A Focus on the Frightful – Blood in the Water: Snark Attack

A Focus on the Frightful Banner

Blood in the Water: Snark Attack

I’ve been a bit serious here lately so I thought I’d lighten things up a bit. I know there is no way possible to get to all of the movies we’ve seen so If you guys enjoy it Snark Attack may turn into a monthly feature on A Focus on the Frightful. Even though I love some of these movies to death they are not without their faults. I’ll try to stick to plot holes and things that just don’t make sense in general. I may point out a goof or two here and there but don’t worry. I’m not one of those that will say “Oh, this bird was not in this area during this alignment of the stars so that feather in the background should not be there.” If it is a book to movie adaptation I will confine my snark to the movie itself. Although, a more thorough book to movie snark, uh, I mean objective comparison, of course, might come in a later post.

I’m also very lazy and I’m just going to assume you’ve seen them all so I’m not going to give each of them a synopsis. You can hover over the movie cover to get the synopsis if you need a refresher. The movie covers will give you good markers if you would like to skip to the next movie without having the previous one spoiled.

Please keep in mind that this is all in good fun and I love most of these movies to death. There will also be spoilers for the following movies: 1408, The Awakening, Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2,

So get out your yellow rubber floatie and Snark Cage and let’s dive in!


I’ll get to whether or not this is a good adaptation or not in a different post. The movie for the most part is creepy and John Cusak is great in the role of the disaffected, cynical Mike Enslin. There is one thing that has always bugged me. To give it credit it is not the only movie to commit this egregious sin. During one of the rather lengthy “Room screwing with Mike” scenes there is a part where he is actually out of the hotel. for what seems like a few months. But, alas, he’s not and he’s sucked back into the room’s evil grasp. I really, really hate when the captives have seemed to escape the building that holds them, only to find out they were there all the time. Yes, it’s probably only in his head but…dammit! You can’t be in a hospital, on a beach, walk around all over and still be inside a hotel room! One of the other movies that pulls this (in a worse way) was Grave Encounters 2. The creepy laptop call between Evil Room Mike and (maybe) mike’s wife however, is creepy as all get out.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

The Awakening

I really do love this movie. If you haven’t seen it please skip this, watch it, then come back. It’s heavy on atmosphere and the acting is excellent. There are a few parts, however…

The first, and again, this is not confined to this movie solely, is an early scene in which Florence Cathcart (Rebecca Hall) reveals a medium to be a fraud and the medium is duly arrested. As Florence is feeling pretty good about herself the elderly lady that the medium was preying on spits in Florence’s face for ‘stealing her hope’. I honestly hate scenes like these. I, personally, would rather spit on the one preying on desperate people rather than the one who exposed the fraud. But, people are weird so who knows.

One of the smaller scenes worth mentioning is when Robert Mallory (Dominic West) comes to hire Florence to investigate the boy’s school. He meets Florence in her sitting room and she, knowing it is going to be a business meeting is dressed very casually in a men’s suit. Which, ok, she’s modern and defies conventions of dress for the period, cool (the fact that she looks dead sexy in it doesn’t hurt much, either). However, she does not wear a suit coat with it. She also perches in some weird spots while they’re talking. It strikes me as odd since she is presented as being professional enough to work with the police and her odd seating choices and not wearing a coat with her suit strikes me as odd. We’ve already picked up on the fact that she’s unique and intelligent, no need to shove it down our throats to the point of absurdity.

There a few other parts that aren’t exactly plot holes and maybe I just wasn’t sharp enough to figure them out. Obviously Robert has his former military unit hanging out spectrally with him. Am I wrong in thinking that Florence’s fiancee was a part of his unit or what? There are some lines that make it seem so but…I don’t know. Anyone have any ideas? The ending always threw me as it is unclear whether or not Florence dies. It seems as though she throws up the poison and lives but at the end people are talking around her like they can’t see her? Any ideas?

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2

This movie got such a bad reputation upon release. I, personally, think it’s a pretty damn good horror movie. Much more creepy than a lot of the movies you find in theatres lately * cough * Blair Witch * cough *. The only parts I don’t like are where the studios meddled with it. Such as the very obvious clips of the murders interwoven throughout the movie. It kind of takes away any sense of mystery or suspense at the end. There are some parts that are very creepy when you’re watching it but later don’t make a lot of sense within the overall plot.

Some of it’s character-wise such as we’re never told what Jeff’s issue is (I’m guessing some kind of paranoia, going by his actions in the movie) or why he would kill Erica. There is one slight incident when they’re partying when he hints that he wouldn’t mind sharing her sleeping bag and she turns him down but by and large he doesn’t seem into her enough to kill her over a very slight rejection. It actually would have made more sense for Stephen to have killed her since there was obvious sexual tension there. There’s also no reason for Erica to lie about where she’s from except to create ambiguity about her character. And, on another note, I’m guessing either someone really liked the way she looked naked on film or she was more comfortable doing those scenes because at their witch orgy she is shown a lot compared to Kim. Just an observation, take it as you wish.

Another thing that is never explained, especially if the director was aiming for a more ambiguous ending, is the presence of the police files. It heightens the mistrust among the group but if it’s supposed to be a witch/no witch ambiguity the files could only have gotten there (and known well enough to recognize later) if there were some supernatural shenanigans going on.

Another, slightly less pressing issue, is where all of their accessories came from for their witchcraft orgy? At the bare minimum there’s a skull that pops up (between Erica’s legs) that doesn’t seem to be anything any of them brought.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

This actually turned out to be a much shorter post than originally planned due to a medical emergency so I can guarantee you’ll be seeing another next month. Let me know down below if you guys caught anything strange in the above movies whether it’s a goof or something that just doesn’t make sense. I look forward to seeing your comments!

Focus on the Frightful: A Pox on Period Horror

A Focus on the Frightful Banner

I love a good ghost story and haunted house movie and some of the best ones are set in the past. The moods, atmosphere and tones fit in well with certain time periods. Some of the best ones to exemplify this are The Others, The Awakening, etc.

Watching Winchester this Wednesday (my son and his girlfriend’s choice rather than a ‘romantic’ movie, I’m so proud *sniff*). I have to say, though that the most feeling it created was a hearty “Eh”. I try not to watch previews, sometimes they give away too much, so maybe it was my own fault. I was expecting something along the lines of it being closer to the real story of the Winchester Mansion, heavy on atmosphere with some supernatural elements. What I got were some big Hollywood Horror moments with some modern commentary so forced in that I think I rolled my eyes so hard I lost a contact in my cranium.

