147 reviews
For those who grew up with horror made in the seventies this will be a throwback to that era. Those who are into the new horror genre will find it rather boring. Let me explain it a little bit.
There isn't that much action going on and before it becomes awry you have almost wait for an hour. Before that you will have your jump scenes and the atmosphere that will take you into the horror.
I see that some reviews are talking about unknown thespians but what the hell, Barbara Crampton of the Re-animator franchise fame and Monte Markham, well known in the eighties and seventies.
If you can sit through the first hour you will be surprised to see a lot of bloody and even gory shots. Really something to check out if you are a geek of Italian gory flicks (Fulci style) but if you like the flicks made nowadays avoid it at all costs.
Gore 2/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
There isn't that much action going on and before it becomes awry you have almost wait for an hour. Before that you will have your jump scenes and the atmosphere that will take you into the horror.
I see that some reviews are talking about unknown thespians but what the hell, Barbara Crampton of the Re-animator franchise fame and Monte Markham, well known in the eighties and seventies.
If you can sit through the first hour you will be surprised to see a lot of bloody and even gory shots. Really something to check out if you are a geek of Italian gory flicks (Fulci style) but if you like the flicks made nowadays avoid it at all costs.
Gore 2/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
Greetings from Lithuania.
"We Are Still Here" (2015) is a pretty effective horror film. It has some great atmosphere, good chills, scary sounds and images and very solid acting. The problems with this movie begins at the end - they somehow didn't live up to the great hype they achieved in the first part of this movie, and ending is just blood bath. Nevertheless, almost everything works were so good that i can safely recommend this movie to all horror lovers.
Overall, "We Are Still Here" isn't original, but it's effective genre picture. It has great chilling "hounted house" setting, intriguing cinematography, good acting, nice pacing (although movie is kinda short), and some genuinely good scares. All in all i can recommend to see this horror flick. The ending is a bit off, nevertheless the whole ride is pretty good.
"We Are Still Here" (2015) is a pretty effective horror film. It has some great atmosphere, good chills, scary sounds and images and very solid acting. The problems with this movie begins at the end - they somehow didn't live up to the great hype they achieved in the first part of this movie, and ending is just blood bath. Nevertheless, almost everything works were so good that i can safely recommend this movie to all horror lovers.
Overall, "We Are Still Here" isn't original, but it's effective genre picture. It has great chilling "hounted house" setting, intriguing cinematography, good acting, nice pacing (although movie is kinda short), and some genuinely good scares. All in all i can recommend to see this horror flick. The ending is a bit off, nevertheless the whole ride is pretty good.
The plot is solid enough. The movie is entertaining enough also meaning that if you want something new to watch in the horror genre- this movie is just entertaining enough, The lore could have been improved upon, and with some more back story, perhaps even some flashbacks with some creative storytelling and this film could have been a gem.
The movie at just 84 minutes doesn't provide enough time to the viewer to understand what this evil is that has descended on this family. We are told a few bits a pieces about he first owner who ran a funeral parlour out of this home. Something about the owner Dagmar hiding or selling the bodies and that the house was built on some ancient evil. Other than all that we are left to guess at what the heck the rest of the back story is and what it has to do with the old boiler downstairs.
If only they took another 15 minutes of screen time to flesh out the sordid past and we could have left this movie more satisfied with a true understanding of the houses evil past, where and why and how.
What we are left with is a gore fest with jump scares that are really nothing new. It's just a good old fashioned horror with a 2 star rating.
The movie at just 84 minutes doesn't provide enough time to the viewer to understand what this evil is that has descended on this family. We are told a few bits a pieces about he first owner who ran a funeral parlour out of this home. Something about the owner Dagmar hiding or selling the bodies and that the house was built on some ancient evil. Other than all that we are left to guess at what the heck the rest of the back story is and what it has to do with the old boiler downstairs.
If only they took another 15 minutes of screen time to flesh out the sordid past and we could have left this movie more satisfied with a true understanding of the houses evil past, where and why and how.
What we are left with is a gore fest with jump scares that are really nothing new. It's just a good old fashioned horror with a 2 star rating.
- scottmannen1
- Jun 14, 2015
- Permalink
Reviewed by: Dare Devil Kid (DDK)
Rating: 3.3/5 stars
"We Are Still Here" is the latest iteration of people unwittingly stumbling upon an ancient haunted house, and it succeeds more than it fails, thanks largely to the competent work of first-time director Ted Geoghegan. The Director does a great job in keeping the tension high, teasing his ghastly ghosts with escalating bouts of gore infested violence to make a film that will satisfy both haunted house and gore horror fans.
That's not saying that "We Are Still Here" is up there with some of the best haunted house movies like "The Exorcist", "The Shining", "Poltergeist", or "The Conjuring", but it does offer enough decent scares and some moments of high tension to push it past pastiche. The film mixes stylish, subtle filmmaking with sudden gore effects to deliver a twisted take on the stale and anemic haunted house formula. And though it doesn't match up to the aforementioned classics, "We Are Still Here" stands on its own as a memorable and utterly creepy genre offering that deserves to be seen by horror fans that appreciate something out of the ordinary.
