Silent House

Silent House is directed by Chris Kentis and written by Laura Lau. It stars Elizabeth Olsen, Adam Trese and Eric Sheffer Stevens. Music is by Nathan Larson and cinematography by Igor Martinovic. A remake of Uruguayan film, La casa muda (The Silent House), story has Olsen as Sarah, a young woman who finds herself locked in the abandoned family home she was helping her father and uncle to clear out before it is sold. Soon Sarah finds herself pursued by an unseen assailant and she struggles to make sense of what is festering in the house.

Forget the gimmick that comes with the film, that of the use of "real time" to give off the effect of one continuous take, it doesn't impact on how you ultimately will feel about the film either way. It comes down to if you can buy into another haunted house movie whilst accepting the outcome as being worth your time. Horror fans are notoriously hard to please, even when something original happens along, such as the recent The Cabin in the Woods, a good portion of the horror faithful will remain displeased. Silent House is what it is, a hugely efficient haunted house creeper that admirably builds suspense and then shows its twisty hand. If you want fresh and exciting, and I keep seeing people write that "such and such" didn't bring nothing new to the table whilst themselves not offering up exactly what could be brought to said table, then it's very unlikely Silent House will fill your horror hungry bellies.

Coming from the makers of Open Water, it's evident that Silent House wants to have realism on its side, it's stripped back for impact, with a less is more approach to its garnering of chills. With Olsen terrific, and she is, we are asked to put ourselves in that house and be in her shoes to feel the terror. Not everyone can do that, obviously, but being able to do that considerably makes Silent House a far better movie than its lowly internet ratings suggest it is. The scares are not over done, the music score is suitably sparse as claustrophobia reigns supreme, the use of natural light impressive and the camera glides about as an ethereal observer, technically it is a very effectively constructed haunted house picture. It's also refreshing to find the makers are able to use credible reasons for characters to be in and out of the house, this isn't about the dumb decision making so often rife in this sub-genre of horror over the years.

Sadly the third act is weak as the scares, tech attributes and atmosphere subside, we land in familiar territory and the big reveals, whilst thematically potent and never to be scoffed at, lack the desired impact and the film closes down more on a whimper instead of the terrified scream the rest of the film deserved. A shame, because for the most part this is a very good genre offering for those who have a bent for such spooky/home invasion doings. 7.5/10

The beginning of the movie is about a home invasion. It's been done before, some good and some bad. I thought this part of the movie was good. For the first three quarters of the movie I was stressed out...but in a good way. I didn't understand what was happening, who was in the house and why, but I knew my main character was in trouble and I wanted her to escape. The images were dark, cluttered. Where is she? Is someone behind her? Can they see her? Is she hiding well enough? How can she get out? Is she going to make it? Are those friends or foes? Can we trust them?

Then just when I couldn't take anymore stress...the movie instantly got stupid. The entire ending fell apart and my good simple but scary movie went limp. My coping mechanisms kicked in, not because the stress had resolved, but rather because they would be useless where the movie brought me. And it's not like we haven't seen this sort of ending before so I'm not sure why the writers even went there.

Greetings again from the darkness. On my never ending trek to find quality horror movies, this one had a couple of interesting things going for it. First, it stars Elizabeth Olsen (sister of the twins) who was so impressive in last year's Martha Marcy May Marlene. Secondly, the film was reported to have been shot in one continuous take/shot. From a technical aspect, this is one of the more curious claims and brazen filmmaking attempts one can imagine.

Let's start with the fantastic Ms. Olsen. With very few lines of dialogue and being on screen for 95% of the frames, she doesn't disappoint. The camera loves her face ... even when that camera is mere inches away and the lighting is provided by a kerosene lamp or flashlight. She proves very expressive in fear and isn't afraid of quiet, and more rare these days, she isn't afraid to look less than glamorous. Ms. Olsen's future is much brighter than the lighting in this bleak house.

The basic story has Sarah (Olsen), her dad (Adam Trese) and her uncle (Eric Sheffer Stevens) returning to the family lake house for some simple rehab and packing, with the goal of putting the place up for sale. Next thing you know, strange noises, a lost key, and dad is bloodied on the floor. The house itself is a maze of doors, floors and staircases, and because the windows are boarded up and the electricity is dead, the limited lighting will have you straining your eyes to make out location and shapes.

