248 reviews
Anna (Emily Browning) returns home from a psychiatric institution after her suicide attempt. She's been struggling after her mother's death in a fire. Her mother was ill and the caretaker Rachel Summers (Elizabeth Banks) is now her father Steven (David Strathairn)'s girlfriend. Her sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel) is convinced that Rachel killed their mother. She keeps having visions of 3 little kids. Her boyfriend Matt is killed presumably in an accident after she sees him in a vision. Her father is getting remarried to Rachel. The girls discover that Rachel is using a false identity. Anna suspects her to be Mildred Kemp who killed the 3 kids in her vision and disappeared.
Emily Browning is great as a distressed teen and I like everybody in this. There is a moody ghostly sense through out the movie. This boils down to the ending. I completely understand if some people throw up their hands at the final twists. I personally scratched my head at first. In the end, I accepted it and like the movie. I could have easily gone the other way.
Emily Browning is great as a distressed teen and I like everybody in this. There is a moody ghostly sense through out the movie. This boils down to the ending. I completely understand if some people throw up their hands at the final twists. I personally scratched my head at first. In the end, I accepted it and like the movie. I could have easily gone the other way.
- SnoopyStyle
- Oct 18, 2015
- Permalink
I typically find newer horror movies to be cheesy, humorous, boring, and above all: not scary. You know that feeling you get when a movie starts to take its toll on your patients and causes your eyes to wander around the theater? You don't get that at all with this film. This movie grabbed me from the beginning and refused to let go. The film's music score is extremely effective at creating a suspenseful and uneasy viewer sensation, which I think deserves full appreciation for the movie's ghostly flavor. Without any doubt, appropriate music in a movie is like butter on popcorn. Would Jaws scare you without the renowned theme music? The cast was nothing less then superb. Emily Browning was perfect at playing the "sad, quiet girl with horrible visions" role. I'm not going to spoil it for anyone, but the ending of this movie really twists your mind and makes you think. I found it to be an adequate yet abrupt closure for the story despite how it is following a certain trend with recent horror movie endings.
- bass-player-blues
- Feb 1, 2009
- Permalink
The picture is a sleek production with acceptable budget and packs genuine chills , suspense , tension , and shocks , it's a terror-thriller very exciting . It deals with a teen named Anna Rydell(Emily Browning) , after spending a stint in a mental institution, return to the home of their father , a famous writer named Steve (David Strathairn) who is now living with her late mother's nurse, Rachel Summer (Elizabeth Banks) and both Anna and her older sister Alex (Arielle Kebel) think Rachel was responsible for her mummy's death in a seaside house blow up the year before . Once there, in addition to dealing with their stepmother's obsessive and cruel ways . Soon after her arrival , Anna also starts to receive warnings from her late ghost mother and three interfering children who affects her recovery . The Alex's sanity is also jeopardized thanks to her unbalanced stepmother , and aloof father . Another night Anna goes to sleep, she hears noises and the door to her bedroom creakily opens and meets the ghost . Terrified, she runs out of her room and tells her sister that someone has come into her room . Alex and Anna set out to look for proofs to demonstrate that Rachel is the killer.
This eerie movie produced by the successful director/producer Ivan Reitman displays terror, shocks, hard-edged drama , plot twists and creepy images . The story come to life in a wonderful fashion, giving it a haunting ominous atmosphere that often seems to mimic the tense relations between the members of the family . While the look is suitable atmospheric and scary , the argument stretches plausibility to the breaking point in a surprising finale . The film is an American remake of successful Korean film titled ¨A tale of two sisters¨ by Ji Woon Kim . It also contains the usual spooky phantoms of pale complexion from Japanese stories directed by Takashi Mike and Hideo Nakata as ¨The Grudge ¨ , ¨ The ring ¨ and ¨ Dark water ¨ . The direction is incredibly good , production design by Andrew Menzies , the cinematography by Daniel Landin , lighting, and especially the soundtrack by expert on terror scores Christopher Young , all are captivating. The motion picture is well directed by the Guard brothers , Charles and Thomas who create a powerful character study that blends chills , thrills , suspense and psychological drama in a cleverly devised plot that certainly offers more than the usual terror film . This is a frightening , psychological thriller, and familiar drama , all at their best that will appeal to horror buffs . Rating : Better than average . Worthwhile watching .
This eerie movie produced by the successful director/producer Ivan Reitman displays terror, shocks, hard-edged drama , plot twists and creepy images . The story come to life in a wonderful fashion, giving it a haunting ominous atmosphere that often seems to mimic the tense relations between the members of the family . While the look is suitable atmospheric and scary , the argument stretches plausibility to the breaking point in a surprising finale . The film is an American remake of successful Korean film titled ¨A tale of two sisters¨ by Ji Woon Kim . It also contains the usual spooky phantoms of pale complexion from Japanese stories directed by Takashi Mike and Hideo Nakata as ¨The Grudge ¨ , ¨ The ring ¨ and ¨ Dark water ¨ . The direction is incredibly good , production design by Andrew Menzies , the cinematography by Daniel Landin , lighting, and especially the soundtrack by expert on terror scores Christopher Young , all are captivating. The motion picture is well directed by the Guard brothers , Charles and Thomas who create a powerful character study that blends chills , thrills , suspense and psychological drama in a cleverly devised plot that certainly offers more than the usual terror film . This is a frightening , psychological thriller, and familiar drama , all at their best that will appeal to horror buffs . Rating : Better than average . Worthwhile watching .