It got me thinking, however. In almost all period horror pieces there are always strange anachronisms. I don’t mean the nitpicky kind where “This feather should not be in that hair because that bird didn’t live in that area in that time”. I’m talking about when the director or writer wedges in modern commentary, actions or attitudes that sit so awkwardly in the movie they might as well be shouting “See how tuned in I am??!!”

I do see this in books more often than movies but books would be too numerous to mention here. Generally the worst offenders that I see in books are the ones who make their 19th century ladies very modern and nobody bats an eye. I have no problem with good, strong, female characters being portrayed in period novels but it detracts from the work if it’s so obvious that it takes you out of the story altogether.

However, there are some movies, some very good ones that also fall into the same error. I’ll talk about a few here. I don’t think there will be any spoilers. However, if there are they will be clearly marked. I also want to remind people that these are my opinions only.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider


Winchester Movie

I’ll start with Winchester because it’s the most recent. honestly, I’m not even sure where to begin with this one. There will probably be spoilers so if you want just skip down to Crimson Peak.

The first one that caught my eye made me giggle. In a beginning scene Dr. Price is shown taking laudanum. The laudanum label has a huge POISON on the front. And if that didn’t get it across there’s also a huge skull and crossbones. I’m assuming that it was done to get it across to modern audiences what laudanum was since some people might not know what it is. That one just made me laugh.

The more annoying ones have to do with the main plot of the guns and what amounts to a modern day office shooting. I’m not getting into any discussion of gun control here. I only want to point out that at that time (1906) guns were common. Very, very common. One of the reasons people thought that Sarah Winchester was crazy was because of her stance that the ghosts of the people killed by Winchester guns were haunting her. Most people didn’t give guns a second thought.

The other, and more annoying one, is what Sarah Winchester referred to as “soldier’s sickness” which is what addiction was called. And if they had went straight from the soldier’s sickness comment to her requesting him to not take drugs while he’s there since she wants him clear-headed I wouldn’t be so annoyed. But they just couldn’t resist adding in her question to him, “Are you addicted to any medication?” With all of the scrutinizing of painkillers lately this was not a throwaway line. Seeing this crackdown hurt so many people who are taking their medication correctly instead of the people it’s meant to be stopping, yeah, it ticked me off. Big time. The more so because it was so wedged in. It was not a very common stance at the time.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Crimson Peak

There’s not many in this one. Just one, actually. When Edith is complaining that the publishers didn’t take her seriously because she was a woman writer who was writing ghost stories. That publisher’s wanted ‘a love story’ in her ghost story. Well, there were a lot of female writers at the time writing ghost stories that had no love stories but were still well regarded. I feel as though it’s Guillermo del Toro’s comment on love stories being wedged into almost every kind of story, whether they’re needed or not.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Mary Reilly


Let’s ignore all of the other stuff wrong with this movie (namely Julia Roberts playing an Irish woman) but they literally had to change almost everything about the original story to force in a love story between Marty and Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde. They also wedged in a “be free!” message that is just…ugh. I don’t know how much of this is the book’s fault and how much of it is the movie’s but it doesn’t work.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider


One thing I notice the absence of in period pieces (most notably the war genre) is the absence of smoking of any kind. Especially when a doctor in 1860 lectures a patient about smoking (Sherlock 2009). I’m sorry but it just wouldn’t happen at that time period. Yes, smoking is bad for you. And in modern movies and tv shows they can leave it out all they want. But to act like it didn’t exist in period pieces is asinine. Thy try to work around it occasionally by showing someone with a cigarette or cigar but they usually lose it or their lighter doesn’t work. And for some weird reason cigars are ok to be shown but not cigarettes. What’s the difference? Especially when they have no problem showing those same people chugging down alcohol like it’s water.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

So what movies did I miss? Are there others that have been very noticeable to you guys? This article is more of a lead-in to next week’s. I’m a little tired of being so serious so I’m going to let the inner Nitpicker out to play next week and pick apart some major flaws in some movies! So see you next week to have a little snarky fun!

Sci-Fi Biweekly Bulletin: Black Panther, The Gone World, and More

The Sci-Fi Biweekly Bulletin Banner

From spaceships to alternate history, and other worlds to nanites, science fiction is a fascinating genre of rather amazing depth that many talented writers happily delve into on a daily basis. And we, the curators here at Sci-Fi & Scary, aren’t even going to talk about a tenth of it right now. However, what you will get is a selection of movies, books, and interesting articles from across the net. Also, there’s a strong potential for puns, gifs, and a moderate amount of fangirling.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Movies

Movie cover for Black Panther

I don’t think I need to talk about this again, do I? What I want to know at this point is when are you going to see Black Panther?

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Books

Pictures link to Goodreads

First off, in case you missed it, if you’re balls-to-the-wall about Black Panther, Titan Comics is releasing a Official Guide to the movie,complete with behind the scenes pictures and everything, on February 20th. Find out more here on our original post.

Book cover for The Gone World

The Gone World – Tom Sweterlitsch – February 6th, 2018

Inception meets True Detective in this science-fiction thriller of spellbinding tension and staggering scope. The Gone World follows a special agent into a savage murder case with grave implications for the fate of mankind. 

Shannon Moss is part of a clandestine division within the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. In Western Pennsylvania, 1997, she is assigned to solve the murder of a Navy SEAL’s family–and to locate his teenage daughter, who has disappeared. Though she can’t share the information with conventional law enforcement, Moss discovers that the missing SEAL was an astronaut aboard the spaceship U.S.S. Libra–a ship assumed lost to the darkest currents of Deep Time. Moss knows first-hand the mental trauma of time-travel and believes the SEAL’s experience with the future has triggered this violence.

Determined to find the missing girl and driven by a troubling connection from her own past, Moss travels ahead in time to explore possible versions of the future, seeking evidence or insight that will crack the present-day case. To her horror, the future reveals that it’s not only the fate of a family that hinges on her work, for what she witnesses rising over time’s horizon and hurtling toward the present is the Terminus: the terrifying and cataclysmic end of humanity itself.

Luminous and unsettling, The Gone World bristles with world-shattering ideas yet remains at its heart an intensely human story.

Note: I’m almost done with this, and it is a good read. Not an “Oh my god, this is so awesome I must forgo sleep to finish it” read, but a good read nonethless. Sweterlitsch has a fantastic imagination.

