As they get ready to
leave for the evening, Mr. Ulman confesses that he and the missus
have no young children for Samantha to look after. Instead, he wants
her to stay in the house just in case Mother needs any help. Mother,
who lives somewhere upstairs, is quiet and should be no problem
at all; in all likelihood, Samantha won’t ever have to go
up and check on her. Samantha agrees to the job if her pay is increased
to $400 (if that sounds ridiculous, keep in mind that the original
offer was $100). Mr. Ulman, in dire need of someone for the night,
agrees. He and his wife then depart, leaving Samantha with a list
of phone numbers, including a local pizza joint in case she gets
hungry. We don’t exactly know where the Ulmans are going,
but we do know that there will be a lunar eclipse around midnight.
What follows is a carefully paced buildup of tension. At first,
it seems like absolutely nothing will happen; Samantha goes up and
downstairs checking out various rooms, and that’s it. Uneventful?
Yes, but at least we get the chance to take in the ambiance of the
house, which gives one the feeling of having stepped back in time
by at least seventy-five years. At a certain point, things start
to get creepy. For one thing, she keeps calling her best friend,
Megan (Greta Gerwig), but gets only the answering machine. She then
orders a pizza, and the guy at the other end seems a little too
friendly. She turns on the television, where “Night of the
Living Dead” is being broadcast on the weekly horror show.
When she has to use the bathroom, she takes a butcher’s knife
with her for protection. And what exactly is Mother doing upstairs?
Is anyone even up there?
I suspect the vast majority of today’s audiences will be bored
out of their minds by “The House of the Devil,” a film
released at a time when the success of a horror movie is measured
by masked killers and teens wandering off alone and getting naked
before dying elaborate, bloody deaths. Writer/director/editor Ti
West has the ambition to avoid such clichés and go for something
much subtler, relying on dim hallways, eerie shadows, and phantom
noises emanating from faucets. Even the final scenes, which aren’t
as strong as the scenes that came before them, don’t follow
the conventions of the typical horror movie; they explain certain
things, yet they still leave much to the imagination. As we all
know, what we see is never as scary as what we don’t see.
When we leave the theater, we think not about the plot or the characters
but about what has been experienced – the suspense a quiet
room can generate, dangers that may or may not be hiding behind
a closed bedroom door, terror brought on by what we can’t
actually see or hear. What evils lurk out of sight? Will they ever
be seen? And if they are seen, what will they do? Even if “The
House of the Devil” is founded on a premise that’s all
too familiar, it manages to be frightening because it exposes some
of our most basic fears, none more powerful than being alone in
a house. If you’re tired of the typical teen slasher film,
if you find slow and steady buildups more satisfying than back-to-back
pop out scares, then I would recommend you go and see this film.
- Chris Pandolfi
Was the acting as good as Roger Ebert said it was?