After being cleared for release from a mental hospital, Anna (Emily Browning) returns home to her writer father Steven (David Strathairn) and sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel). In her absence, Emily's father has grown closer to her late mother's former caretaker Rachel (Elizabeth Banks). Anna is continually hallucinating and seeing her dead mother, insisting that her death was not an accident and that Rachel had something to do with it. With this in mind, she sets out with Alex to prove Rachel is not everything she seems.
I did not expect much from The Uninvited, but surprisingly, I received a lot more than I expected.
Despite being an American remake of the Korean film A Tale of Two Sisters, The Uninvited does enough to make it stand out on its own. I never saw the original film, but I imagine it looked different than this film does. It is dark and atmospheric from the very beginning, and continues on the same wavelength to the very end of the film. It frequently blends horror with psychological terror, developing a movie that could have easily been a throwaway scare-flick for pre-teens to scream through, but ends up being a fairly accomplished film. This is not a film anywhere near the quality of the greatness found in the likes of The Silence of the Lambs, but it is a film that was not just scraped out for a profit.
The story itself, as twisty and loopy as it gets, is fairly well done. Although I was not too interested at the beginning, the film draws you in rather tightly, revealing itself quite nicely over its short 87-minute running time. Yes, there are plenty of predictable moments laced throughout the film, but there are a few moments of genuine surprise as well. The film never makes the claim that it is trying to be original, but it does a unique enough job that you can only see shades of what has come before (as opposed to a standard American horror film basically spelling out exactly what it is ripping off, or homaging sort to speak). Even with the cheap scares around every corner, it still managed to make me jump back more than once.
What does not make sense however, is how some things are explicitly stated while others are briefly alluded to. A lot of what happens is fairly obvious for even the least astute of audiences, yet the film dumbs itself down more than once to fit the conventions of 2000-era PG-13 horror. When something ambiguous comes up, it is either explained in-depth, or done away with entirely. A rather crucial character element of Anna's is revealed very close to the beginning of the film, but is never explored in any capacity. We understand her motivations and what drives her quest for the truth, but there are a few background details that even after the film concludes, still left me a bit baffled. Why explain some things that are obvious, but not bother touching on ones that are not?
Despite not having starred in a lot of things, Browning is quite good in her role as Anna. Struggling throughout the film with mental anguish and hallucinations, Browning makes this young teenage character convincing in a way only someone so young could do. She is not perfect in the role, but you can see the desperation and heartbreak in her face and her actions. This is an actress who becomes her role, and never falters out of it. She carries the film from beginning to end, and never looks the worst for it. She is a young actress I hope to continue to see more of, especially in higher fare.
Kebbel, while not as powerful as Browning, commands when she is on-screen. She works beautifully off of Browning, and makes their relationship clear and pure from their first moment together. Their chemistry makes the film as surprising as it is. It easily could have been something that was clouded over, or underplayed. But the filmmakers use every opportunity to stress the strength of the relationship of the two sisters, and their willingness to go the distance for each other. Some moments are just heartbreaking, seeing the lengths they are willing to go, but Kebbel keeps herself in check at all times, and gives a great performance.
Strathairn, despite the Oscar-nomination for Good Night, and Good Luck., seems to have fallen on being the wise older character in every movie since, and gives the same old performance here. He is good as always, but seems more mellowed down than he should be. Banks on the other hand, is completely out of her comfort zone, and her performance is an obvious reflection. In some scenes, she is downright terrifying as the evil potential stepmother, and in others, she is laughably bad. There is no middle ground, and no one seems to have been able to suggest any consistency tips for her. While she gives a decent performance anyway, it could have been stronger with a more confident actress.
But what the film is guilty of is its lack of reinvention. It is a unique piece of horror for 2009, but the film never strives to be anything bigger or better. It lacks the motivations to really make something of itself, and never even tries to be something better than it could be. The Uninvited really surprised me for how good it actually was, but surprised me more in how easily it could have been even better. A lean running time, a great pair of young actresses, and some decent supporting acting could have made this small picture quite the notorious horror flick. But instead, it seems content just being an above average run-of-the-mill psychological thriller.
7/10.
(Portions of this review originally appeared on http://www.dvdfanatic.com).
I did not expect much from The Uninvited, but surprisingly, I received a lot more than I expected.
Despite being an American remake of the Korean film A Tale of Two Sisters, The Uninvited does enough to make it stand out on its own. I never saw the original film, but I imagine it looked different than this film does. It is dark and atmospheric from the very beginning, and continues on the same wavelength to the very end of the film. It frequently blends horror with psychological terror, developing a movie that could have easily been a throwaway scare-flick for pre-teens to scream through, but ends up being a fairly accomplished film. This is not a film anywhere near the quality of the greatness found in the likes of The Silence of the Lambs, but it is a film that was not just scraped out for a profit.
