When you've been to the movies as often as I have, you learn to predict what times of the year tend to release quality from the ones that issue atrocities. January and at least part of February are when studios tend to release movies they have no faith in because it's just after the Holiday season and people are less likely to spend money at the movie theaters. Even so, every once in a while, there's a movie that appears to have all the hallmarks of an awful film, but has at least one or two aspects of it (a well-known actor or director) and you think that maybe, just maybe, this one won't be as bad. But the moment the movie starts, reality slaps you right in the face.
The story takes place in 1906, which, incidentally, is around the time of the great San Francisco earthquake. Our hero is a doctor named Eric Price (Jason Clarke) who specializes in psychiatry and is in the middle of a laudanum addiction. He is soon hired to conduct a mental evaluation of Mrs. Winchester (Helen Mirren), the inheritor of the Winchester Rifle manufacturing company. The board's concern stems from Mrs. Winchestor's perpetual construction of her house and wants to determine if she is indeed mentally capable of fulfilling her duties as owner of the company. It turns out that Mrs. Winchester continuously adds on to her house because ghosts tell her to do so. She is in regular contact with spirits who have died from Winchester Rifles. Out of guilt, she takes it upon herself to replicate the places where the ghosts died where they remain until they find peace and move on.
Now, on the surface, there is a lot here that could make for a potentially intriguing movie. There's the doctor with his drug problem which could blur the line between a haunting and a hallucination creating tension in the story, you have a historically accurate location with elegant yet disorienting architecture guaranteed to perpetuate paranoia and claustrophobia, and you have a potential commentary on gun violence and responsible vs. irresponsible gun ownership. Sadly, you will not find any of that in this film.
First of all, the film tries to play the "is this house truly haunted or not?" angle with one small problem. The very first scene pretty much establishes that, in this story, ghosts are indeed real and they mean business, thus robbing the movie of any actual tension. Next, despite taking place in a house with over a hundred rooms and built in an unusual and disorienting manner, the film only takes place in two, maybe three, well-established rooms, meaning there is never any question as to where anyone is at any given moment. Finally, arguably the worst part of this movie, it ultimately betrays its anti-gun message. The short version is that the uber-powerful vengeful spirit is defeated by a shot to the chest using a Winchester Rifle with a particular bullet. Which undermines the story entirely, because making the source of the problem also be the solution is not clever, it's lazy. If your house is on fire, the answer to the predicament should not be a flamethrower.
This film is filled to the brim with lazy writing, missed opportunities, and complete and utter waste of Helen Mirren's talent as well as Jason Clarke's. If you have not yet seen the actual Winchester Mystery House, I would recommend you see it, as it is indeed something that you have to see to believe. Just don't waste your time with this movie.
Is this movie worth seeing?
No
Is it worth seeing in theaters?
No
Why?
It's boring, lazy, doesn't understand its own goals and wastes everyone's time and talent.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am TheNorm, thank you for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment