Jack - A Caixa Maldita

Jack kept me in this, even though the story made no sense!

A low budget but enjoyable horror. The main character is a good actor and the jack in the box wasn't exactly scary but was entertaining.

'The Jack in the Box' had the potential to be such an awesome movie, but sadly fails.

The film's score is really good. The sound effects are good. The Jack in the box doll with its haunting eyes, is creepy. The demon clown with its scary make-up is the stuff nightmares are made off. So what went wrong? The script. This is a very basic script, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Sometimes its good to have a premise that is simple and straight forward. Only, the dialogue is pretty standard. The characters are not fully explored and not interesting at all. The events are not even interesting. The demon clown appearing for the kill felt deja vu. He had the same demeanor in every scene - and there were times when it seemed they didn't really know what he was supposed to be doing.

The Acting. Boy, the acting was bland. The film looks acted. It didn't feel realistic - as if the actors were saying their lines, and then waiting for the director's "Cut!". It looked like they were doing this for the paycheck, or for experience only. They didn't seem motivated at all. Unconvincing. Lucy-Jane Quinlan especially was really bland as Lisa. Then again, the character itself was such a dull and dreary character that one can't really blame the actress. She hardly served any purpose in the movie until the final moment.

Ethan Taylor stars as the film's hero, Casey, who also didn't really seem like he was taking it very seriously. Maybe the director was to blame, who knows, but the film lacks on too many levels. Had 'The Jack in the Box' been directed by Mike Flanagan or James Wan for instance, I think it would have been a lot better. The film just wasn't as suspenseful or captivating as it could and should have been. The film also looked like it was shot with a home movie camera. The visual effects were also basic and low budget. The main draw card here is the box, which had a great design, and the Jack.

Having said that, it also is not a bad movie. If you can overlook the flaws, sit back and allow to be entertained, I'm sure you'll find something here you like. The clown certainly is memorable, although he, too, could have been far better explored.

Surprisingly, it was followed by a sequel - 'Jack in the Box: Awakening'.

Would I watch it again? No.

It's not gory. It's not fast-paced. It's not fancy.

They clearly spent all the budget on the box and Jack - which are nice and convincing. But they obviously hired their cousin with a DSLR to shoot it. It is recorded with ambient light and sound. So it just looks and sounds flat. That seems to be the standard nowadays in these dime-a-dozen pre-professional horror movies. So if you are looking for stimulating atmosphere, there is an echo-y, brightly sunlit, nearly empty local historical society "museum" at the center of the film.

It is also very understated in a British way. The lead actor will wind up going on to better things. He is charmingly handsome; and it is only up for him from here. He just had a peculiarly muted accent. Most of the other cast was staid and just there.

The movie had some interesting ideas. A decent protagonist. A very well-designed villain. But horror-oriented plot, suspense and execution - not so much.

None of the actors were familiar to me and that was perfectly fine. The story was creative and not like a horror film concept I've seen before. It combines the eeriness of some of our greatest fears regarding clowns and the nostalgia of a childhood toy. Excellent character creation, costuming, and movement of Jack. No foul language or gratuitous violence. Not Rated but was a film we watched with our 10 year-old. Give it a chance.