The story itself, as twisty and loopy as it gets, is fairly well done. Although I was not too interested at the beginning, the film draws you in rather tightly, revealing itself quite nicely over its short 87-minute running time. Yes, there are plenty of predictable moments laced throughout the film, but there are a few moments of genuine surprise as well. The film never makes the claim that it is trying to be original, but it does a unique enough job that you can only see shades of what has come before (as opposed to a standard American horror film basically spelling out exactly what it is ripping off, or homaging sort to speak). Even with the cheap scares around every corner, it still managed to make me jump back more than once.
What does not make sense however, is how some things are explicitly stated while others are briefly alluded to. A lot of what happens is fairly obvious for even the least astute of audiences, yet the film dumbs itself down more than once to fit the conventions of 2000-era PG-13 horror. When something ambiguous comes up, it is either explained in-depth, or done away with entirely. A rather crucial character element of Anna's is revealed very close to the beginning of the film, but is never explored in any capacity. We understand her motivations and what drives her quest for the truth, but there are a few background details that even after the film concludes, still left me a bit baffled. Why explain some things that are obvious, but not bother touching on ones that are not?
Despite not having starred in a lot of things, Browning is quite good in her role as Anna. Struggling throughout the film with mental anguish and hallucinations, Browning makes this young teenage character convincing in a way only someone so young could do. She is not perfect in the role, but you can see the desperation and heartbreak in her face and her actions. This is an actress who becomes her role, and never falters out of it. She carries the film from beginning to end, and never looks the worst for it. She is a young actress I hope to continue to see more of, especially in higher fare.
Kebbel, while not as powerful as Browning, commands when she is on-screen. She works beautifully off of Browning, and makes their relationship clear and pure from their first moment together. Their chemistry makes the film as surprising as it is. It easily could have been something that was clouded over, or underplayed. But the filmmakers use every opportunity to stress the strength of the relationship of the two sisters, and their willingness to go the distance for each other. Some moments are just heartbreaking, seeing the lengths they are willing to go, but Kebbel keeps herself in check at all times, and gives a great performance.
Strathairn, despite the Oscar-nomination for Good Night, and Good Luck., seems to have fallen on being the wise older character in every movie since, and gives the same old performance here. He is good as always, but seems more mellowed down than he should be. Banks on the other hand, is completely out of her comfort zone, and her performance is an obvious reflection. In some scenes, she is downright terrifying as the evil potential stepmother, and in others, she is laughably bad. There is no middle ground, and no one seems to have been able to suggest any consistency tips for her. While she gives a decent performance anyway, it could have been stronger with a more confident actress.
But what the film is guilty of is its lack of reinvention. It is a unique piece of horror for 2009, but the film never strives to be anything bigger or better. It lacks the motivations to really make something of itself, and never even tries to be something better than it could be. The Uninvited really surprised me for how good it actually was, but surprised me more in how easily it could have been even better. A lean running time, a great pair of young actresses, and some decent supporting acting could have made this small picture quite the notorious horror flick. But instead, it seems content just being an above average run-of-the-mill psychological thriller.
7/10.
(Portions of this review originally appeared on http://www.dvdfanatic.com).
- DonFishies
- Apr 26, 2009
- Permalink
What worked:
It's a beautifully shot and captured movie, with amazing natural space. The movie keeps its essence and mysterious till the end, which is a plus point, making it a watchable movie
What did not work
I must say the screenplay and narrative of the movie is weak, making it a dull watch because of the lack of substance. The movie is a simple thriller, with few thrills or exciting scenes. I would have loved the movie more if the movie had maintained the mood and climate of the movie. It's not a bad watch but an average watch
Final verdict: it's an okay time pass movie
- ridi-arahan
- Jan 31, 2021
- Permalink
I was incredibly disappointed. I am a fan of Asian Horror and have the movie A Tale of Two Sisters that this movie was based on. There is little real resemblance. They completely revamped it, probably because they thought American audiences were too attention deficit to sit through a real psychological thriller without a linear plot that was explained to death. They also must have thought that the concept of vengeful spirits was too scary for us because they turned it into another lame overdone psycho killer movie. They took an intense and creepy ghost story and mutilated it. What they ended up with was a movie that was boring, tedious, and predictable. Don't waste your money seeing or renting this one.
For my part, I find it excellent. I who usually hate horror movies, I really enjoyed The Uninvited, because it's not a horror movie, precisely. I would rather say that it's a thriller, particularly well done, which features Emily Browning, an amazing actress who plays well throughout the film. All the supporting roles are equally compelling, from the creepy stepmother to the protective sister and the ambiguous father.
But the real strenght of The Uninvited is its ending : completely unexpected, it is very well brought and remains logical with everything that has been showed to us previously, if we watch the whole thing again. A very nice surprise for me! 8/10.