Purchase via Amazon Affiliate Link

Also released on Feb 13th: Gunpowder Moon and The Megarothke

Book cover for Gunpowder Moon

Book cover for the Megarothke

Goodreads Giveaways

The Rise and Fall of D.O.D.O by Neal Stephenson and Nicole Galland

Awakened: A Novel by James S. Murray and Darren Wearmouth

Stars Uncharted by S.K. Dunstall

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Trivia

Thinking about carrots the other day I eventually started thinking about Signs (do you really want to know the thought processes behind that?) and it really annoys me when people gripe about two parts. Whether or not the rest of the movie is good is up for debate. Personally I like it. Except the ridiculous “Swing away, Merrill”. I would think it would make more sense to just throw the water at them.

Ok, one of the two things that it seems most people find ridiculous in the movie is the aliens coming to a planet that is primarily water. The movie leaves the aliens’ motives unexplained because, in a way, they’re really secondary in the plot to the human element. But humans are boring so let’s check out the aliens. Most of what they do in the movie seem to line up with what the kid (going by a book) describes as a raiding party. If they needed a resource, presumably humans since they are said to have taken some, wouldn’t they grab that resource from wherever it’s available? Whether or not that environment is hazardous? And it does seem as though they tried to take precautions against being near water. So, to me, it still makes sense that they would come here even if certain elements on the planet were hazardous to them.

The other is that damn doorknob. And the argument I always hear for that is “if they’re so advanced why can’t they open a door?”. Well, the only thing that I can say to that is that maybe their civilization has advanced past the use of knobs or maybe even doors. The alien takes a bit to figure it out but it obviously eventually does. So, when confronted with an object it may have never seen of course its going to take a bit to figure it out!

Well, what do you guys think? does it make sense? If you don’t think it does let me know (politely please!).

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Sci-Fi Guest Post Call

Anyone fancy doing a guest post about ‘relationship’ bots in Sci-Fi?

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Sci-Fi on the Web

Debate Club talks their Top 5 Sci-Fi Romances (Only one might surprise you.)

Haven’t had your fill of people griping about The Cloverfield Paradox? Check out The Ithican’s take on it.

Semiosis is a novel that’s on my radar (and I’m on it’s waiting list at the library), here’s a somewhat spoilery review from The Verge.

Like staying on top of what people call the ‘best recent science fiction’? Here’s The Guardian’s take on it.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Focus on the Frightful – The Gothic and the Horror

A Focus on the Frightful Banner

The Gothic and The Horror Genre: Uneasy Bedfellows

I’ve been poking around the edges of books like We Have Always Lived in the Castle and Picnic at Hanging Rock for awhile now. These are books (along with others I’ll get to, including movies) that seem to fall into a catch-all category known as Horror first and Gothic Horror second. Our guest post Sunday by David Michael Williams put part of the problem very succinctly.

“I can’t agree with the stance that a story should be penalized because it doesn’t fit snugly inside the box of one sub-sub-sub-genre or another.”  – David Michael Williams

I agree completely. The Gothic book used to have a very clearly defined description as Mr. Williams mentions in his post and which you can also find in a previous post by us here. Now it seems to be either a catchall for the Romance genre or they get thrown into the horror genre. They are much more closely aligned with horror than any other genre but they are also done a huge disservice. It just seems that publishers don’t quite know what to do with them. As always there will most likely be spoilers for these books specifically – We Have Always Lived in the Castle, Picnic at Hanging Rock,  The House Next Door and…Twilight.

So What’s the Difference?

Gothic Romances are generally focused intensely on one heroine or family and their odd family goings ons. They can be melodramatic, over-the-top and also introduce elements of the supernatural, overtly and covertly, thus muddying the genre waters even more. I’m going to focus solely on the Gothics and focus on more modern productions. So, don’t worry, you won’t see a deconstruction of Wuthering Heights here. Don’t sigh in relief just yet…I love the book so it will probably be popping up on A Focus on the Frightful sometime or other. Unfortunately hard as I tried it turns out I will be talking about Twilight. Sigh. There are four books in particular that I would like to mention specifically in regard to this and you guys will probably have very different reactions to each (and may not have heard of at least one of them). For the synopses please hover on the covers: 

We Have Always Lived in the Castle  (our discussion of it here) – 1962
Picnic at Hanging Rock – 1967
The House Next Door – 1978
Twilight – 2005


The Books

We Have Always Lived in the Castle

I’ll start with We Have Always Lived in the Castle since that is the book that seems to create the most confusion. As I put forth in my previous post (see above) it seems as though it is shelved under Horror, much to its detriment. I believe it gets put there because of The Haunting o Hill House, which I will contend has more in common with the Gothic genre than horror as well. Many of the criticisms leveled at it are “not scary”, “not horror” and “boring”. Boring is subjective and up for debate but I’m not here to force anyone to like it. I would like to address the charges of “not scary” and “not horror”. Being shelved under Horror people come to it with the expectation that it is horror. That it will be scary and are very disappointed when it’s not overtly horror. A lot of the horror is subliminal and you really have to read between the lines a few times to really understand just where the horror comes in. Again, I’m not saying those who don’t like it are not “deep” enough to get it. It’s just that being stuck in a confining genre people come to it with a preconceived set of expectations and are not satisfied when it doesn’t meet them. 

Picnic at Hanging Rock

Picnic at Hanging Rock is another book that often gets put into the Horror category but there’s not much ‘horrific’ doings going on. At least, on the surface. A finishing school for the well-to-do ladies in training that live in Australia, run by a woman who sees it as little more than a business venture. On a Valentine’s Day picnic to a nearby feature called Hanging Rock three girls and a teacher disappear, never to be seen again. The book was put out at the time as “Based on a True Story”. However, this seems a marketing tactic as the research of readers has not come up with a matching case. Much of the book revolves around the search for these girls (the search for the teacher seems incidental) and the consequences on the school itself. One of the girls is found a week or two later but the mystery only deepens as she has only minor cuts and bruises with no sign of dehydration or starvation after two weeks in the broiling Australian outback. The true horror comes in the mental breakdown of the headmistress and her tyranny over the one student who has no family of ‘name’, just a benefactor. The final denouement only makes it all the more tragic. But is it really horror? Not really. Is it Romance, True Crime, an Unsolved Mystery so…into the Horror category it goes. Although the book seems to fall into the Mystery category as well. The mystery was eventually (bizarrely) resolved in an end chapter released later but there is some question of whether it was actually written by Joan Lindsay herself, or not. She refused to have it published while she lived and those that have read it (it’s insanely expensive for a single chapter) claim the writing style seems different and Ms. Lindsay always insisted that the mystery should not be solved. The movie is very much categorized as Horror which does seem to baffle some people. However, Peter Weir’s directorial style and the cinematography gives it such an eerie, slightly off-kilter feel to it that it passes a little better under the Horror section. 

