Print Topic

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board  /  Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  /  The Haunting In Connecticut
Posted by: Old Time Wesley, June 29th, 2009, 9:40pm
"After a family is forced to relocate for their son's health, they begin experiencing supernatural behavior in their new home, which turns out to be a former mortuary."


This movies suffers from being a drama and nothing more. I'm haunted by the fact they called this a haunting. (IMDB has it as Horror, Thriller)

Based on a true boring story.

This kid, he has cancer, right? The best part is he sees dead people and chooses a bedroom in a spooky house which is an embalming room but oh no they can't open the door until...

Casey Jones shows up and is awesome.

They briefly touch on the fathers alcohol abuse and he shows up later for the big payoff.

If I mentioned all the things I disliked in the movie I would spoil the plot for anyone who may actually watch this.

I loved the ending to this movie because that meant it was over and so are my thoughts on this movie.
Posted by: steven8, June 29th, 2009, 10:41pm; Reply: 1

Quoted from Old Time Wesley
"After a family is forced to relocate for their son's health, they begin experiencing supernatural behavior in their new home, which turns out to be a former mortuary."


This movies suffers from being a drama and nothing more. I'm haunted by the fact they called this a haunting. (IMDB has it as Horror, Thriller)

Based on a true boring story.

This kid, he has cancer, right? The best part is he sees dead people and chooses a bedroom in a spooky house which is an embalming room but oh no they can't open the door until...

Casey Jones shows up and is awesome.

They briefly touch on the fathers alcohol abuse and he shows up later for the big payoff.

If I mentioned all the things I disliked in the movie I would spoil the plot for anyone who may actually watch this.

I loved the ending to this movie because that meant it was over and so are my thoughts on this movie.


So. . .you didn't like it then?
Posted by: Zack, June 30th, 2009, 8:05am; Reply: 2
I actually liked this. Much better than I thought it'd be.

~Zack~
Posted by: Old Time Wesley, June 30th, 2009, 7:07pm; Reply: 3

Quoted from steven8


So. . .you didn't like it then?


Honestly, I don't know. The only reason I watched it because I was trying to give horror a chance and not be so down on it but this movie felt like originally it was a drama and some dimwit asshole changed it and added the silly supernatural horror garbage in it.

I have a bunch of other movies and hopefully they aren't as poor.
Posted by: ReaperCreeper, June 30th, 2009, 7:46pm; Reply: 4
Wait, so you have them but you haven't watched them? Which ones are they? And do you like Horror at all? If not, then why do you even have them? [if you don't like them, I'll keep 'em =P]

I can say I disliked this movie, but for completely different reasons to yours. I thought the Horror scenes, atmosphere and imagery were VERY well-done -- very solid for a PG-13 movie -- but on the downside, most of the "family" scenes were horribly-written. I have no problems with Drama in Horror movies because it makes the characters feel more real and thus easier to relate to once they're thrust into the horror, be it supernatural, a serial killer, or whatever. But the scenes here felt like a cheap weekend soap opera. The dad breaking the light-bulbs was hilarious, for example, although it wasn't meant to be.



[SPOILERS HERE ON!!!!!]



Another thing I disliked was how they tried to humanize the spirit in the movie by saying he was in fact protecting the family from the evil ones. Good ghosts, to me, just crap all over any film (horror-wise anyway) and it just oozes cheese. In fact, I think the only Horror film where this was well-done was Stephen King's "Pet Sematary".

--Julio




Posted by: Old Time Wesley, June 30th, 2009, 8:58pm; Reply: 5
I'm not a fan of the genre in the sense that I'll take the same recycled crap with a new name and say "That was classic" but I will give a film a watch if it looks good regardless of genre.

Spoilers

This movie should have just ended after Casey Jones took the dust out of the house. Anything after that should have happened at the start and not rushed into the end.

The kids played hide and seek too much without anything happening. The possessed kid coming back at the end with the axe was dumb. Why didn't he just burn the house down? Why did he break the wall for his sister/cousin to see bodies before he kicks her out? Then for dramatic effect he breaks the rest of the walls to "release" the bodies instead he could have just burned the house and they fall out as it is burning.

Everything that would have made the film better happened too late for me to care.