But the real strenght of The Uninvited is its ending : completely unexpected, it is very well brought and remains logical with everything that has been showed to us previously, if we watch the whole thing again. A very nice surprise for me! 8/10.
- brosseauphilippe
- May 4, 2022
- Permalink
I saw this movie BEFORE the original Korean horror film ('A Tale of Two Sisters' ) that it was based on and I found this a bland, blunter, popcorn shocker version of the film.
The sole merit of this film is Emily Browning. She turns in a credible performance. You believe in her, makes you fear for her, and that's half the battle.
So it's such a shame that the directors and screenwriters drop the ball so badly. Everything in this movie is SO geared to a major twist in the last reel that instead of making you bug out with its rug-pulling impact, like Sixth Sense or Usual Suspects do, it instead just makes you roll your eyes.
Why? Because like those 2 films i've mentioned this flick lacks of any preceding foreshadowing or character nuance thus robbing the end twist of its intended impact. Oh, and the cheesy J Horror ghosts moments seem more Scary Movie than The Ring.
The Korean original was creepier, confusing in parts but it comes together in the end and the cinematography is beautifully framed (one impressive shot comes out from underwater and up onto a deck where the titular sisters are sitting). The Guard Brothers ignore such artistry and go for a generic approach and when they do breakaway its to copy/homage a Kubrick helicopter shot from 'The Shining'.
Strathairn (fantastic in Good Night + Good Luck) is wasted. Banks, who has proved her on screen versatility in an eclectic choice of roles in multiple pics over the past year, here goes for the fairy tale Step mother - the steel under her smile was borderline hammy but she definitely is one of the best (and overlooked) actresses in the business.
All in all - avoid this film and seek out the Korean original instead but if it turns up on cable and you have 87 minutes to waste - watch it for Browning and Banks and the fun of yawning at a schlock-y story. LOL
The sole merit of this film is Emily Browning. She turns in a credible performance. You believe in her, makes you fear for her, and that's half the battle.
So it's such a shame that the directors and screenwriters drop the ball so badly. Everything in this movie is SO geared to a major twist in the last reel that instead of making you bug out with its rug-pulling impact, like Sixth Sense or Usual Suspects do, it instead just makes you roll your eyes.
Why? Because like those 2 films i've mentioned this flick lacks of any preceding foreshadowing or character nuance thus robbing the end twist of its intended impact. Oh, and the cheesy J Horror ghosts moments seem more Scary Movie than The Ring.
The Korean original was creepier, confusing in parts but it comes together in the end and the cinematography is beautifully framed (one impressive shot comes out from underwater and up onto a deck where the titular sisters are sitting). The Guard Brothers ignore such artistry and go for a generic approach and when they do breakaway its to copy/homage a Kubrick helicopter shot from 'The Shining'.
Strathairn (fantastic in Good Night + Good Luck) is wasted. Banks, who has proved her on screen versatility in an eclectic choice of roles in multiple pics over the past year, here goes for the fairy tale Step mother - the steel under her smile was borderline hammy but she definitely is one of the best (and overlooked) actresses in the business.
All in all - avoid this film and seek out the Korean original instead but if it turns up on cable and you have 87 minutes to waste - watch it for Browning and Banks and the fun of yawning at a schlock-y story. LOL
The Uninvited is not your typical horror film and that's a good thing! I didn't see the original movie (2003 South Korean horror film called "A Tale of Two Sisters") so I can't say if it's better or worse but on it's own it's a great psychological horror film! The plot is good. There's a really great character development and the build up to the end is done really well. Really keeps the viewers engaged. I especially liked the movie's atmosphere. It was scary, creepy and intense and not your typical dumb slasher. It's a mix of psychological thriller and horror in one movie. You won't find moronic characters, cheap jump scares and tons of gore and nudity in this film. Which, as far as I'm concerned, is a good thing! I really don't understand the bad reviews! It might not be an Oscar Winner but so what?! As a horror/thriller it's really good. The cast and crew did an excellent job and I also enjoyed the beautiful scenery (most of the movie was shot at one location, a beautiful waterfront property in Vancouver, British Columbia). If you never seen it, give it a chance!
- Just-A-Girl-14
- Mar 6, 2021
- Permalink
I haven't seen the original Tale of Two Sisters by Kim Ji-woon to begin with so I won't be able to do any meaningful comparisons. But if a remake is any indication of how the original is generally miles better, especially if done by Hollywood, hen it probably is worth my while to put the Korean horror movie in my to-watch list. After all, Kim Ji-woon's film is one of Korea's top box office draws when released.
There have been more misses than hits when Hollywood adapts what it thinks could be instant box office gold with its fountain of Asian content, and since there have been only a limited number of successful Asian horror releases in recent years, it had looked inwards and cannibalized on remaking its own shock/slasher films. This one took a long while to translate to The Uninvited, and I guess taking some 6 years indicated the filmmakers wanted to do things right instead of rushing through and come out with crap.