The House Next Door

Although Anne Rivers Siddons is a prolific Southern writer her book The House Next Door, her one and, as far as I know, only, foray into the Horror genre was largely ignored by horror fans until Stephen King’s Danse Macabre showcased it. Which, to me, was questionable. It’s a capable ‘haunted’ (‘cursed’ might be a better word) house novel but there are many that do a much better job with the haunted house novel. What she does do, however, is bring out the daily horror of the scandal, the gossip and the side-long glances of a small well-to-do suburban subdivision of Atlanta. What qualifies this as more settled in the Gothic genre is that we are in Colquitt’s head (the main character) the whole time. We are privy to every single thought and emotion that she plunges into. She’s dramatic and vain and although she’s on the general outside of the house’s shenanigans she is also drawn into each one by dint of being neighbors with the House Next Door. The house is not ‘haunted’ in the traditional Southern way. There are no plantation belles wailing about, no dueling brothers to re-enact every anniversary. Bad things happen there. Small in size at first but gradually growing until one terrible night that destroys the neighborhood and Colquitt and her husband decide to burn the bastard down after trying to warn people away (through an article in People magazine, no less). But our sympathies, such as I can muster, are generally with them as friends ditch them and talk behind their backs. This is given almost equal weight on the scale of ‘terribleness’ that the house also dishes out. Again, though, it being listed under straight up Horror makes people think they’re in for, perhaps, a gory good time instead of the sedate and almost sanguine prose of Colquitt’s narration.


Twilight is often shelved under Horror…because vampires of course! However, since much of it focuses on Bella and Edward’s ‘”Oh-so-intense” feelings for each other I think it qualifies more as a Romance than Horror. If you were to take out the vampires and add in a little more stalking and a little more insultingly described BDSM you’d have a Romance. And if you want to argue the point I shall direct you to Fifty Shades of Grey. This has got to be one of the most cannabalistic series I have ever read. The Paranormal Romance has much more in common with the Romance genre than either the Gothic or Horror. The only justification for these books to be flooding the Horror genre is the presence of some supernatural creature or another. My tone might be a little condescending but I promise I’m not trying to put down the Paranormal Romance genre as a whole. My disgust here is aimed mainly at Twilight and its love-child Fifty Shades of Grey. I will argue, however that they simply do not belong in the Horror genre just by dint of a supernatural love triangle (or quadrangle).

Ok, Just What the Heck Am I Getting At, Exactly?!

Some books just can’t be defined by a single genre. Horror, especially crosses into so many other genres you could go on forever subbing genres into eternity. Perhaps that’s some poor librarian’s purgatorial punishment. However, as any horror fan who has desperately searched through an endless list of Fantasy/Science Fiction (looking at you Amazon, would it kill you to add a Horror category?) the defining genres can be a blessing.

While I do agree in part with the thrust of Mr. Williams’ argument that sometimes genres, sub-genres and sub-sub-genres can ultimately hurt a book by confining it to one area and people might not be willing to veer outside of their comfort areas to try new genres. It seems a fifty-fifty split on the pro/con side. For those that like one particular genre it can be very helpful to be able to find precisely what they like. However, if you are looking to get outside your chosen genre for a little exploring the hundreds of sub-genres can feel like a maze as difficult to navigate as the hedge maze in The Shining,

So let me know what books you have come across that seemed to be Horror but weren’t? Or, vice versa, you went looking for a different kind of book and ended up with something completely different. Were you happy or pleased? Do you find them helpful or tedious? Let us know down below!

Curse of the Witch’s Doll #MovieReview

Curse of the Witch’s Doll Synopsis: After a series of inexplicable events, Adeline Gray believes a haunted doll possesses the soul of a vengeful Witch. To have any hope of being reunited with her missing daughter, she knows she must defeat the evil curse of The Witch’s Doll.

Written and Directed By: Lawrence Fowler

Starring: Helen CrevelPhilip RidoutLayla Watts

Release Date: 02/06/2018

Runtime: 1hr 35min | Rating: 4 out of 5 | Source: Received from October Coast for review consideration

Curse of the Witch’s Doll Review

It seems like I go into a lot of movies with low expectations because the times I do go in expecting a movie to be fantastic I’m always disappointed. And when I go in with very low expectations I’m pleasantly surprised. Curse of the Witch’s Doll was one of those times.  I really think the cover does it a bit of a disservice. Going from the cover (and title) it looks like an Annabelle clone. That couldn’t be farther from the truth.

Unfortunately I can’t say too much about Curse of the Witch’s Doll because there are quite a few twists and turns that were genuinely surprising and I’d hate to ruin anything. I will only say one thing. The first ‘twist’ made me roll my eyes a bit but I can guarantee you…stick with it. I promise it’s worth it. The pacing is perfect, it always keeps moving forward with no lags at all. This is a movie that relies on acting, atmosphere and mood to scare you and it does it well. I never felt like they were going for the easy scare.

The cinematography is excellent with some truly beautiful and original shots. Combined with some decent CGI the movie is worth watching for that alone. Particularly one scene near the middle. It’s a very simple shot but the way its done is just…perfect. The make-up effects are decent. I’m a little torn on the doll itself. I kept going between creepy and goofy. Although there were some genuinely creepy moments with it. There were a lot of times when they didn’t go for the obvious jump-scare and used a more subtle effect. I liked that a lot. The sound design was excellent as well. The music is moody in places and only comes to the forefront during the action sequences and never telegraphs the scares. They also mix sounds in very well with the music to give you hints or to just make it creepier.

The acting is great all the way through. Everyone puts their hearts into it and it shows. The dialogue flows smoothly and naturally. There is one speech in particular that Adeline says that I really, really loved. Adeline’s words and actions feel very real. You really invest in Adeline’s character and, frankly, I was upset with her and for her. The finale of the movie was a bit abrupt. The switch in styles was surprising but understandable. It just left off of one part abruptly so you’re a little unsure of what happens next. I mean, you have a pretty good guess but I would have liked a few things cleared up.

