Director and Newton native Eli Roth (“Cabin Fever,” and the “Hostel” movies), working from a script by TV writer Eric Kripke, trades his signature torture-porn for kiddie frights in his adaptation of the 1973 novel by John Bellairs and illustrated by Edward Gorey, famous for his morbid depictions of domestic life. The result is a mixed bag of tricks, hexes and spells. Roth creates vivid visuals that shock and scare and in some scenes, delight. But those tonal shifts from playful banter to outright action to fantastical whimsy to middle-school angst and back don’t always coalesce. Though, I’m not sure if the target audience will even notice.
Be warned, this isn’t a movie for small children, and Roth is on a mission to scare your kids as much as the PG rating allows. It’s dark, but it’s nothing middle-age kids can’t handle (think: “E.T.,” “Harry Potter,” “Gremlins,” “Goonies”). The frights are both funny and eerie, not in a gross-out bloody way, but rather creepy clowns, killer pumpkins, self-playing pianos, mannequin faces, graveyard shenanigans, and shape-shifting characters. But for all the effort Roth expends stylistically, he fails to create palpable suspense. That’s the main reason the movie falters. There’s never any doubt, too, about how the story is going to play out and who’s going to be the hero. In fact, it is broadcast almost from the start, when one character advises: “To become a warlock you have to defeat an evil spirit using your own magic.”
I have a lot to say about how the film looks and I guess I’ll at least start on a positive note by saying the production design is great for what this film wants to achieve. The main house blends the right amount of gothic fantasy mise-en-scene as well as the classic haunted house look of tall staircases, a study room filled with spell books and furniture that comes to life. To some, this can be outrageously absurd, and it is true that some moments teeter on that scale, but for the most part, the film does a decent job of keeping this in check. Originally, I had thought that the haunted house vibe was in the past and had become corny, so I’m glad that The House with a Clock in its Walls was able to disprove my opinion.
But once passed this, this film becomes as torturous to watch as Eli Roth’s torture horror films, with way too much potty humour than needed. Surely, in this day and age, we have gone past the point for out of the blue toilet humour. But the film feels that it needs to market itself to the immature by throwing in a pooping topiary lion. In an article for Vulture, Eli Roth explains he wanted to create a sense of Spielberg-ian sweetness with Roth rawness. Yes, because a farting, pooping hedge is capturing the magic of a Spielberg film. The topiary lion would have worked much better if it was just that, sights like this should make imagination go wild with excitement, having it repetitively be responsible for the same immature gag over and over again degrades it.
The story from the book is pretty simple, so Roth has expanded and enhanced it, amazingly without losing the inherent spirit. Not only has he added some elements from the other books to expand the story, but he's also added some depth that wasn't there in the original book, especially surrounding Lewis' mourning.
Roth is a deft hand with the scary stuff, and he proves he can keep his gorier instincts at bay. While there are frightening things throughout the film, such as living jack-o'-lanterns, a room full of clockwork figures and an attempt to raise the dead, it's all subdued and family-friendly. It's also constantly tinged with a wry sense of humor, with the occasional foray into potty humor to really break the tension for the kiddies.
Be warned, this isn’t a movie for small children, and Roth is on a mission to scare your kids as much as the PG rating allows. It’s dark, but it’s nothing middle-age kids can’t handle (think: “E.T.,” “Harry Potter,” “Gremlins,” “Goonies”). The frights are both funny and eerie, not in a gross-out bloody way, but rather creepy clowns, killer pumpkins, self-playing pianos, mannequin faces, graveyard shenanigans, and shape-shifting characters. But for all the effort Roth expends stylistically, he fails to create palpable suspense. That’s the main reason the movie falters. There’s never any doubt, too, about how the story is going to play out and who’s going to be the hero. In fact, it is broadcast almost from the start, when one character advises: “To become a warlock you have to defeat an evil spirit using your own magic.”
Dana Barbuto
GoErie
I have a lot to say about how the film looks and I guess I’ll at least start on a positive note by saying the production design is great for what this film wants to achieve. The main house blends the right amount of gothic fantasy mise-en-scene as well as the classic haunted house look of tall staircases, a study room filled with spell books and furniture that comes to life. To some, this can be outrageously absurd, and it is true that some moments teeter on that scale, but for the most part, the film does a decent job of keeping this in check. Originally, I had thought that the haunted house vibe was in the past and had become corny, so I’m glad that The House with a Clock in its Walls was able to disprove my opinion.
But once passed this, this film becomes as torturous to watch as Eli Roth’s torture horror films, with way too much potty humour than needed. Surely, in this day and age, we have gone past the point for out of the blue toilet humour. But the film feels that it needs to market itself to the immature by throwing in a pooping topiary lion. In an article for Vulture, Eli Roth explains he wanted to create a sense of Spielberg-ian sweetness with Roth rawness. Yes, because a farting, pooping hedge is capturing the magic of a Spielberg film. The topiary lion would have worked much better if it was just that, sights like this should make imagination go wild with excitement, having it repetitively be responsible for the same immature gag over and over again degrades it.
Sean McConville
seanmcconvillereviews.com
The story from the book is pretty simple, so Roth has expanded and enhanced it, amazingly without losing the inherent spirit. Not only has he added some elements from the other books to expand the story, but he's also added some depth that wasn't there in the original book, especially surrounding Lewis' mourning.
Roth is a deft hand with the scary stuff, and he proves he can keep his gorier instincts at bay. While there are frightening things throughout the film, such as living jack-o'-lanterns, a room full of clockwork figures and an attempt to raise the dead, it's all subdued and family-friendly. It's also constantly tinged with a wry sense of humor, with the occasional foray into potty humor to really break the tension for the kiddies.
Damond Fudge
TV8 KCCI
(Ed. note: Long live John Pascuzzi.)
No comments:
Post a Comment