Why the hate?


It's a shame that this film hasn't quite won over people. I really appreciate that Netflix had invested in a small budget, quiet and ambiguous gothic tale - it's a unique little gem to see appear on Halloween.

After viewing it, it had won me over: it had the ambiguity of enigma of a David Lynch film, yet the stillness and gentle pacing of a Haneke film. The cinematography and overall aesthetic was beautiful; the performances were engaging (although I had a little gripe with some of the protagonist's dialogue while she was alone - it felt too overtly dramatic and forced at times [i.e. when she talks to the television]: in cases like that, the dialogue wasn't necessary); the soundtrack and sound design was subtle and haunting.

For the most part, I enjoyed this a lot. Some of the dialogue choices were questionable but other than that, I struggled to find much wrong with it. It felt like a very refreshing gothic tale for me, hence my surprise at the poor score here on IMDB. Out of curiosity, if you rated this film with a low score, what didn't you like about the film? Was it too slow? Was it not what was expected? If you didn't like the film, were there any aspects you did enjoy about it? :]

reply

So, um, here's a question for people who liked it, what was the point of the story? What was the movie trying to say? What was the main character's motivations and end goals? (Besides having a job?) If the Writer didn't know how Polly's (Pauline's?) story ended, how did she know she ended up in the wall? Why was there so much purple prose?

reply

My interpretation was that the house had secrets to uncover and the film focused on a gradual realisation of that. I think the protagonist's initial intentions may not need to go beyond simply needing a job ( although it would be interesting to see what she needed the money for or why nobody came to visit her, it made sense to not dwell on it for long because the focus seemed more on the house rather than a conventional protagonist's journey).
The purple prose utilised during the Woman in the Wall book seemed to indicate the book's quality (if I remember correctly, it's suggested that the author's books were the kind of books you might find cheap at an airport). I'm not quite sure why the protagonist speaks in a similar tone during her narration and monologues, but I think I mentioned in my OP that some of her dialogue didn't quite fit imo.

I hope this clears things up: I'm not trying to say I understood every aspect of the film, but rather that my initial reaction after having watched it was fairly positive and that I'm interested to see what others thought too. I do intend to re-watch it at some point as an attempt to understand it more.

reply

Honestly, I'm trying to figure-out what exactly is it about this film; haunting me in such a way as not to have left my mind since watching...Late Saturday night.
I thought the languid pace would have lulled me to sleep. Rather, the slow-burn effect took over and I was transfixed by each revealing scene. I caught myself looking into the dark corners to see if something was about to emerge. And if that something was going to reach out and grab the nurse!
I can't really answer your questions because I didn't think about what the director, Osgood Perkins, was trying to say. I didn't question what was the point. Let me turn it around and ask: does there have to be a point to the story? Does a film have to say something in order to be a satisfying viewing experience?

reply

I really wanted to feel the same way. I think because I was sick and watching in the middle of the day, might not have put me in the right mood. The way you describe that slow burn, transfixed, looking into dark corners, etc., that's exactly how Lake Mungo left me feeling, which many people dislike. Same with Darling, though it's a straight up homage (or rip off to some) of certain older horror/thriller films. In the end this one was just too sparse for me I think, and I ended up getting bored. But I can understand how it worked for some!

reply

I haven't seen Lake Mungo but, now, I'll take your mention of it as a recommendation to give it a go! And, yes, I did feel Darling was too derivative of other, older, better Horror/Thriller efforts. I wanted to like Darling but, alas, did not.
IATPTTLITH simply will not leave my mind. I continue to have scenes & images flash around the ole grey matter; dark corners, walls and all. I think the only option I have is to take-in a second viewing.

reply

I'm in full agreement with you as I thought this film was very good.

reply

It was coming from the viewpoint of a ghost, and to me it was the best credible execution of a haunting on film. No blood, guts, gore and shock, but it succeeded, loved this film. Thank you Netflix!

reply

I suspect because I can't imagine anyone with a phone or a camera, a light switch, and a house, with 30 seconds to spare, could even accidentally come up with something even remotely as much of a pointless waste of time as this.

Literally the worst thing I've ever endured in moving pictures.

Call it "enigma" or "ambiguity" all you like, that's not what it was at all, but I understand that makes it sound fancy, in front of a poncechino. On top of that, it was almost like they thought there was some sort of reveal at the end that wasn't blatantly obvious from the get go, the cheek of it!

reply

"Literally the worst thing I've ever endured in moving pictures."