I would have liked a bit more information on The Witch. There is absolutely no backstory for her. I would have liked to have known a bit more with that. Presumably she was hung as a witch but how did the doll end up where it did? Was it in the same place? It’s hard to say and with the Witch having an obvious French accent I think those parts should have been explained more. Even if it’s just through the trusty “ye olde journal” source. All in all I did enjoy it. Enough to want to watch it again and possibly buy it to keep.

A Focus on the Frightful: Session 9

A Focus on the Frightful Banner

Session 9

Directed by Brad Anderson and starring David Caruso, Peter Mullan, and  co-writer Stephen Gevedon

I can’t even begin to say how much I love this movie. It’s always mentioned on “Best Underrated” or “Top Cult Films” lists and still somehow manages to slip under the radar. At the time of its release it largely went unnoticed, not even making back what it had cost. It’s a movie that can have two totally different interpretation. Two very different truths. And, unlike a lot of other movies, either one makes sense and the movie itself does not tell you which to believe. Whether that was their intention or not, I don’t know. It often seems like the best effects or subtext comes through when the director is not trying to consciously wedge it in there. As always, major spoilers ahead. If you haven’t watched Session 9 yet, go watch it then come back here.

Demons of the Mind

The main story follows Gordon and his asbestos removal company that has been hired to un-asbestos the Danvers State Hospital. From the start a few things are apparent. Gordon has a new baby that seems to be up all night, every night with an ear infection and Gordon hasn’t been sleeping well. Gordon also is in need of money as his deal that he works out with the city for the asbestos removal lands them a huge bonus but only if they complete the job in a week. Anyone who’s ever seen the Danvers State Hospital on anything would know what a huge task that would be. If not its made pretty clear from the start as they tour the building with the city contractor. For reference, here’s a picture:

So he’s basically promising the impossible. They figure they can get it done, though, by working overtime and hiring on an extra man, Gordon’s wife’s nephew. The crew seems to have all known each other for a long time but there’s a lot of tension. At least between Hank and Phil. As the job goes on things start to deteriorate and more friction occurs. Hank goes missing, presumably having run off to Miami and casino school. Mike gets more and more fascinated listening to a recording of a former patient of the hospital – Mary Hobbes, a split personality. Gordon reveals to Phil that he hit his wife and things are bad at home and Phil wonders if Gordon’s losing it. It all culminates in Gordon going on a killing spree and killing his teammates at the end of the movie. This is also where we learn the reality of what has been going on the entire time.

The basic timeline of events, boiled down, is this:

After receiving the contract Gordon buys his wife some flowers to celebrate. From the way they both look it looks like parenting and bills have been pretty rough lately. After he walks in the door they talk and then he accidentally gets boiling water spilled on his leg. This causes him to snap and he murders his family.

The next day Gordon goes to work, having blocked out the events of the previous day. He remembers having hit his wife and he thinks that he’s been sleeping in his truck ever since. Gordon’s really been sleeping in the Danvers hospital as clues show. Things start getting a little strange and tensions among the team run high. Hank and Phil, in particular have issues. Hank is ‘living with Phil’s ex-girlfriend but doesn’t really seem to care about her, he just likes that it annoys Phil. Phil, from the start, has been trying to get Hank booted off the team and replaced with a much more dependable man. Gordon refuses which makes Phil irritated. Their equipment also takes some damage (at some point, it’s not really clear when this happens) and Gordon sees Phil talking to two shady looking characters. Shortly after this, Hank doesn’t show up fr work. Phil calls Hank’s girlfriend Amy, who tells Phil that Hank broke up with her and is heading to Miami for casino school. Gordon becomes suspicious of Phil because he saw him talking to the two guys and nobody else heard the conversation between Phil and Amy, they only heard Phil’s side of it. Phil and Amy, however, are telling the truth. Hank, during an asbestos check has found a cache of gold, old coins and other valuables. So, knowing he couldn’t smuggle it out with the team there, he came back later that night and was attacked by Gordon. One of the clues that Gordon is actually living in the hospital is the jar of peanut butter that Hank finds in the tunnel. It’s the same jar that Gordon picked up on his way home from work for his wife. Gordon becomes increasingly paranoid and suspicious of Phil. After Gordon confesses to Phil that he hit his wife (in his mind) Phil thinks that Gordon is cracking under the pressure and is worried that they’ll lose their bonus if they don’t hire on some outside help, which Gordon has been very resistant to. Mike and Gordon’s nephew are kind of in the background for some of the movie. Mike has become fascinated with a recording from a former patient there. Mary Hobbes. She was committed for Multiple Personality Disorder and the tape is her recounting of the events that led up to her mind fracturing and being committed. The doctor continually tries to get Mary to talk about a mysterious ‘other’ personality named Simon. We hear her story threaded through the events of the movie.

At the climax Jeff finds Hank wandering around, lobotomized. As everything starts falling apart Gordon snaps and murders his entire crew. We (the audience) finally get to see the events as they really transpired. Much of what we have seen is real. It’s when we’re with Gordon, which is most of the time, that reality is skewed. Throughout the movie it has shown him trying to call his wife repeatedly, begging to come home and apologizing. Later we find out that the phone was broken the whole time.

Split Personality

One thing this movie does, and does well, is setting up the characters. We see Phil as suspicious right along with Gordon. His actions seem shady and with the hatred that he displays towards Hank it’s pretty believable that he might have killed him, or hired others to do so. All of the parts are very well acted, making you that much more interested in them. My personal favorite was Mike. I could definitely see myself getting absorbed in listening to old patient tapes and records. Plus, when things start getting heated between Gordon and Phil he just nopes out of the situation and goes back to listening to his tapes. The nephew, Jeff, is also a great character. At first he seems like your basic mullet-headed doofball but there’s a very touching scene between him and his uncle Gordon. It was a very nice touch and gives Jeff a little depth without going cheesy. Their conversation sounds very real. After Hank telling him that Gordon really needs the money Jeff goes to Gordon to talk to him and reassures him that he’ll work his hardest for him. It’s a very nice scene.

There are two ways that you can read this movie. The simple reading is Gordon, under pressure to be a father, pay the bills and keep his business afloat, snaps. But…then there’s Simon.

Mary Hobbes

Mary Hobbes is the patient we learn about through the tapes. Another part that’s so well-written. You get invested in a character you don’t even see. We listen with Mike to Mary’s story. It’s a little fragmentary but the gist of it is that one evening Mary Hobbes was frightened by her brother, Peter. She fell and cut her chest very badly on her china doll. To get even with him, ‘Simon’ through Mary (or with her complaisance) stabbed her brother to death and then killed the rest of the family.

