Review: The Haunting in Connecticut
Filed under: Horror, Thrillers, New Releases, Theatrical Reviews

(We're reposting this review from SXSW to coincide with the film's theatrical release this weekend)
By: William Goss
Oh, actual events. Long have you reigned as the trump card in horror marketing, and only slightly less long have you been exposed as mostly malarkey. That hasn't stopped scarier films from finding their fans, nor the hokum from earning its opening weekend before vanishing into a blur of like-minded teen-targeting supernatural fare. Peter Cornwell's The Haunting in Connecticut falls firmly into the latter category, a run-of-the-mill spooker that often opts for Dolby jolts and Avid farts over character investment that itself rarely extends beyond asking why special effects happen to good people.
The crux of Connecticut is based on the allegedly true story in which a family found themselves terrorized in their new home, a former mortuary, back in 1987. While eldest son Matt (Kyle Gallner) receives and recovers from treatments for his cancer, he alone finds spirits roaming the house and tormenting his dreams. His parents (Virginia Madsen and Martin Donovan) just try keep him comforted, assuring him and themselves that it's simply a side effect, but a similarly ill priest (Elias Koteas) suggests that being close to death has indeed put them closer to the realm of the dead, which is in turn bringing escalating harm to the household...
I'm not sure what's worse: that most of the scare shots in the film are accompanied by the lazy shriek of violins, or that several other moments are left to sound effects, thus proving how effective the reveal of a shadowy figure can be when handled with restraint. Based on a true story or not, there's something to be said for the sinister nature of The Strangers' main money shot, in which a menace merely slips into frame as they might in your very own home. Here, we're subjected to a score that's about as content with how these actual events might've actually rolled out as we are, and it's a pity that quick cuts and loud noises are once again the name of the game.
Speaking of the usual, the usual parade of specters and maggots make their appearance, though carved-up corpses and boxes of snipped eyelids are certainly less passé and uniquely creepy in comparison. See, when it wants to, considerable atmosphere and dread permeates The Haunting in Connecticut, but that goodwill is almost inevitably botched by more obvious beats to come, whether melodramatic or mysterious in tone. (At least The Amityville Horror '05 can boast a relative consistency of peril, but that's a concern of Adam Simon and Tim Metcalfe's ramshackle screenplay above all else.)
As for the cast, Gallner balances his shifting role as tormented and tormenter with consistent chops, and in a parallel part, Erik Berg sells a lot of anguish under a lot of visual gimmickry and with nearly no dialogue. Madsen is a doting and sobbing mother in equal measure; Donovan's father is convincing enough until he falls off the bandwagon and disappears for a significant portion of the film; Amanda Crew is simply a good sport as a startle-prone
For the twenty-, thirty-, forty-somethings who've seen any other movie with the word 'Haunting' in the title, there's not much new here in terms of frights, but if you'd been sold on all of those anyway, there's probably nothing stopping you anyway. The rest of us don't pay to be skeptical, though; we pay to be scared, and no actual-events disclaimer should have to make up that. To whoever's ready and willing to give us the next good haunted house movie, may I suggest that you don't worry about making it real, so long as you make it real scary.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
3-27-2009 @ 5:32PM
Erin said...
Everyone should watch "A Haunting in Connecticut" before watching "THE Haunting in Connecticut." In my opinion, the Discovery Channel movie was much better. And that's saying something.
Reply
3-29-2009 @ 8:51PM
Twistychick said...
LoL I totally agree with you, we watched this last night in the theater and i compared it to the other one...they took way too many liberties in this movie..i was horrified...but not by the movie!
3-27-2009 @ 10:33PM
Bubbameister33 said...
Virginia Madsen just won't get old.
Reply
3-28-2009 @ 3:56AM
Amanda said...
I just saw the movie and I thought that it was overall decent especially since it is based on a true story. My only problem with it was that no one seemed to notice that the little girl burned up in the house at the end. The older girl tells her to go play hide-and-seek so she runs upstairs then the guy pushes the little boy and older girl outside then sets the house on fire. They definitely overlooked that.
Reply
3-28-2009 @ 10:16PM
xyzzyxxyzzyxyzzy said...
Alright I'm sorry but I have to say something about your "observation." This is actually a falsehood. In the movie that I was watching very carefully, the little girl did go and hide, but she did not burn inside of the house. As the older girl went to get the little boy and was hurrying to leave the house, she got the little girl in her ams reach as well and hurried them both out the door. This then led to the three of them watching and waiting for Matt to burn the house, and thus led to the finally of the movie. Thank you and I'm sorry that I had to publicly correct you like this No hard feelings either way (for you getting it wrong in the first place.)
Thanks agin,
jennifer
4-01-2009 @ 3:29PM
Kayla said...
That is odd how I also thought the little girl burnt in the fire.. I remember clearly thinking "man, she must be burning up" and I was trying to look for her in any of the following scenes but I must have missed it then.
3-28-2009 @ 11:46AM
Jim said...
Don't forget the nauseating overtly Christian messages interspersed, ending with the "mysterious ways" mantra. Ugh.
Reply
4-19-2009 @ 10:42PM
Nicole said...
I too thought that the little girl was stuck in that house and on fire. I'm not really sure where Jennifer gets her attitude from unless she has a personal interest in this mediocre movie. Maybe "Jonah" took over HER body to prevoke such a violent reaction. I never ever comment on these things, but when I read that i had to say something...weirdo. Anyway, enough about "Jennifer". At the very end of the credits and the flashing pictures, there is a little girl looking out the attic window that says "mommy". At no point in time was there any other small child ghost with a lost mommy throughout the movie. But I realized that the lady in the movie was the AUNT to this little girl. SO, this movie just sucks! Now get a life.
Reply