Screenhead

I’ve always been leery of any movie that purports to be “based on a true story“, especially when horror films use it.  Now, I’ve said it before and it bears repeating that the best horror is  that which is most plausible.  If there’s no way whatever you’re watching could actually come to pass, then what reason is there to be afraid?  That which you’re watching is just out and out fiction, and as any ten year old can tell you, fiction doesn’t happen.  But when something that COULD happen comes up, even when it’s not necessarily likely, it’s still scary.  It may be a one  in a million shot, but that just means it could happen three hundred times in the United States alone.  The possibility that what you see unfold in front of you could happen to you or your family or even your friends makes things extra scary.

But when a film like The Haunting in Connecticut openly advertises that it’s “based on a true story”, it goes too far.  Yes, plausibility is a scary thing.  But ADVERTISING plausibility in an attempt to generate plausibility, now…that’s just crass.  It’s as though they know the work can’t stand on its own merits thus they have to underline the plausibility factor to get scares.

Interestingly, this isn’t the case with The Haunting in Connecticut.  The Haunting in Connecticut is actually plenty scary by itself, but it’s not without its flaws.

The story is actually almost too simple—a family with an eldest son suffering from cancer moves to a rental home to be close to said eldest son’s treatments.  They’re offered a good deal on a spacious house with plenty of room in a quiet neighborhood…but it’s got a history.  It’s got a LOT of history, not to mention a few ghosts besides.  The situation gets steadily worse for the family until the explosive ending in which all the secrets are disgorged and brought out into the light.

Like I said, extremely simplistic storyline.  That’s basically it—cancer boy and company go through a haunted house hell ride until they come out the other side.    Not exactly long on the plot.  Not much growth, not much change, and what character development there is (the father of the family was a lying drunk, briefly, and the many stresses he’s under triggers a relapse) seems tacked on and meaningless.

But the lack of focus on character development has instead left the movie to focus on scaring holy hell out of its audience.  I heard screaming from the audience on this one, folks.  Screaming.  Even I, a veteran of numerous horror films, got a good jump out of a few scenes.  Yes, The Haunting in Connecticut is heavily dependent on the jump scare to win its daily bread, but that doesn’t necessarily make it unpleasant.  What it makes it is fun.

Yes, The Haunting in Connecticut is a fun, somewhat scary little romp that might be better served by waiting for a bargain matinee or for a DVD release.  But even if you go full price, you likely won’t have a bad time.  And in the end, isn’t that all that counts as far as movies go?

Popularity: 1% [?]