During these tape sessions Mary’s personality shifts between her, a male personality named ‘Billy’, a childlike personality named ‘The Princess’ and a mysterious ‘other’ personality named Simon. The doctor keeps asking to speak to Simon but Mary (and her other personalities) are very resistant to this. It becomes clear, once Simon is introduced, that he is not one of Mary’s personalities. His voice is very different, as is his attitude. He is creepy. So, so creepy. Whoever voiced him (I’ll get to that later) did an excellent job. He’s creepy without descending into Bond villain territory.

Everything is so on-key with this movie. The acting is great, the story is tight and you can have two explanations without the movie really telling you what to think. There is one scene that slightly tips its hand towards the supernatural but even that is very minor so people preferring the ‘psychotic break’ narrative can easily brush it off as Gordon’s mind breaking down. But is he?


Simon, to me, tips it to the supernatural. As he’s presented ‘through’ Mary he seems much different than her other personalities. He’s much more calm and collected. The scene I was referring to above as slightly tipping its hand into the supernatural is near the beginning. Gordon and Phil are getting a tour through Danvers to estimate the time and work involved. During the tour you can clearly hear a voice say “Hello, Gordon”. Later it’s revealed to be Simon’s voice. It’s unclear in the movie whether or not Gordon actually hears it or not. He seems kind of zoned out when the voice speaks but he doesn’t really react to it. During the end sequence, as Simon is talking to the doctor on the tape the doctor asks why he did it. And Simon replies “Because Mary let him, they always do” and the ‘personality’claims that she wanted to do it. He also says that he lives in “the sick and the wounded”. Which Gordon certainly is. It’s the only overtly supernatural thing that happens in the movie. But, to me, it points to an outside intelligence taking advantage of a person’s broken psyche.

The Ending

I prefer the supernatural explanation but then, I usually do. You can read it either way you want which is what makes it great. There was an alternate ending and sub-plot concerning a homeless woman who had been staying there and who witnessed everything but viewers found it confusing with many of them thinking that the woman was Mary Hobbes. I’m personally glad they changed it because viewing things through her perspective rather than Gordon’s really takes away the emotional impact of the final few scenes. That is another area that the movie does very well. We hear enough to know what happened at Gordon’s house (and just hearing it is chilling enough) but that’s it. The director didn’t feel the need to show us every gruesome detail. I can honestly say this is one of the only movies that I’ve felt any kind of sympathy for a child murderer. I think this is due to Peter Mullens’ powerful acting throughout. He really makes you feel for Gordon throughout. No mean feat to pull off, finding out what you do about Gordon and what actually happened. The final scenes of him sitting alone in the hospital, speaking into a broken telephone and begging for forgiveness from his wife are very, very powerful.

Final Thoughts and a Bit of Trivia

This is the area where I stick any other thoughts that pop into my head but don’t really fit anywhere else.

I always found it funny that they’re supposed to be working overtime, trying to get this done but almost every scene is them taking a break.

One of the reasons that I watched the movie was the picture on the cover. Looking at it I noticed that it seemed really familiar…Then I played Silent Hill 3 again and realized where I had seen it before.

Apparently Team Silent liked Session 9. Or, at the minimum liked the image. The plot for Silent Hill 2 may have also been inspired a bit by this movie. It’s different in tone but there are similarities.

The movie also features two CSI actors, David Caruso (Phil) and Paul Guilfoyle (Bill Griggs, the guy who hires them. David Caruso was on CSI: Miami and Paul Guilfoyle is on CSI: Vegas.

It was filmed at the Danvers State Hospital. One of the few remaining Kirkbride buildings. The other is the Traverse City State Hospital which has since been converted into apartments and shops and office space.

I liked that it left it a bit open for interpretation. It does seem to lean toward the supernatural but ‘Simon’ could be in Gordon’s head. I personally think that Simon is either an evil ghost or demonic presence that feeds off of fear and pain. Gordon was just emotionally low enough for Simon to worm his way in.

So let me know what you guys think of the movie. Do you think Simon was an evil entity or Gordon’s bruised and battered psyche? Did you like it? Hate it? We’d love to hear about it!

Sci-Fi Biweekly Bulletin: The Feed, Maze Runner: Death Cure, and a Giveaway from Sinister Grin Press!

The Sci-Fi Biweekly Bulletin Banner

From spaceships to alternate history, and other worlds to nanites, science fiction is a fascinating genre of rather amazing depth that many talented writers happily delve into on a daily basis. And we, the curators here at Sci-Fi & Scary, aren’t even going to talk about a tenth of it right now. However, what you will get is a selection of movies, books, and interesting articles from across the net. Also, there’s a strong potential for puns, gifs, and a moderate amount of fangirling.

And, as promised, a huge giveaway from Sinister Grin Press!

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Your Sci-Fi Funny

A Funny Star Trek Meme

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Movies

Well, for you Maze Runner fans out there (I haven’t seen one yet), you probably already know today is going to be an a-maze-ing day, as Maze Runner: Death Cure hits theatres!


Movie Poster for Maze Runner: Death Cure

Maze Runner: Death Cure synopsis: Young hero Thomas embarks on a mission to find a cure for a deadly disease known as the “Flare”.

Starring:  Dylan O’BrienKi Hong LeeKaya Scodelario (TBH, the only one I recognize is Ki Hong Lee, and that’s because he was in the not-so-great Wish Upon)

But, honestly, I think most of are looking forward to Friday next, aren’t we? I’m not even a fan of Marvel movies anymore, and I’m excited about Black Panther.

Movie cover for Black Panther


Black Panther synopsis: T’Challa, after the death of his father, the King of Wakanda, returns home to the isolated, technologically advanced African nation to succeed to the throne and take his rightful place as king.

Starring: Chadwick BosemanMichael B. JordanLupita Nyong’o

A black director, a nearly all-black cast, and a story-line about a “sh*thole” place that managed to do amazing things for its people? (At least according to what I’ve read.) What is there about that to not be excited about? Let’s hope it’s not ruined by the Marvel tendency to force in one-liners whenever possible whether it’s needed or not.

Ryan Coogler did good with Creed. Let’s hope he does fantastic with Black Panther.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Books

Book cover for The Feed

The Feed – Nick Clarke – January 23rd, 2018

THE FEED by Nick Clark Windo is a startling and timely debut which presents a world as unique and vividly imagined as STATION ELEVEN and THE GIRL WITH ALL THE GIFTS and explores what it is to be human in the digital age.

