"Haunting the Obvious"

(The Haunting)

The storyline is as follows: 3 filmmakers disappear in the woods in Maryland while shooting a documentary. A year later…..oh shit, I'm sorry….wrong movie. I thought I was reviewing a SCARY movie.

My bad.

Remember a little B&W film that came out in '63 that scared the hell out of it's audiences and still does even now, 36 years later? It was a film that featured 4 characters (2 men and 2 women) who were attempting to spend the night in an alleged haunted mansion. Our colorful characters consisted of a Scientist, a seductress, a mental patient, and a dork.

Well, as much as that sounds like the plot of a film recently released by Dreamworks SKG, whatever you do, DON'T mistaken the two as similar.

I realize they share the same title…but still, don't do it.

Yes, I also realize both films have the same amount of characters with the same personalities…in fact, the same NAMES…..BUT STILL….don't confuse them.

'Cause, ya see, one of them is a truly frightening film, while the other is….well, somewhat of a comedy with $80 Mill worth of f/x.

Yes, I am obviously referring to DreamWorks 'remake' of Robert Wise's "The Haunting".

Now, the original version is one of my favs. A big reason for that was it's unique approach in that it was able to scare the hell out of you without showing anything. You heard plenty, but it left the rest up to your imagination. It completely manipulated the 'ol idea of being terrified by the things that go 'bump' in the night.

Well, DreamWorks felt for some reason that audiences wanted to 'see' what was bumping, and they had a butt load of f/x to bump with. But that wasn't enough. They now needed direction, but it had to come from someone who was fast paced, action oriented, because several of these f/x were going to happen quickly……in some cases, 'chase you', if you will. Who better than director John (Replacement Killers/Face Off) Woo? Well, he was apparently busy, so they turned to a rather 'Speedy' director who could take a mean assed ghost and 'Twist' it around the 4 victims. Enter action freak, Jan De Bont.

So the f/x and director are in place……now we need talent.

We need a convincing scientist…..who better than Liam Neeson, and he's just coming off from "Star Wars"!

'K…..now we need a seductress. Someone who is a hottie these days. Let's see……Selma Hayek isn't convincing enough……but Catherine Zeta-Jones is some pretty damn hot eye candy, AND she recently proved actress worthy in Spielberg's "Zorro", and Spielberg is the EP on this flick……PERFECT!

Only 2 more left……….we need a mental chick….hmmm, Lili (don't ask)Taylor could do that well…..okay, now a dork…….but no one too obvious…but they have to have some horror experience…..well, "Anaconda" was pretty damn 'horrifying', so how about that blonde guy, Owen Wilson? Don't worry, he's simply in the film for comic relief, cause afterall, this film is gonna be SOOOO scary that we GOTTA have comic relief.

Okay! It's settled.

Now, everybody grab their camping gear. We've got the map and the 2 cameras…..so a-witch hunting we will go…..OH WAIT….I'm sorry, I forgot which film this was.

But hold on a sec……aren't these 4 people staying in a giant mansion with a haunted history? And aren't they frightened by those bumps in the night?……there ARE bumps, right?

Then why is dork-dude free-basing Pez?

Why?

Because you know you have a scare factor problem when the most terrifying aspect of the film only occurs everytime bi-sexual Zeta-Jones appears to be making a hit on her colleague, Taylor.

(On the other hand, that's a turn on for some of us.)

Hmmmm.

In my case, I realize I will have a prob w/ a horror flick when my favorite parts are coming from that dork dude's dialogue. He was some funny shit!

But I thought this was supposed to be a horror film? A suspense-thriller?

Well, the $80 Mill f/x were creepy, right?

I'm sure they would have been had I not seen them before in at least 3 other films (Frighteners, Poltergeist, Elm Street, etc).

Ya see, when you're trying to build suspense within a horror/suspense film, you gotta BUILD it. This requires atmosphere, very little comedy, lighting, and the element of the unexpected.

Well, I did so much laughing in the first half of this film, so when the time came for me to take it seriously, I found it hard as hell to switch gears…..and then it was too late.

Now, allow me to explain the title because I consider it the underlying theme of this film.

There is a rule you try to follow when making a serious, suspenseful film.

NEVER 'state the obvious'.

Huh?

In other words, never create a situation where your audience is going to say 'Duh'.

For (obvious) example, when something is making loud, painful noises on the other side of a door, try not to have your character claim

"There's something behind the door!"

Or……when a character is standing on a stairway that is breaking apart, DON'T have one of the witnessing characters say

"Get off the stairway, it's falling apart!".

Getting' the idea?

The only thing missing (thank god) was when a character appeared to be dead. I was expecting one of the others to claim

"She's dead".

(good boy, De Bont!)

Don't get me wrong…the film didn't suck.

The f/x were playful, the comedic dialogue was well written and Zeta-Jones was nice to look at.

But for some strange reason, I was looking forward to being scared….kinda like the way I was during the '63 version of this film.

Also kinda like the way I was while watching the first "Poltergeist" which had Spielberg written all over it. And, ironically (?) this film borrowed a few ideas from Polty, unfortunately not the frightening moments.

In my opinion, the director was out of his element.

This one needed a DePalma, a Romero….hell, I'd even have settled for a Tobe Hooper (Poltergiest).

And for some reason, whenever something funky happened, I kept expecting Keanu Reeves to say

"Woah!".

Well, I'm scared….how about you?

Anyway…..the 3 filmmakers film footage is found a year later….


D

BACK