As such the directing duo of the Guard Brothers Charles and Thomas managed to find some balance between telling a psychological thriller, and moments where they can properly employ tricks from the usual formula book to scare an audience, with the usual light and shadows, smoke and mirrors, warped beings, decomposed bodies and jump cuts with ghouls staring down at you. Surprisingly it didn't rely on sound or lack thereof to add a further sensory dimension to set pulse racing, which I thought was a little let down in its moments to build up to the next "Boo!" If anything, the acting duo of Emily Browning (Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events, with pouty lips to rival Angelina Jolie's, and given special attention too in this narrative) and Arielle Kebbel shine as skimpily clad sisters Anna and Alex respectively, who have to rely on each other as they uncover the truth behind the death of their mom (Maya Massar). It doesn't help of course with Anna just being certified sane and safe to be released from a mental institution, and their suspect happens to be their nanny-turned-new-step-mom-to-be Rachel (Elizabeth Banks) whom dad (David Strathairn) intends to marry. Given the short run time of under 90 minutes, the pace is kept compact with little room wasted to pump in unnecessary subplots (unless set up just to provide an additional avenue to unleash horrific mayhem), focusing very much of the relationship between the two sisters, and their strained one with their father. Emily Browning, as the lead, of course had enough latitude to showcase a double-head snake role in being "nice" to Rachel, in order for some fishing of information.
That isn't to say there isn't any loophole that a jumbo jet can't fly through. Even if you have no background knowledge gained from the original Korean film, it is easy enough for sharp-eyed viewers, or those whose cinematic staple is horror films, to stay one step ahead and deduce just what is exactly going on. Which makes me wonder just how much it'll take for shockmeisters to scare seasoned audiences since they're getting savvier, and easily bored with the same old bag of tricks.
If anything, The Uninvited would have piqued your interest in the original, which has a longer run time and in all likelihood, the exploitation of mood and atmosphere that are quite standard tools for horror films from Asia, which is sorely lacking in this version. Nonetheless it's still one of the better Western remakes of Asian horror attempted.
There have been more misses than hits when Hollywood adapts what it thinks could be instant box office gold with its fountain of Asian content, and since there have been only a limited number of successful Asian horror releases in recent years, it had looked inwards and cannibalized on remaking its own shock/slasher films. This one took a long while to translate to The Uninvited, and I guess taking some 6 years indicated the filmmakers wanted to do things right instead of rushing through and come out with crap.
As such the directing duo of the Guard Brothers Charles and Thomas managed to find some balance between telling a psychological thriller, and moments where they can properly employ tricks from the usual formula book to scare an audience, with the usual light and shadows, smoke and mirrors, warped beings, decomposed bodies and jump cuts with ghouls staring down at you. Surprisingly it didn't rely on sound or lack thereof to add a further sensory dimension to set pulse racing, which I thought was a little let down in its moments to build up to the next "Boo!" If anything, the acting duo of Emily Browning (Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events, with pouty lips to rival Angelina Jolie's, and given special attention too in this narrative) and Arielle Kebbel shine as skimpily clad sisters Anna and Alex respectively, who have to rely on each other as they uncover the truth behind the death of their mom (Maya Massar). It doesn't help of course with Anna just being certified sane and safe to be released from a mental institution, and their suspect happens to be their nanny-turned-new-step-mom-to-be Rachel (Elizabeth Banks) whom dad (David Strathairn) intends to marry. Given the short run time of under 90 minutes, the pace is kept compact with little room wasted to pump in unnecessary subplots (unless set up just to provide an additional avenue to unleash horrific mayhem), focusing very much of the relationship between the two sisters, and their strained one with their father. Emily Browning, as the lead, of course had enough latitude to showcase a double-head snake role in being "nice" to Rachel, in order for some fishing of information.
That isn't to say there isn't any loophole that a jumbo jet can't fly through. Even if you have no background knowledge gained from the original Korean film, it is easy enough for sharp-eyed viewers, or those whose cinematic staple is horror films, to stay one step ahead and deduce just what is exactly going on. Which makes me wonder just how much it'll take for shockmeisters to scare seasoned audiences since they're getting savvier, and easily bored with the same old bag of tricks.
If anything, The Uninvited would have piqued your interest in the original, which has a longer run time and in all likelihood, the exploitation of mood and atmosphere that are quite standard tools for horror films from Asia, which is sorely lacking in this version. Nonetheless it's still one of the better Western remakes of Asian horror attempted.
- DICK STEEL
- May 8, 2009
- Permalink
- karl_consiglio
- Apr 17, 2009
- Permalink
- The_Amazing_Spy_Rises
- Feb 3, 2009
- Permalink
Some movies you just know are not going to complete your soul. You watch them because it's a social circumstance - because you are never going to convince your group of friends to watch a Wojciech Has - or are just looking to get some images before your eyes that don't demand you work with them but passively absorb. It was only after coming here that I read this was supposed to be a remake of the Tale of Two Sisters; dumbed down is right, it's the marketable, prefab version smoothed out for our precarious amusement.