It makes us. It destroys us. 

The Feed is everywhere. It can be accessed by anyone, at any time. Every interaction, every emotion, every image can be shared through it.

Tom and Kate use The Feed, but they have resisted addiction to it. And this will serve them well when The Feed collapses.

Until their six-year-old daughter, Bea, goes missing.

Because how do you find someone in a world devoid of technology? And what happens when you can no longer trust that your loved ones are really who they claim to be?

Read a review for The Feed on these sites: SnazzyBooks, JennyinNeverland, EmmasBookishCorner, Damppebbles

Purchase via this Amazon Affiliate Link

Indie Author Giveaway

Oh, my dear, sweet sci-fi geeks, do you have it made today! You see, Sinister Grin Press is giving 5 lucky winners their choice of sci-fi novels from their site! Five of you are gonna get a free book? How sweet is this?!

Sinister Grin Press

“Stories that’ll carve a smile on your face…”

Sinister Grin Ad

a Rafflecopter giveaway

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Science Fiction Trivia

The really awesome super-blue-blood moon this week has come and gone and looked beautiful. On the con side, Cthulhu didn’t show up. Maybe the next one! So in honour of the big ball of…rock in the sky I’ve come up with the best moon movies. Well, at least movies about the moon.


Iron Sky

Apollo 13

Despicable Me

For All Mankind

A Trip to the Moon

2001: A Space Odyssey

Magnificent Desolation

In the Shadow of the Moon

Transformers: Dark of the Moon

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Join our Team!

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Sci-Fi on the Web

I love Quantum Leap and this article at SyFy makes a good argument why it should be given the reboot.

Also on SyFy they look at Annihilation’s de-codeable Twitter campaign

Nintendo is working on a new Super Mario Bros. movie. Hopefully it’s better than the abomination with Bod Hoskins and John Leguizamo

Satellites going places attached to rockets…I got nothing

A long-lost satellite has been heard from…very heartwarming

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

And a Sci-Fi GIF Goodbye

A Real Rocket Dr Who Gif

Butcher the Bakers #MovieReview

Butcher the Bakers Synopsis: Recently fired, a grim reaper terrorizes a small town, killing and collecting souls for a purpose only he knows. Sam and Martin, slackers who work at the local bakery, are hired by a mysterious stranger to stop him from killing again.

Tagline: Death Never Felt More Alive

Directed By: Tyler Amm

Starring: Ryan Matthew ZieglerSean WalshAlex Dittmer

Release Date: VoD Release Date –  January 16th 2018 (Release Date: April 17, 2017)

Runtime: 1h 34m | Rating: 3 out of 5 | Source: Received from October Coast for review consideration

Butcher the Bakers Review

I was a little reluctant to take Butcher the Bakers as I’m incredibly picky about horror comedies. I can’t say that I loved Butcher the Bakers but I also can’t say that I hated it. There were a few parts that made me chuckle, a few parts that were amusing and a few moments that made me go wtf? The acting for the most part was pretty good. There were a few off-key moments but very few and mostly the very minor characters.

The pacing seemed a little jerky now and then. For the most part it flowed smoothly but then there were certain areas where it dragged just a little. Plot-wise it held up pretty well. One of the funniest parts for me was an unexpected meta-moment that made me laugh. I also loved the characters of Lance the Commissary and Pastor Carafe. Especially in the scenes they were together. Their personalities played very well off each other and one of the times I did chuckle quite a bit was when they were at Pastor Carafes house. The eponymous Bakers were just okay to me. They had a few amusing moments but for me the ladies saved the movie. Pat, Dani and Bones were the most amusing parts for me. Their timing and deliveries were pitch perfect. The mute ‘Neil Armstrong’ was also a favorite. It’s surprising how much humour a disembodied arm can give. Particularly when you throw on a pair of googly eyes…

I also loved the characters of Lance the Commissary and Pastor Carafe. Especially in the scenes they were together. Their personalities played very well off each other and one of the times I laughed the most was when they were at Pastor Carafes house.

My main issues with the movie were the ‘meh’ feelings that the Bakers gave me and it was very loud. Not in the sound design, which seemed to be suitable, but there was a lot of yelling. It actually started to give me a headache after a bit. Usually movies don’t bother me too much (Heck, found footage movies never give me a headache or motion sickness) but there was so much yelling that it started to be uncomfortable. I am curious about some of the costuming decisions. Particularly as regards Dragomir ‘Drag’s’ finger created forces. I’m curious if the choices were deliberate or due to budget constraints. I did like the Plague Doctor (but I’m always partial to a Plague Doctor, they’re so creepy looking) and the voice for him was perfect. I would have loved to see/hear him more than a few of the others, except Bones. I always enjoyed seeing her. The effects were well within their budget and looked quite good. Particularly with the help of judicious editing. One choice that I did really love was Drag’s look. Reaper’s are generally shown in similar ways: suits, creepy or businesslike. Drag looks a bit greasy and bedraggled. It was an interesting and unique choice. 

All in all, while it didn’t thrill me much I think that I just wasn’t the right audience. I won’t try to discourage anyone from seeing it as what strikes your funny bone might just whack me on the elbow. I believe when it finds its right audience it will fare much better.

Butcher the Bakers is out on VoD now. You can watch it on Amazon here.

Our Watch Just Once Sci-Fi and Horror Films

A banner with the words The Top Ten Tuesday List on it.

There are lots of great science fiction and horror movies out there that you enjoy and end up purchasing so you can have them around to watch whenever the mood strikes you. But then when you re-watched it the first time you realized that it just doesn’t hold up as well to a second watch. Either that, or you enjoyed it the first time you watched it, but at the same time just knew it was one you weren’t ever going to watch again. This is a list of those films for us.

