The Uninvited” could have settled for being a harmless horror flick for the tween set.
But no … the film had to try a twist ending on for size. What was a moderately dopey thriller with a nice turn by its young star becomes an incomprehensible one that insults viewers of all ages.
Anna (Emily Browning) attempted suicide after her poor ma perished in a fire, but after 10 months of psychiatric care she’s been returned to the custody of her father (David Straithairn).
He’s spent that time canoodling with his late wife’s nurse, Rachel (Elizabeth Banks). Now, Paps is getting serious with Rachel, but both Anna and her older sister Alex (Arielle Kebbel) don’t trust their future step mom.
It doesn’t help that the ghost of Anna’s mom keeps popping up to warn them about the curvy nurse. But is Rachel really as evil as every line/shot/sequence in “The Uninvited” says she is?
So far, so mediocre. It doesn’t help that the characters behave in insanely dumb fashion time and again – even by horror movie standards.
But when the ending arrives, just about every frame that’s come before it gets tossed out the window.
Browning gives a nicely calibrated performance as the bedraggled teen, and Banks tries all she can to make Rachel a believable construct. Good luck with that.
In case you’re still interested in seeing the film, here’s a short list of the items the folks behind “The Uninvited” think are scary:
- Garbage bags
- Little children who don’t wear the requisite “Ring” black wig.
- Blood oozing out of keyholes
- Mothers with bells on their wrists
Here’s what I find frightening – the film is getting a modicum of heartfelt reviews.
Now, I’m scared.
(Photo: Emily Browning gets threatened during a key sequence in “The Uninvited.” Photo Credit: Kimberley French)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
The reviews I’ve read so far make the movie sound pedestrian and at best worth a NetFlix rental. I may be the only one around old enough to remember the original “The Uninvited” which starred Ray Milland and was made the year I was born. I first saw it when it came on TV about twelve or thirteen years later. Great acting, great atmosphere, great mystery. By today’s standards, the special effects were amateurish, but that didn’t matter since the plot, acting and pacing made the movie scary. I’m not one of those fuddy-duddies who think that old b&w movies are invariably better. I love special effects and have HD and surround to magnify them. But I still find many of the old horror and gothic movies superior to the modern thrillers which depend far too heavily on fx and too little on originality and atmosphere. When the special effects are the only thing in the movie designed to produce the fear and chill up the spine, they usually fail.
No, LawhawkSF, I remember that terrific film, too. When I first heard about this film, I thought they were remaking that one and went to IMDb to see who was playing the Gail Russell [Stella] and Ruth Hussey [Pamela] parts. Imagine my disappointment to learn it’s yet another ‘young Hollywood can’t seem to tell the difference between spooky and slasher’ flick.
I liked this movie It has a lot to like: good cinematography, good acting, and a good story.