Directed by the husband and wife team of Chris Kentis and Laura Lau (Open Water), the first 30 minutes of this movie captured my interest and had me on edge. Unfortunately, it kind of unravels and ultimately ends with a disappointing and rather cheap explanation. It's a remake of a 2010 Uruguay film, which was based on a true story from the 1940's. I am not sure if the ending to this one follows the "true" ending. As for the single take, I call BS. There were changes to the blood spatters on Olsen, not to mention numerous times where a "blackout" proved convenient to shift camera gear. Still, the real time feel is a nice touch, as is the minimal use of music ... a rarity in a genre known for blasting crescendos to cue our screams.

OK, obviously i had just finnished watching this movie. I came to IMDb to look up who the lead actress was. Upon finding the poor reviews on this movie i had to make an account. I have had enough of these movie "critics". Every time i come on here i see ratings that do not justify the movies. Time and time again all you read is some snob critic complaining about something and the sheep of mindless dummies nod and agree. Im not going to go into full details about this movie but rather give my two cents from a person who's life basically is stories on screens. My criteria for "good" movies/shows. 1.)is the lead actor good. 2.)Is it different. 3.)Was it entertaining 4.)Was it predictable 5.)How was the story telling. Do not listen to the mindless hordes of know it all, the lead actor was good, the story was not predictable and it was entertaining overall. watch this movie and judge for yourself. I mean seriously IMDb rating is crap.

Sarah (Elizabeth Olsen) is helping her father (Adam Trese) and uncle (Eric Sheffer Stevens) to renovate the family's old lakeside house before selling it. It's a place they have rarely visited in years. Local kids have smashed all the windows and blown the electrics meaning that the boarded up windows let in no light. The only light available is that which comes from a torch or hand-held lamp. While in the semi darkness and after her uncle has left for the day, Sarah hears a noise which her father goes to check out. He never returns. Sarah is left alone in the house with someone or something out to get her and her family and no way out.

The whole film was shot in such a way as that it looks like one continuous shot. I noticed the odd cut here and there but overall the idea is very successful. It genuinely feels as though Elizabeth Olsen is in the house for 85 minutes, running, hiding from and fighting whatever is after her. Using just one camera, Olsen is on screen for about 84 of the 85 minutes and has to carry the entire film. She does so with great aplomb. The one shot idea isn't original and indeed the film itself is a remake of a 2010 Uruguayan film but it's a nice gimmick that is well used.

The house is brilliantly dressed to maximise the creepy feeling. It creaks and whistles and is filled with all manner of sinister fittings from old furniture and toys to large objects under sheets and unknown items half hidden in the shadows. It also feels a little maze like though you get to know your way around as the film progresses. Elizabeth Olsen is dressed in typical horror attire with a tight white vest which shows off her 'ample talents' as well as the blood and dirt she accumulates throughout the film. Her performance is also mind blowingly excellent. She was superb in Mary, Marcey, Marlene and if anything even better here. She starts off a bit slowly but after twenty minutes goes all the way up to eleven where she stays until the final few moments during which she is pushing twelve. She is even better at the end than she was during the rest of the film.

So far, so good then. Unfortunately there are two major problems. The first is that it is nowhere near scary enough. I get scared by everything and I didn't jump once. Don't get me wrong, it's scarier than Dark Shadows but so is my girlfriend in the morning. For a proper 'scary' horror, it didn't produce the scares it needed to. There was plenty of tension but it didn't go anywhere. My second problem is that I worked out part of the twist after about eight minutes and had unravelled everything by the mid point. The film still ended in a satisfying way but I felt where we were heading was fairly obvious. On the other hand, my girlfriend said she thought about it at the beginning but it didn't totally click with her until the end so maybe I'm in a minority.

Overall the film will be best remembered for its clever cinematography rather than for its scares. It's a nice idea but the plot has been done a thousand times. It creates plenty of tension and intrigue but doesn't deliver the final blow. Elizabeth Olsen continues to impress and I look forward to seeing her again soon.

www.attheback.blogspot.com