Our Watch Just Once Sci-Fi and Horror Films

The Conjuring – Director: James Wan – Starring: Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson

My first watch of The Conjuring – in theatres – was amazing. Oh my god! This was an awesome movie. I could not WAIT to see it again!! So I bought it without even thinking twice about it. And then…and then I watched it again, and I discovered the magic just wasn’t there. To be honest, I still put it on sometimes, mostly for background noise, though.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

InceptionDirector: Christopher Nolan – Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio and Joseph Gordon-Levitt

I was reluctant to watch Inception, but fairly quickly sucked into it. It was thought provoking, well-acted, and as soon as it was over I knew that I had no desire to ever see it again.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Jurassic World Director: Colin Trevorrow – Starring: Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Harrow

Jurassic World definitely didn’t win me over until near the end of the movie. And then there were those awesome dinosaur battles that you couldn’t help but fall in love with. However, I’m sad to report that multiple viewings of this film only help you to see the issues in it. Even though I was so eager to buy the movie in the beginning, at this point I can’t even say I’m looking forward to the next one.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Star Wars: Episode IVDirector: George Lucas – Starring: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, Carrie Fisher

Okay, so to be truthful I can’t even say I was gaga over this movie the first time I watched it. (It actually took me a couple of tries to watch it.) However, I eventually got far enough in to get hooked, I had to admit that it was a good movie. However, Star Wars: Episode IV, like the couple of other Star Wars films I’ve watched, never sparked even the tiniest urge to watch the film again. I guess that while I can appreciate that it is a cool universe, I just don’t see the appeal of the films.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

The ShiningDirector: Stanley Kubrick – Starring: Jack Nicholson, Shelley Duvall and Scatman Crothers

This, like Star Wars: Episode IV, falls in the realm of movies was a movie I didn’t mind watching once but had absolutely no urge to ever watch again. A well-acted movie with some iconic scenes and some characters that you will always recognize, it definitely had its good points. But, to be honest, I was happier watching that ridiculous documentary, Room 237, they did about all the symbolism and whatnot in the movie.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

HushDirector: Mike Flanagan – Starring: John Gallgher Jr. and Kate Siegal

I probably never would have watched this if it hadn’t been for @OddnMacabre’s movie days. Watching it with Twitter made it a lot more fun. I don’t really get into ‘Intruder Horror’ that much so, if left to my own devices, I probably never would have watched it in the first place. Even though the last ten minutes are really, really great I just don’t have any big urge to watch it again.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

The Woman in BlackDirector: James Watkins – Starring: Daniel Radcliffe and Janet McTeer

I saw it. Liked it well enough but I really haven’t had the urge to buy it or watch it again.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

Identity – Director: James Mangold – Starring: John Cusack, Ray Liotta and Amanda Peet

This is more in the ‘Thriller’ category but sometimes there’s a lot of crossover between thrillers and the horror genre. There are some movies with twists that you want to watch again but this was not one of them for me. I did like it. It has a lot of great actors but it’s just not one that caught me enough to want to watch it again.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

The Diary of Ellen RimbauerDirector: Craig R. Baxley – Starring: Lisa Brenner, Steven Brand, and Kate Burton

I liked Rose Red well enough (even if it was a bit derivative of The Haunting of Hill House and the Winchester House). The Diary of Ellen Rimbauer adds a bit of backstory and it’s worth watching once but repeated viewings really aren’t necessary.

Small Sci-Fi and Scary Divider

The AvengersDirector: Joss Whedon – Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans and Scarlett Johansson

This actually goes for most superhero movies. I might watch them once and enjoy them but I rarely watch them a second time.

I’m sure some of you were very offended with our choice of one-watch movies, but that’s okay! As long as you tell us why you thought the movie was so great! (Politely, that is!)

House of Salem #MovieReview

 House of Salem Synopsis: A group of kidnappers become a child’s unlikely protectors, after finding out they have unwittingly been set up to take part in a deadly game of human sacrifice.

Tagline: The Devil Has Come Home

Starring: Jessica ArtertonJack Brett AndersonLiam Kelly

Writer/Director: James Crow

Release Date: Available on VoD – 01/23/2018  (August 27, 2016 U.K.)

Runtime: 1h 40m | Rating: 4 out of 5 | Source: Received from October Coast for review consideration

I have to admit that I am guilty of judging a movie by its cover. I can’t say that I love the cover, it seems to be riding the creepy clown vibe but it has nothing to do with them. Thank goodness. I find clowns annoying but not very frightening. House of Salem starts out with the introduction to the child that we know will soon be kidnapped. The kidnapping itself was somewhat more unusual than most and I started to pay more attention. Eleven minutes in gave me a “Holy crap!” moment that ensured my attention for the rest of the movie.  

The pacing of House of Salem stays pretty even throughout, picking up near the end. The acting was very good. Much better than I was expecting and the moreso when I realized that it is Jessica Arterton and Liam Kelly’s first movie. Liam Kelly’s acting in the role of the kidnapped child was great. He seemed to play it a bit younger than his actual age but it is right for the character. The other actors are great as well. They all have an ambiguity about them which makes it hard to know what they will end up doing in the long run or how they will react. I did have one minor issue and that was when they spoke with the masks on it was very muffled and a little hard to tell what they were saying. Some ADR would have worked well there with a slight cloth effect overlaid. The dialogue between the characters flows well and doesn’t seem stilted or poorly done.

The scares were low-key but very effective. More creepy and atmospheric rather than trying to make people jump. I appreciate that. It’s also a movie that does child death well. That might be a weird thing to say but it’s true. It doesn’t linger up close and gory for shock value. It gives you just enough to go on visually but keeps most of the scares to the creepy side rather than the in-your-face gory side. The scoring wasn’t stand out but it was very effective and suited the scenes. No huge musical build-ups to telegraph the scares from a mile away. One part in particular made me giggle. I was thinking that the masks that were used by the cult were reminiscent of The Wicker Man and right after a character made a Wicker Man joke. It gave me happies.

The locations in House of Salem were great as were most of the effects. In general the effects were low-key and the story didn’t rely on an over abundance of them, which was very refreshing. They obviously knew they were a weak area and kept the momentum up with story and dialogue, rather than cheap, poorly done scares. There were a few missteps, however. At certain parts you could really tell that the make-up effects were make-up. It was less noticeable in the far shots, it was only in the close-ups that it was readily apparent. Also, has pink become the new color for gunfire? I’ve noticed it in three different movies now. At first I thought it was a style choice in the first movie but I’ve seen it in others now so I’m wondering if it’s a cheaper effect? I don’t know. I just know it doesn’t look quite right.

House of Salem was great up until the last minute or two. It’s part of why I can’t give it the full five stars that I would like to. With the rest of the movie doing some original things it was kind of a let down. The climax and finale were great but the final couple of minutes kind of took away from it. It wasn’t done poorly, it’s just that type of ending has been done before. A lot. I think it would have better served the movie to trim off the last minute or two and let it end just before. But that’s just my opinion. 

House of Salem turned out to  be much better than I thought it would be. The plot was coherent and interesting and took a few turns that I wasn’t expecting. The acting was much better than I anticipated, especially from the newcomers. I look forward to seeing more of them.