A guy walks to the store, buys some gum and goes home. - Based On A True Story.
Posted by: Aaron, July 21st, 2009, 8:57pm; Reply: 6
I liked the ending. But the movie had cliche scare tricks that are done to death. But I will admit I jumped twice, but as a horror movie it didn't work. I did like the last few lines of the film but overall....meh. It was alright
Posted by: Baltis. (Guest), July 21st, 2009, 9:25pm; Reply: 7
Movie sucked goat shit out of a cathader...

One of, if not, the worst movies I've seen in a long time. My wife wanted to see this when it hit theaters and I cleverly averted the disaster by seeing something else... I think it was "Ghost of girlfriends Past" or some shit. Either way both sucked hardcore.

This story isn't true. My take... The kid had cancer... He was hallucinating and seeing visions and weired shit from all the pills and meds he was on. Experimental ones at that... The mom wanted to cash in cause she was a lowly wretch and went along with the story, causing shit to happen and making people believe it really was ghost.

The cancer cleared up cause of the doctors treatment. Nothing more. Miracles didn't happen then and they don't happen now. Simple and clean. There are no such things as ghost roaming our earth and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to take a step outside. Jesus didn't turn water into wine, raise the dead or turn back the hands of time, either... He was a man. Nothing more.  

This movie had some of the worst acting I had seen in a big release in a long time. Virginia Madison gave her lines like a crack whore would give a 2 cent blow job. She and that incandescent shit bubble kid should've been recast. She took off years and years from working in Hollywood and to come back and do this junk??? Please, I'd have stayed home.

The Haunting in Connecticut was about as thrilling as a colonoscopy...
Posted by: CindyLKeller, July 23rd, 2009, 7:47am; Reply: 8
I fell asleep watching it...
thought I'd give it another try the next night, and fell asleep again, but I woke to see this a kid throwing up this thick stuff that floated out of his mouth...
okay...
fell asleep again and woke to him with an ax, and breaking out the walls releasing the bodies of the dead.

Didn't work for me.

The writer should have came here for input on the script. Then done a rewrite before filming. Not sure who wrote this, but they must have known somebody somewhere.


Cindy  
Posted by: Aaron, July 23rd, 2009, 11:35am; Reply: 9
I'm surprised it was as slow moving as it was. Even when the climax happened, it seemed it was thrown and slapped together, anyone agree?
Posted by: Old Time Wesley, July 23rd, 2009, 12:41pm; Reply: 10

Quoted from CindyLKeller


The writer should have came here for input on the script. Then done a rewrite before filming. Not sure who wrote this, but they must have known somebody somewhere.


Cindy  


I blame the director who is a nobody and from his credits he deserves no credit.

One of the writers was the writer of Revenge of The Nerds...

Whoever thought this was a true story is an idiot and should be killed by assassins who make it look like auto erotic asphyxiation.

Any of these based on a true story movies are complete bullshit (Cue Penn & Teller)
Posted by: michel, July 23rd, 2009, 2:18pm; Reply: 11

Quoted from CindyLKeller
The writer should have came here for input on the script. Then done a rewrite before filming. Not sure who wrote this, but they must have known somebody somewhere.

Like many movies... And we spend days, weeks, months, sometimes years to try to write a decent script...  >:(
Posted by: Andrew, July 23rd, 2009, 4:05pm; Reply: 12
Wow, did anyone like it?!

Trying to intellectualise horror movies is redundant - it is what it is. People like what they like, and as with any business, if there's a market for it, there will be suppliers.

Andrew
Posted by: Old Time Wesley, July 23rd, 2009, 9:33pm; Reply: 13

Quoted from Andrew
Wow, did anyone like it?!

Trying to intellectualise horror movies is redundant - it is what it is. People like what they like, and as with any business, if there's a market for it, there will be suppliers.

Andrew


That is the problem. The bar is so low because "Anyone can make a horror film" and they usually do the genre has become a joke in my opinion of course.

You call it a movie and they called it the true story and that is the problem. How can a true story have plot holes and no real horror until the end?

I'm writing a true story about me, as a superhero. Obviously I'm saying it's true so it must be, right? You can't disagree with the plot because it really happened.

That is the major problem with this "film"

I don't buy this happened and they say it did. If they take that away it would still be average but at least people wouldn't question the "Based on a true story" bullshit they toss at us.
Print page generated: May 4th, 2024, 11:47am