Rosewood Lane

Or rather don't get there, if you know what's good for you. Something our main protagonist seems to ignore. But I think that's not the only thing that people were missing in this movie. While it is a nice change from the Jeepers Creepers franchise for Victor Salva, he doesn't seem too much at home with this.

I wish I could share Ray Wises enthusiasm for that film (I'm guessing the script read a lot better), but I can also see what he liked about the movie. There are some genuine scary or at lease eerie scenes in it. Plus you've got a bad guy in here, who's really good (at being bad). The acting is above par, but for all the weird things that happen, there are other things that will not completely satisfy your viewing needs.

This brought back memories of the Jeeper Creeper without the big monster in it but it sure had the villain. Unlike most movies that have a huge build this one does not. Right from the beginning you know who the villain is and there is no question this kid is screwed up.

The movie is going to go a place that I didn't think it would go. I was sure this kid was the devil with some of the stunts that was going on. I will not spoil the surprise but at the end you will understand everything. I really enjoyed it from beginning to end. If you enjoyed jeepers creepers style type movie than you will enjoy this.

Recommend

If you recognize the line in my title then you might want to turn away because you won't be able to sit through this movie with a straight face. Through no fault of "Rosewood Lane" which otherwise is a good thriller, it dives into a plot that seems so preposterous that it became the running gag in the hilarious 80s dark comedy "Better Off Dead". That plot is, of course, that a supernatural psycho paperboy terrorizes the town.

Excuse me, I just spewed milk out my nose.

OK getting serious for a minute, "Rosewood Lane" handles itself very well. It should be noted that it is NOT a horror movie; it's a thriller. And, as the filmmakers explain in the "Making Of" feature, that means it has a slower pace, more character development and more atmospheric investment than the average slasher. Aside from a death in the opening scene, half the movie focuses on the main character's psychological complexities (growing up abused, dealing with newly surfaced demons of her past, a failed relationship, issues of professional ethics, and perhaps a slight nod to her OCD). While this side of the movie doesn't provide many popcorn spilling shockers, I thought it was a new & interesting angle of approaching the protagonist. In a sentence: she's just 1 psychology degree away from the looney bin, herself.

So when she starts seeing a psycho paperboy stalking her around every corner, we're not quite sure how much is real and how much is delusion. I think Rose McGowan did an excellent job of playing a tough, mentally guarded character who is overcompensating for deep, suppressed issues which she probably hasn't conquered as she'd like to claim.

Another good acting job comes from Daniel Ross Owens (creepy paperboy) who, though perhaps looking too old for the role, pulls off the psychotic thing really well, particularly in an awesome "laugh" he delivers toward the end. You'll know the one I'm talking about.

So in the end I recommend this movie to anyone who is not expecting a horror flick but rather a slow moving thriller with some good momentum. In style/feel alone (not in story!) I might compare this to "The Sixth Sense" because it has an atmosphere of darkness with a surreal quality lighting the main actors. In other words it has a dreamlike quality to it, not stark realism. I thought that was a nice choice considering the psychological spin. In the interviews, the director mentions Hitchcock (in particular "Psycho") as perhaps a strong influence, and I can definitely see that, the way the house at Rosewood Lane becomes a sinister character itself, like the Bates Motel.

But... oh lordy help me, I just couldn't get those 80s paperboys out of my head. If you see this movie, then just for laughs afterwards, AFTERwards so not to spoil it, go to YouTube and search for "Better Off Dead two dollars" and you'll see what I mean. Even the foot-in- the-door gag is there, making me wonder if it was a direct homage. Well you know what they say... ghoulies & ghosties & long legged beasties & paperboys who go bump in the night...

Reveiwing a movie is open to our own personal opinion and everyone is entitled to there own opinion. For me I read all reviews posted here and although I enjoyed this movie I do agreed with some of the negative reviews that states that it was slow moving and a bit lacking on thrills. That alone however doesn't mean it was a bad movie or as some state "aweful waste of time." Now to add to there points they start reviewing the size of an actors lips, or the age of another who supposed to be a kid or even criticize product placement in the first have.

I think that when you have to find such small items to pick on then in fact the movie wasn't all that bad. Other negative reviews write sentences with single words longer than my complete name put together. But if you read exacting what they are writing and yes with the help of a dictionary you soon realize that some just use big words to give themselves a certain look because at the end of there conclusion all those big words just basically mean nothing, just like a politicians reply to a question he doesn't want to really answer honestly.

I'm not saying this was a great movie but I am saying that I enjoyed it. I did not get that "hey I was robbed "feeling once it was over. Sure It had some unanswered issues but nothing major. They could have done certain things differently yes but they didn't. What I watched is what they did and I must be honest on what I saw. Good . Good movie.

One thing though is that they call it a horror film and that is where maybe some of the bad reviews are coming from. Disappointed horror film fans. This is not a horror film but I would say more of a mild thriller. If I was in the mood for a good horror film and saw this I would have been disappointed too.

The psychiatrist and host of the radio talk show Talk Line, Dr. Sonny Blake (Rose McGowan), returns to Rosewood Lane, in Stillwater, one year after the death of her father to live in his house. Sonny was raised with brutality by her father and is a traumatized woman that was submitted to therapy by Dr. Cloey (Lesley-Anne Down). Sonny's boyfriend, the DA Barrett Tanner (Sonny Marinelli), helps her to bring her things to her new home.

On the arrival, her next door neighbor advises Sonny that the paperboy (Daniel Ross Owens) is a dangerous weirdo. Sonny finds that the paperboy has broken in her house and might have killed her father, but Detectives Briggs (Ray Wise) and Sabatino (Tom Tarantini) do not believe on Sonny and think that it is her imagination. When Barrett is attacked and is missing, Sonny and her friend Paula Crenshaw (Lauren Vélez) call the police but he is not found in the house. Is Sonny freaking out or is the paperboy an evil being? "Rosewood Lane" is a laughable horror movie with terrible story and screenplay with many plot holes. I have already spent my time watching this garbage and it does not worth to spend more time writing about this awful film. If you do not believe on my words, do the same I did to feel how bad a movie can be. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "A Vila do Medo" ("The Villa of the Fear")