I am not a fan of the Ji-Woon film, but whereas that was frightfully complex, this is comfortably simple; you can recommend it to your group of friends, co-workers, family, and be sure it's going to be the blandest choice every time.
Oh, there is the eventual twist, as is the vogue of the times, meant to open up a chasm of depths beneath our feet. It does no such thing of course. A writer must be shamefully unhinged to write something like that down post-Sixth Sense. Elizabeth Banks is horrible as the menacing step-mother, the two teenage girls prance around like it's a Twilight audition.
I am not a fan of the Ji-Woon film, but whereas that was frightfully complex, this is comfortably simple; you can recommend it to your group of friends, co-workers, family, and be sure it's going to be the blandest choice every time.
Oh, there is the eventual twist, as is the vogue of the times, meant to open up a chasm of depths beneath our feet. It does no such thing of course. A writer must be shamefully unhinged to write something like that down post-Sixth Sense. Elizabeth Banks is horrible as the menacing step-mother, the two teenage girls prance around like it's a Twilight audition.
- chaos-rampant
- Aug 29, 2011
- Permalink
- michaelRokeefe
- May 12, 2009
- Permalink
- violetblack-22118
- Aug 2, 2022
- Permalink
Man... How do I put this without sounding unhinged...
Okay, first and foremost, ANY time I wish to read about a film that I am interested in I ALWAYS read the 'External' reviews first, which for me personally especially where Horror films are involved, I rely on COMPLETELY as opposed to the 'User' reviews. Those are usually much more balanced and you can count of the fact that they are genuine and NOT 'plants'. Admittedly, Horror is EXTREMELY subjective, so perhaps some may enjoy this film; although I'm sorry, but I must admit that I most certainly did not, and to me at least some of these 'rave reviews' are so calculatingly worded as to how 'wonderful' the film is in EVERY way that it makes me a bit nauseous. I don't know, maybe I just have a bad case of gas...
For what it's worth, at least for my personal taste, ANY time there is a Horror film that catches my eye I always try to see if 'Slasherpool's site has reviewed it, because many times I do agree with their taste and their reviews. This one had 1 star out of a possible 5. He had seen the original and felt that this one was a complete travesty by comparison. He also stated that as a stand alone film not taking into account the original, that it was just very poor instead of abysmal. Just thought I'd share that, since I don't know how many take the time to read the 'External Reviews. To me, his are usually right on the nose and what I really appreciate about his reviews is that whether it is a tame PG-13 film like this one or a horrendous Slasher film, he treats them all equally as to their cinematic merits. (***UPDATE: Sadly, since my writing this, the site no longer exists :(
Now, from MY standpoint. First off, the reason I even give this film 2 stars is because the production values and photography and the technical aspects of it are very good. But... sadly, that is about it. Primarily I just did NOT like the acting at all; sure, Strathairn is an excellent actor, but right from the beginning, Emily Browning's acting in the Psychiatrists office, her little predictable 'pensive' and 'ooh, do you really think so' expressions, etc., just did NOT ring true to me at all at any level whatsoever. The interaction between the two sisters including the 'acting' of the other sister, pretty much the same thing. The direction... Well, I don't know, maybe it's personal preference but I just felt we were being led along a very, VERY predictable path from the first scene in her bedroom after she had gone to sleep (not giving any specifics away of course) Honestly, the whole thing just felt like complete cardboard. Like 'Okay, let's show how scared she is... okay now lets play the scary sounds... okay now lets build up the 'suspense'...' Sorry, the film just did absolutely NOTHING for me. Didn't care, wasn't moved, didn't like the girl at all...
It strikes me that perhaps what was sorely missing was a GENUINE atmosphere. I just did not FEEL it at all. Her reactions were completely 'plastic' and unbelievable, which could have been the fault of the director either not bringing the right performance out of her (because she IS supposed to be a good actress) or perhaps in the editing, choosing the wrong takes, I don't know. It just wasn't working for me...
So, what we are left with is a very nice looking movie with good production values, but completely unmoving, sterile, unrealistic and unbelievable. The interactions between characters are artificial. The film has absolutely NO atmosphere at all, which is COMPLETELY unforgivable for a Ghost Story...
Okay, first and foremost, ANY time I wish to read about a film that I am interested in I ALWAYS read the 'External' reviews first, which for me personally especially where Horror films are involved, I rely on COMPLETELY as opposed to the 'User' reviews. Those are usually much more balanced and you can count of the fact that they are genuine and NOT 'plants'. Admittedly, Horror is EXTREMELY subjective, so perhaps some may enjoy this film; although I'm sorry, but I must admit that I most certainly did not, and to me at least some of these 'rave reviews' are so calculatingly worded as to how 'wonderful' the film is in EVERY way that it makes me a bit nauseous. I don't know, maybe I just have a bad case of gas...
