Change Your Image
matthewmabey
Reviews
The Haunting of Molly Hartley (2008)
More original than people are giving it credit for
I've only recently even started reading the reviews on IMDb.com Previously I've just viewed it as a database. Now that I've noticed the reviews I feel compelled to jump in because so many people that can't seem to pay attention to the movies they review are posting. So with that introduction to my review, on with the show...
Almost the entire cast is actors that specialize in TV dramas. That may be why many think it comes across as a made for TV movie. I think that the acting, cinematography, production design, and editing are all typical of non-blockbuster Hollywood. Not awe inspiring, but good.
The story is much more original than most of the reviewers are giving it credit for. The plot and script are both much stronger than "The Covenant" to which at least one reviewer compared it. Someone with Christian beliefs (like myself) can expect to be uncomfortable with the triumph of evil and with the murderous nature of the Christians in this movie, but horror movies seldom conform with Christian beliefs. The intentional muddle of who is evil and who isn't, and who is sane and who isn't, is what makes this movie work. Apparently if one isn't paying attention while watching the movie this can be missed. Working out the "why" of the introductory scenes is part of the mystery that is unveiled through the plot. Ultimately the movie presents a world view that everyone in the world lies somewhere on a spectrum that runs from evil to clueless without ever passing through good. That is what is supposed to creep you out about the ending. The reviews here go a long way towards validating such a world view. For my part, I'll stick with a world view that includes a fair number of good people that have more than just a clue. This movie gives a glimpse of what the world might look like to a person with an non-religious background when they encounter Evil (with a capital E).
The Shooting (1966)
Not so straight forward as some seem to think
As I read the many reviews of "The Shooting" I am amazed at how "certain" some people are about their speculation while other people seem to completely miss the point of some aspects of the movie. It seems to me that you are supposed to be left guessing about many of the details. I.e. who, exactly, is the woman? and who shoots who in the end.
The performance of "the woman" is a very difficult role and done quite well by Millie Perkins. She is playing the part of a clearly troubled and emotionally unstable woman who at the same time is very focused, determined, and calculating about one objective. The fact that she is slight and girlish in appearance is an intentional contrast to the vicious objective on which she has focused. Whatever her history, she is not a "gunslinger."
The unknowns during the movie and the unanswered questions even at the end are completely intentional, I think. Reality isn't about being omniscient. Everyone lives and dies having known only part of the story they've lived through.
Some clues in the movie that I think have been missed by many are as follows: The woman is more disturbed than would seem to be appropriate for being simply distraught over the death of husband and child. She also exhibits some signs of having been sexually assaulted.
Will intentionally leaves a trail of flour for the woman following him. Why? He must have already known something about her and her objectives before he even talked to Coley.
Will's hand is injured. How and why?
Will was late getting back. He gives Coley an explanation, but it isn't very satisfactory.
Will's gun is missing. What's up with that? Again, the dialogue doesn't give a satisfactory explanation.
Why is it that the woman gets there so far ahead of the Sheriff?
Why did the woman kill her horse? The obvious answer of drawing Will and Coley to her assistance seems to be an awfully high stakes gamble against the odds.
Leland didn't seem to think he had anything to fear. So why did he get killed and Coley didn't (initially).
If Billy wanted to kill Coley, why didn't he do it the night he killed Leland?
Why wasn't Coin (Coan?) "running" faster and why did he trust the Bearded Man and yet leave him to die?
What did the Bearded man tell Coley?
What exactly was Coley trying to accomplish in the minutes leading up to his death?
One might notice that I've switched from clues to questions. If anyone thinks they have easy, or certain, answers to the questions or conclusion from the clues, then they are missing the point of the movie.
One last thing, pay careful attention to the colors of the horses and the horses legs.