of reality television "ghost hunters" as they investigate a purportedly haunted insane asylum.

One of the things that made the original Grave Encounters work for me was the way the filmmakers handled the team's approach to their show, right down to footage of the show's star bribing a groundskeeper to lie about seeing ghosts through the asylum's windows. It was this irony--that the stars of the film weren't really believers in the first place--that gave the film just the right amount of credibility, just before all hell breaks loose.

Grave Encounters 2 is somewhat less effective than the original for a number of reasons, though it obviously tried to pick up where the original left off and lend some depth to its story and characters. A film student, Alex Wright (played by Richard Harmon) takes a break from creating cheesy torture porn movies with his pals to pursue his personal obsession--proving that the original Grave Encounters actually took place. With the help of a mysterious individual known only by his online screen name, "DeathAwaits666," as well as some actual on-hands investigation, Alex manages to convince his friends to travel to the asylum featured in Grave Encounters and do some filming of their own.

Being chased through ductwork by ghosts must really suck.

The lead-up to the asylum is fairly tedious--I even shut it off fifteen minutes in the first time I tried watching it--but once there, Grave Encounters 2 dives right back into the sorts of events that took place in the original film. The down side to this is that while the original was relatively fresh when it was released, the sequel relies on a number of tropes that were originally established in Grave Encounters. Not only that, but the effects are heavy-handed, and this, combined with the fact that we've seen it all before, makes them feel forced, look fake, and results in a much less creepy film.

However, when one of the characters from the original movie shows up, driven completely nuts after spending 10 years in such a terrifying environment, things get a bit more interesting. The filmmakers even try a couple of new tricks, which are clever and shake things up. Despite this, the majority of ghostly encounters aren't much different than they were the last time... with the exception of the ending, but I won't spoil that for you.

The cast's performances aren't bad, mind you. They do pretty well with what they've been given. Some of the characters are actually interesting, and you might miss them a little once the team has been whittled down. They do a lot of running around, hiding, and we get at least one obligatory, cliched moment where a character talks to the camera about how scared he is, how he doesn't want to die, along with a derivation of, "If you're watching this, I must be dead." At least you're not stuck staring up his nose.

This is what I'd call "Ridden hard and put away wet."

Cinematography is about what you'd expect from a found footage film, with shaky camera work and lots of night vision. The special effects are obviously CG and in your face, so much so that their artificial nature is much more blatant than I would've liked. When it come to CG effects, I really prefer it if they're subtle. Some practical make-up effects are used, too, and these are simple and well done.

At the end of the day, Grave Encounters 2 is a mostly competent found footage film that doesn't quite live up to the original. If you enjoyed the first one, you'll probably enjoy this one, too, and you'll be able to pick up on some of the common story threads that flow through and between both movies. If you've never seen the original, I suggest you track it down and watch it first.

Haunt (C+)

So you want to hear a ghost story?

I really had to give my rating for Haunt a good think before I decided what to rate it. In the end, I felt it was definitely worth my time to watch. It doesn't break much new ground, but it's still a quality film with a lot of creepy moments. I've never heard of the director, Mac Carter, before, but this was his feature film directorial debut. I'm quite interested to see what he does next, as Haunt is a well-crafted film which may lead to more original works in the future (knock on wood).

Like many ghost stories, Haunt begins with a house. A family of five lived there, but something horrible happened to their three children. We meet the father, Franklin Morello (played by Carl Hadra), in the opening moments of the film. He uses a wooden "ghost box" (which appears to be a modified radio) to contact the spirits of his dead children before being violently slain by some otherworldly power. A voice over from his wife, Janet (Jacki Weaver), accompanies the film's opening and sets the initial tone.

Fast forward to another family, the Ashers, who are viewing the house with their realtor. They buy the house, of course, because there wouldn't be much of a movie to see if they didn't. The three Asher children, Evan (Harrison Gilberson), Sara (Danielle Chuchran), and Anita (Ella Harris), don't seem overly thrilled about the place, but their parents, Emily (Ione Skye) and Alan (Brian Wimmer), are immediately enamored by it. It's a pretty nice house, honestly, large and in great shape. The only downside is the mysterious circumstances by which Franklin Morello and his three children met their ends. Local folklore insists the home is cursed, but the place is much too good of a deal to pass up.

She's not really chewing the scenery here. Just wait.

Janet Morello shows up at the house one day, looking for a painting of her son that she left behind in Evan's new room. She meets the Ashers and welcomes them to the home. Still, she's a creepy lady with a haunted look, doubtless the result of losing her entire family to... something. Janet sticks around long enough to get her painting and drum up some pity from Emily.

After the Ashers have moved in, Evan excuses himself one evening to go for a walk. While out and about in his somewhat rural neighborhood, he meets Sam (Liana Liberato). Sam, after taking a beating from her drunken father, is upset, and Evan attempts to soothe her. She rebuffs him, but it's obvious the two are going to end up together later on.

After another night of abuse, Sam sneaks into the Asher's home and slips into bed with Evan. Nothing sexual goes down between the two (at least, not yet), but Sam's presence is discovered by Anita the next morning. Evan's a good, honest kid (almost too good and honest, despite smoking the occasional joint), and he doesn't hide anything from his folks. His parents, though concerned with Sam's sudden presence in their son's life, trust him. Evan's mom, Emily, senses there's more to Sam than meets the eye after noticing bruises on Sam's arm. She tries to talk to the young woman, and offers to help her if she needs it. Sam refuses.

Dental care isn't all that important in the afterlife.

Sam tells Evan that she's been in the house before, though she isn't specific about why or when. She reveals the presence of the ghost box in a small room connected to Evan's. The two use the ghost box and hear something that frightens both of them, especially Evan. Things begin to spiral out of control until Evan decides to pay Janet Morello a visit to ask for help. Janet isn't happy to see Evan, and she wigs out, telling he and Sam to burn the ghost box, which they do. Of course, this isn't the end of their paranormal problems, far from it.

The film's ending is brutal and tragic, and answers the majority of the questions surrounding the haunting and its origin. I'm not sure it will satisfy all viewers, but that's sort of up to you... right?

Haunt contains a lot of ghost story tropes--EVP (electronic voice phenomena), possession, and slamming doors, to name a few. It utilizes them well, though, and the results are creepy and, at times, genuinely frightening. It does resort to a few "gotcha" scares here and there, which I've never been a huge fan of, but they're largely in line with the movie and don't detract from it too much.

Sam's got a few problems to hammer out.

The acting is very good across the board. The cast seemed very talented, though Jacki Weaver does chew the scenery up whenever she's on camera. The cinematography, too, is fine, and the special effects definitely get the job done. Like I mentioned initially, the story doesn't break much new ground as far as these sorts of movies are concerned, but the fact that Haunt is well-made makes up for the lack of innovation.

Haunt is currently available on NetFlix if you feel the urge to watch it. IMDB's reviewers aren't very kind to the movie, but everyone's going to have a different opinion. I, for one, enjoyed the movie, especially after some of the real stinkers I've seen, and I'd recommend it to my friends. And to you, of course.