For what it's worth, at least for my personal taste, ANY time there is a Horror film that catches my eye I always try to see if 'Slasherpool's site has reviewed it, because many times I do agree with their taste and their reviews. This one had 1 star out of a possible 5. He had seen the original and felt that this one was a complete travesty by comparison. He also stated that as a stand alone film not taking into account the original, that it was just very poor instead of abysmal. Just thought I'd share that, since I don't know how many take the time to read the 'External Reviews. To me, his are usually right on the nose and what I really appreciate about his reviews is that whether it is a tame PG-13 film like this one or a horrendous Slasher film, he treats them all equally as to their cinematic merits. (***UPDATE: Sadly, since my writing this, the site no longer exists :(
Now, from MY standpoint. First off, the reason I even give this film 2 stars is because the production values and photography and the technical aspects of it are very good. But... sadly, that is about it. Primarily I just did NOT like the acting at all; sure, Strathairn is an excellent actor, but right from the beginning, Emily Browning's acting in the Psychiatrists office, her little predictable 'pensive' and 'ooh, do you really think so' expressions, etc., just did NOT ring true to me at all at any level whatsoever. The interaction between the two sisters including the 'acting' of the other sister, pretty much the same thing. The direction... Well, I don't know, maybe it's personal preference but I just felt we were being led along a very, VERY predictable path from the first scene in her bedroom after she had gone to sleep (not giving any specifics away of course) Honestly, the whole thing just felt like complete cardboard. Like 'Okay, let's show how scared she is... okay now lets play the scary sounds... okay now lets build up the 'suspense'...' Sorry, the film just did absolutely NOTHING for me. Didn't care, wasn't moved, didn't like the girl at all...
It strikes me that perhaps what was sorely missing was a GENUINE atmosphere. I just did not FEEL it at all. Her reactions were completely 'plastic' and unbelievable, which could have been the fault of the director either not bringing the right performance out of her (because she IS supposed to be a good actress) or perhaps in the editing, choosing the wrong takes, I don't know. It just wasn't working for me...
So, what we are left with is a very nice looking movie with good production values, but completely unmoving, sterile, unrealistic and unbelievable. The interactions between characters are artificial. The film has absolutely NO atmosphere at all, which is COMPLETELY unforgivable for a Ghost Story...
- lathe-of-heaven
- Jan 29, 2010
- Permalink
Brace yourselves - here comes another one of those 'orrible 'uns! With some notable exceptions (Unforgiven, The Untouchables, The Unbearable Lightness Of Being), movies sporting the prefix 'un' in their titles are frequently hostages to fortune. On the one hand, they're more interesting-sounding than, say 'The Born', 'The Faithful' or 'The Canny' (and somewhere in a parallel universe there exists a John Wayne western called 'The Defeated'). On the other hand, the very application of those negative prefixes can ironically hasten the film's undoing. Which is unfortunate. And obviously undesirable.
Such is the fate of The Uninvited, another all-too inevitable K-horror remake. Here, young Anna (Australian actress Emily Browning) returns home after a year's spell in a psychiatric clinic, following the devastating death of her invalid mother in a housefire. Along with her elder, spunkier sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel) she's soon warring with her frosty-knickered stepmother, and mom's former live-in nurse, Rachael (a miscast Elizabeth Banks, in Hand That Rocks The Cradle mode).
In a scenario that would have Sigmund Freud jumping up and down and furiously pulling his beard, Anna becomes convinced that Rachael did away with her ailing charge and is plotting to kill the daughters next, the better to have dad (David Strathairn) all to her self. Meanwhile, a creeping dread pervades their New England coastal home - ghostly children, the old hands-round-the-edge-of-the-bedcovers routine and charred manifestations of mum, all seeming to point to Rachael's culpability. Is Anna actually onto something? Or did somebody sign the wrong release form? Like Identity, The Sixth Sense or Secret Window, this is one of those two-for-one deals necessitating, so producers hope, an immediate return visit once the pleasantly deceived audience has, or thinks it has, 'got it'. Unlike most of these Hollywood riddle-me-rees however, there's little that was formulaic or pat about 2003's powerful and poignant A Tale Of Two Sisters (aka Janghwa, Hongryeon).
We actually cared about put-upon sisters Su-Mi and Su-Yeon, so that the pleasing 'aha!' moment, when it arrived, was severely tempered by an almost unbearable sense of grief. Much of this came down to the quality of the acting, in particular a pair of performances of astonishing subtlety and maturity from the young leads. And perhaps uniquely, among this era's crop of South-East Asian horrors, it managed to Tazer the nerves while gently breaking your heart.
The Guard brothers' remake, by contrast, is the usual exercise in jump-scares and PG-13 thrills, more concerned with getting to the twist as swiftly as possible, like a conjuror who remembers he's left the iron on the moment he takes the stage. Depth and characterisation suffer accordingly - though the waifish Browning impresses; a tiny pink flower with fraying petals turned in on themselves. She has an unusual, interesting face, and an assured future, at least, in playing damaged poppets. Hopefully, she'll soon put such bland fare behind her; although Banks and Srathairn should frankly be sent to bed without any supper. At the film's pre-release press screening, the final reveal elicited a single, irritated 'Tch!' from some anonymous critic in the dark. That little noise pretty much sums up this entire production.