If you mean that statement in truth then you should try breathing through your nose.

reply

Very good jcarpenter-1. I believe some of the posters here are guilty of massive hyperbole.

reply

maybe the reason for the hate is more obvious. Both my wife and myself fell asleep during parts of the movie. You might want to consider that in reviewing a movie.

reply

Rather!
Literally the best bit of this film, albeit on a message board about the film about near-zero, so would take that with a pinch of salt.

reply

Call it "enigma" or "ambiguity" all you like, that's not what it was at all, but I understand that makes it sound fancy, in front of a poncechino.


People don't generally pretend to like something they don't like and laud it with various complimentary adjectives just to sound fancy. To say it "was [not] at all" what others have said is to merely suggest that your opinion is a fact (though it's not) that invalidates their opinion (which it doesn't). Clearly this did not appeal to you and did appeal to others. It is okay to accept that and not have to find fault with those who had a different reaction, inventing some strange subtext for why they would pretend to have an opinion that is invalidated by your "facts."

reply

People don't generally pretend to like something they don't like and laud it with various complimentary adjectives just to sound fancy.


Who told you that? I see people do that all the time.

reply

It is a shame, indeed. There were a few things I would have liked to see fleshed out a little more, but all in all this was a pretty spectacular composition. I would also offer that I did not find Lily's monologues/dialogues as out of place as you did. Part of the reason is because it was set some decades ago. If you watch older movies, you'll see it was once more common for people to speak with a little more detail, formality and particularity than they do now. Plus, this film had an austere tone and I think it would have been jarring to stray too far from that in the on-screen speech. I actually thought the TV bit was great because it was one of those moments where she was placed squarely back into just being a normal young person in this job situation (expressing excitement that there was a TV around when she was told there would not be).

As for the hate, I think part of the problem is that Netflix is not very good about helping users understand what sort of movie they're about to watch. Unless you're searching by genre, you usually aren't even told what the genre is. If you search for horror or thrillers, you will be met with various titles whose quality or characteristics cannot be necessarily be inferred from the log line and cover image. The versions of their app that show a few stills from the movie are a little better about this, but barely. Using the ratings to judge is not very helpful either, unless it's rated 5 stars. I say this because virtually every movie that earns 5 stars on Netflix is unequivocally great, but there are plenty of high quality titles hidden among the 1, 2 and 3 star ratings. Why is this? Because different people like different things, and with such little information to go on, and so few titles available to stream, many people outside of a movie's intended audience will inevitably watch, when they had no chance of liking it to begin with. This particular title falls victim to this problem in that it is probably being viewed by many people who heavily favor blockbuster type fare. There's nothing wrong with that; I love blockbusters and all sorts of other movies. Slow, subtle movies like this are not for everyone, but when "everyone" is, in a sense, tricked into viewing it, then there will be a lot of disappointed folks. The opposite also happens, though, as I can attest that I've watched plenty of movies on Netflix where the little information presented to me made me assume the movie would not be very good, but I happily discovered a gem hiding in the pile.

Alas, just as The VVitch and other slow, out of the ordinary titles have done, this will fall victim to being seen by the wrong audience. And if history is any indication, many of those audience members will be so incensed at having been tricked into watching something outside of their area of taste that they will tear it up, and even suggest that those of us who like it are somehow incorrect, flawed or just pretending to like it for some unexplained reason (there's already some of that happening right here on this board!).

reply

This movie was terrible it's just so slow and it goes nowhere. Nothing really happens, she talks to a Tv a phone flies out her hand and not much else. It's just a woman no one really cares about talking in a slow irritating way. You wait for something to happen and nothing does. I admit I do have a short attention span but I found myself not really watching much of it and tuning out. It was a waste of 2 hours or however long it went for. I do admit that netflix movies are so easy to tune out to or just turn off as they are free to view. If you pay for a movie at the cinema you have to persist as it's cost you cash.

reply

Another thing is I went in this with little info as stated above. I wanted a horror movie I don't really think this is horror at all. It's more of a thriller. Nothing in this movie at all screams horror. I do prefer faster pace movies I admit but I just don't see where this movies goes. I'd give it a 3/10 purely for how it was shot but all the dialect was pure crap.