Rating: 3.3/5 stars
"We Are Still Here" is the latest iteration of people unwittingly stumbling upon an ancient haunted house, and it succeeds more than it fails, thanks largely to the competent work of first-time director Ted Geoghegan. The Director does a great job in keeping the tension high, teasing his ghastly ghosts with escalating bouts of gore infested violence to make a film that will satisfy both haunted house and gore horror fans.
That's not saying that "We Are Still Here" is up there with some of the best haunted house movies like "The Exorcist", "The Shining", "Poltergeist", or "The Conjuring", but it does offer enough decent scares and some moments of high tension to push it past pastiche. The film mixes stylish, subtle filmmaking with sudden gore effects to deliver a twisted take on the stale and anemic haunted house formula. And though it doesn't match up to the aforementioned classics, "We Are Still Here" stands on its own as a memorable and utterly creepy genre offering that deserves to be seen by horror fans that appreciate something out of the ordinary.
- DareDevilKid
- Dec 20, 2015
- Permalink
Okay... I have replaced my entire original 2015 review. Honestly, I don't know WHAT the hell I was Smok'n when I originally reviewed this, but I sincerely have to admit I was DEAD wrong!
I can't imagine what it was that really bothered me so much that I gave this movie a '4'... I know there were a few times where the sound design was a tad overdone, but compared to some other films, it honestly was very minor. I kept seeing this on many 'Best Of' Horror lists, so remembering and re-reading my original rating and review, I felt I really needed to watch the movie again, and I am VERY glad I did! This was a great Old-School Retro style Haunted House/Ghost story. Not the low key, laid back Classic British kind, but with a strong, creepy, and somewhat violent American vibe. This time I really noticed and liked the way the director had these outside shots of the landscape and the house and the trees and such. It really gave it a nice, isolated feel that added quite a bit to the atmosphere of the film. This time, I really dug the whole thing. The acting was excellent all around, with the great Barbara Crampton giving a pitch perfect performance of a Mom who had lost her son. Not overdone or with stupid, superficial divisiveness or coldness between the husband and wife that you usually see portrayed in these circumstances. But, very refreshingly a good, believable, realistic depiction of both the parents and yes their sadness, but supportive and comforting to each other. What a nice break from the usual idiotic films like this where a child has been lost and you see all this animosity and anger between the parents. None of that, thankfully... But, a very honest portrayal of what NORMAL people would expect to see with parents in this situation.
And, yeah, good ol' Larry Fessenden was his usual great self! And all other characters, especially the older man from the town, were done really well. Man... Sorry to be such a 'Guy', but poor Susan Gibney... If you had a chance to catch the two Star Trek: TNG episodes where she portrayed the absolutely lovely Dr. Leah Brahms, WOW, I mean I totally fell in love with that character. But, I guess that was awhile ago. If you have a chance though, do a Google search and check out the Leah Brahms character in Star Trek: TNG and you will see what I mean... : )
The atmosphere was very good. The filmmakers did a great job in gradually building up the tension and creepiness as the story goes on. The Ghostly appearances were quite effective which many reviewers comment on. I liked the ending and thought it worked really well. Just all 'n' all a really well done, well executed, Old Fashioned Haunted House Horror film that is a lot of fun with some great effects. If you like this basic kind of Horror movie, then you should really like this one.
After re-watching it just now, I most DEFINITELY came back here and changed my rating from a puzzling '4' to a well deserved '7'...
I can't imagine what it was that really bothered me so much that I gave this movie a '4'... I know there were a few times where the sound design was a tad overdone, but compared to some other films, it honestly was very minor. I kept seeing this on many 'Best Of' Horror lists, so remembering and re-reading my original rating and review, I felt I really needed to watch the movie again, and I am VERY glad I did! This was a great Old-School Retro style Haunted House/Ghost story. Not the low key, laid back Classic British kind, but with a strong, creepy, and somewhat violent American vibe. This time I really noticed and liked the way the director had these outside shots of the landscape and the house and the trees and such. It really gave it a nice, isolated feel that added quite a bit to the atmosphere of the film. This time, I really dug the whole thing. The acting was excellent all around, with the great Barbara Crampton giving a pitch perfect performance of a Mom who had lost her son. Not overdone or with stupid, superficial divisiveness or coldness between the husband and wife that you usually see portrayed in these circumstances. But, very refreshingly a good, believable, realistic depiction of both the parents and yes their sadness, but supportive and comforting to each other. What a nice break from the usual idiotic films like this where a child has been lost and you see all this animosity and anger between the parents. None of that, thankfully... But, a very honest portrayal of what NORMAL people would expect to see with parents in this situation.