Such is the fate of The Uninvited, another all-too inevitable K-horror remake. Here, young Anna (Australian actress Emily Browning) returns home after a year's spell in a psychiatric clinic, following the devastating death of her invalid mother in a housefire. Along with her elder, spunkier sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel) she's soon warring with her frosty-knickered stepmother, and mom's former live-in nurse, Rachael (a miscast Elizabeth Banks, in Hand That Rocks The Cradle mode).
In a scenario that would have Sigmund Freud jumping up and down and furiously pulling his beard, Anna becomes convinced that Rachael did away with her ailing charge and is plotting to kill the daughters next, the better to have dad (David Strathairn) all to her self. Meanwhile, a creeping dread pervades their New England coastal home - ghostly children, the old hands-round-the-edge-of-the-bedcovers routine and charred manifestations of mum, all seeming to point to Rachael's culpability. Is Anna actually onto something? Or did somebody sign the wrong release form? Like Identity, The Sixth Sense or Secret Window, this is one of those two-for-one deals necessitating, so producers hope, an immediate return visit once the pleasantly deceived audience has, or thinks it has, 'got it'. Unlike most of these Hollywood riddle-me-rees however, there's little that was formulaic or pat about 2003's powerful and poignant A Tale Of Two Sisters (aka Janghwa, Hongryeon).
We actually cared about put-upon sisters Su-Mi and Su-Yeon, so that the pleasing 'aha!' moment, when it arrived, was severely tempered by an almost unbearable sense of grief. Much of this came down to the quality of the acting, in particular a pair of performances of astonishing subtlety and maturity from the young leads. And perhaps uniquely, among this era's crop of South-East Asian horrors, it managed to Tazer the nerves while gently breaking your heart.
The Guard brothers' remake, by contrast, is the usual exercise in jump-scares and PG-13 thrills, more concerned with getting to the twist as swiftly as possible, like a conjuror who remembers he's left the iron on the moment he takes the stage. Depth and characterisation suffer accordingly - though the waifish Browning impresses; a tiny pink flower with fraying petals turned in on themselves. She has an unusual, interesting face, and an assured future, at least, in playing damaged poppets. Hopefully, she'll soon put such bland fare behind her; although Banks and Srathairn should frankly be sent to bed without any supper. At the film's pre-release press screening, the final reveal elicited a single, irritated 'Tch!' from some anonymous critic in the dark. That little noise pretty much sums up this entire production.
- Ali_John_Catterall
- Nov 2, 2009
- Permalink
It's not easy to make a horror movie these days. The critics will hate it by definition: their expectations are always high and mostly unsatisfiable. They will call them uninspirational, uninteresting, and not original enough. With time, the horror genre has become an underdog of the movie industry. Prior to watching this movie, I had no knowledge about the plot whatsoever and it turned out to be good for me. I won't beat around the bush: I'm not a horror fanatic, but this one, I enjoyed from the beginning until the very end and I was pleasantly surprised with the outcome. The thing I appreciated the most was the great amount of mystery: at some point the movie becomes more a mystery movie than a horror movie. The plot is interesting at the very least: and it does make you think who the main villain might be. I personally had many guesses and I though I got it right, but the ending surprised me. And there's nothing I enjoy more than an ending I did not see coming. The surroundings are beautiful and the movie is very well shot. Visually, the pictures are very satisfying, another thing you would not expect. The acting is also professional, along the score: all these parts, I have no complaints about. The movie was, for some reasons I don't fully understand, certified as not fresh enough. I do agree, some moments are painfully cliché, but in this case, I found it charming. Isn't it a part of the horror movie to expect that a hand will try to reach you under the bed? It will make you jump in your place either way, so what's the deal? As long it's not cheesy, it's good enough for me. I think that if the creators maybe took a risk and avoided those couple of clichés, the movie would have been praised by critics. But who cares about their opinion anyway? The movie is really enjoyable and if that is what matters to you, don't hesitate and watch it. You won't regret it.
- peterkowalski
- Apr 15, 2009
- Permalink
The Uninvited was see-and-you-will-love-it thriller which had a smooth run until there was a solid twist in the end which will make you watch couple of scenes over the again. Anna has been just released from a mental hospital where she was being treated after her mother died in an unfortunate tragic accident. She happily goes back to her normal life to meet her darling little sister and her father. She soon realizes that her father is having a girlfriend who is staying along with them. As she starts living in the house , she is haunted by the spirit of her mother claiming her accident was actually a murder. She starts investigating about her mother's death and finds something which unravels an unsolved mystery. The Uninvited is a remake of a Japanese horror "The tale of two sisters". Japanese movies have always some interesting stories to be told and this one succeeds in the same. The screenplay is somewhat sluggish but it's the twist in the end which makes the film worth watching. The direction is decent along with the performances. The cinematography is captivating while the background score gives you a genre of horror movies. Watch this if you have liked the Grudge , the Mirror , the Shutter. Though not scary as them but it has some fine captivating moments : Good -3.5/5