reply

Maybe you should stick to the generic modern "horror" films like the Blair Witch sequel. Since even you admit that you prefer faster paced movies and have a short attention span. I honestly feel pity for people like you, while I also can't stand you. You are the exact reason why production companies try and even force most filmmakers/writers to make their ideas more mainstream for those with your attention span. This movie is not at all perfect, but it's not terrible like most people are making it out to be. Also, I find it refreshing that someone can make a movie that challenges the audience, instead of just spoon feeding them with some generic linear BS.

reply

Wow!!!!! you can't stand me cause I have a different opinion then you? Well you are a sad person then unlike you I respect other people opinions. Also there is no need to feel pity for me cause the majority of movies I do enjoy and I am not much of a critic just movies like this I find so boring as nothing happened.

NO the new Blair Witch was absolute crap just a bunch of idiots running around the woods with shaky handheld camera's.

reply

Myself, the reason I have a "problem" with 'people like you' is that you so willingly trash films that are obviously not suited to your taste. I have nothing against you personally, nor with the fact that you may have different tastes and opinions than I, but that a portion such as yourself *beep* all over certain films and filmmakers and try hard to discourage others from seeing a film, readily assuming that the problem is entirely linked to all that is involved in the production simply 'cause a film didn't speak to you personally, and yet none of you ever question whether your lack of enjoyment has anything to do with your own shortcomings, personal preferences, etc.
THAT's not being objective one bit. And I for one am tired of all the useless and highly subjective and unreasonable comments that litter every board.
Accept that NOT EVERY FILM IS MADE FOR YOU!

Ignorance is bliss... 'til it posts on the Internet, then, it's annoying.

reply

Well I wasn't the who put this trash in the horror section of Netflix this was NOT horror at all. Yes I understand I am trashing a film I was never going to like in the first place. I am sorry but I had no idea I wasn't going to like it till after the first 30 minutes when literally nothing interesting happened.

reply

Well, then you just shouldn't be surprised when some people lash out at you due to the type of criticism you put forth, was my point. And, as mentioned, this has nothing to do with the simple fact that you do have a differing opinion.


Ignorance is bliss... 'til it posts on the Internet, then, it's annoying.

reply

This is not a horror story as the modern genres would consider it. It's a ghost story, which is different.

Ghost stories are typically slow and subtle. Yu watch the dark background for shapes and forms, looking for things the director wants the ones paying attention to notice, but maybe unsure of what they saw.

This is such a movie. The reason for the odd speech by the narrator is that she is not human. She is a ghost, telling her story. Or more accurately, what she thinks she remembers as her story. She only knows "for sure" that the pretty thing you are looking at is her is because the pretty thing is carrying a key with a tag with the name "Lily" on it.

There are a lot of little clues like that strewn throughout the movie. It's a ghost story, so you have to look at things differently than in an in-your-face "Halloween" movie.

There is no separate genre for "ghost stories." I wish there were.

Did you see "The Others"? That is a ghost story, too. Notice the quietness of it, the slower speech, the lack of blood and guts, subtle hints, some spooky moments. Not like "Halloween" or "Sinister," which are horror movies (although there are arguably ghosts in Sinister, it's not a ghost story).

This is a very well done ghost story. Expertly written, cleverly plotted, well acted. You clearly didn't catch on to it. Everything is not what it seems. For instance, why is she wearing a white outfit topped with a gold sweater? There is meaning in that. A sweater in August? Why? There is meaning in the narrator saying it was August. Things are not what they seem.

reply

Frankly, I think you're just as pretentious as the film was. The difference between this and The Others is that The Others was actually a good film. It doesn't matter how much symbolism a movie has or how "clever" its story is (hint: this film's story wasn't clever) if you have zero connection to the characters and the plot develops poorly. This movie is drivel. In a short story by LeFanu, one of Poe's micro-shorts, or even a short film, it may have worked. As a feature-length film, it fell flat. No, it didn't fail because people failed to "get it;" it failed because it's a bad film, period. If you want to pat yourself on the back over what a great, intellectual mind you have, feel free to do so, but don't pretend this film is better than it actually is.

reply

I couldn't agree more. :)

reply

The movie is marketed as a horror movie. Many horror fans are young males. I can just see them watching this. "Where's the monster? Why isn't more stuff happening? This is so boring!"

When I read that this is so boring complaint all I think of is Miranda Sings. 

reply