And, yeah, good ol' Larry Fessenden was his usual great self! And all other characters, especially the older man from the town, were done really well. Man... Sorry to be such a 'Guy', but poor Susan Gibney... If you had a chance to catch the two Star Trek: TNG episodes where she portrayed the absolutely lovely Dr. Leah Brahms, WOW, I mean I totally fell in love with that character. But, I guess that was awhile ago. If you have a chance though, do a Google search and check out the Leah Brahms character in Star Trek: TNG and you will see what I mean... : )
The atmosphere was very good. The filmmakers did a great job in gradually building up the tension and creepiness as the story goes on. The Ghostly appearances were quite effective which many reviewers comment on. I liked the ending and thought it worked really well. Just all 'n' all a really well done, well executed, Old Fashioned Haunted House Horror film that is a lot of fun with some great effects. If you like this basic kind of Horror movie, then you should really like this one.
After re-watching it just now, I most DEFINITELY came back here and changed my rating from a puzzling '4' to a well deserved '7'...
- lathe-of-heaven
- Sep 20, 2015
- Permalink
To be honest, this movie baffled me. Is it absolutely terrible? No. Did it have potential? Yes. But somehow all of it amounted to only this bizarre mess of a film. Let me put something out there first: "We Are Still Here" clocks in at one hour and 17 minutes. At the end I expected there to be 20 more minutes of movie left. The whole thing felt rushed, and the ending was...abrupt, to say the least.
The story follows a couple who move into a new house hoping to move past the death of their son. This is a time-tested plot. However, "We Are Still Here" proceeds to give us almost no information about the son and no time to feel the weight of his parent's grief. It merely establishes that his mother can "feel his presence" in the house before embarking on a series of cheap scares. There are several very sudden character deaths that in a better movie would seem bold. Here they just seem lazy. There is precisely one very creepy moment that would have been perfect if it hadn't immediately transitioned to a series of jump scares (that it was also intercut with Lisa Marie's "acting" didn't help).
The later scenes involve almost cartoonish amounts of gore. If the movie was an intentional horror-comedy this would have been fine. The first 3/4 of the movie seemed to be going for straight horror, though, so I didn't know what to make of it. I could talk about the bad writing and jarringly terrible lighting as well, but what would be the point? It ultimately felt like a short film stretched beyond its limit. The concept would have worked great in a tight 15-20 minutes, where movies can get away with the spareness and ambiguity that "We Are Still Here" features. As it is, though, it feels like a movie that ran out of budget and ideas long before it was truly finished.
The story follows a couple who move into a new house hoping to move past the death of their son. This is a time-tested plot. However, "We Are Still Here" proceeds to give us almost no information about the son and no time to feel the weight of his parent's grief. It merely establishes that his mother can "feel his presence" in the house before embarking on a series of cheap scares. There are several very sudden character deaths that in a better movie would seem bold. Here they just seem lazy. There is precisely one very creepy moment that would have been perfect if it hadn't immediately transitioned to a series of jump scares (that it was also intercut with Lisa Marie's "acting" didn't help).
The later scenes involve almost cartoonish amounts of gore. If the movie was an intentional horror-comedy this would have been fine. The first 3/4 of the movie seemed to be going for straight horror, though, so I didn't know what to make of it. I could talk about the bad writing and jarringly terrible lighting as well, but what would be the point? It ultimately felt like a short film stretched beyond its limit. The concept would have worked great in a tight 15-20 minutes, where movies can get away with the spareness and ambiguity that "We Are Still Here" features. As it is, though, it feels like a movie that ran out of budget and ideas long before it was truly finished.
We Are Still Here is paradoxically earnest and witty. There are a lot of reasons why you might enjoy the movie.
It's a blend of intertextual reference and homage, love letter to the genre, and desire to live in the past. If it weren't quite so earnest, it would almost be a parody. It's Lovecraftian in that sense-being a work not of its time.
The points where it departs from the reasons above are the points where it loses itself. The deep emersion in decades past are subverted a few times, and that does detract from the enjoyment.
The pacing of the movie is...awkward in good ways. It's like watching a newborn giraffe stand up for the first time, and then suddenly blow up.
Most of the movies effects are physical, but this makes the ones that aren't stand out enough to pull me out of the experience and land me in bad CGI land.
Despite it's flaws, if your a fan of the horror genre and have any frame of reference for horror movies of decades past, its likely to be an enjoyable experience.
It's a blend of intertextual reference and homage, love letter to the genre, and desire to live in the past. If it weren't quite so earnest, it would almost be a parody. It's Lovecraftian in that sense-being a work not of its time.
The points where it departs from the reasons above are the points where it loses itself. The deep emersion in decades past are subverted a few times, and that does detract from the enjoyment.
The pacing of the movie is...awkward in good ways. It's like watching a newborn giraffe stand up for the first time, and then suddenly blow up.
Most of the movies effects are physical, but this makes the ones that aren't stand out enough to pull me out of the experience and land me in bad CGI land.
Despite it's flaws, if your a fan of the horror genre and have any frame of reference for horror movies of decades past, its likely to be an enjoyable experience.
The first fifteen or twenty minutes of this movie were gold. It was horror done right. Atmospheric, paying upon the unknown, subtle scares. The dialogue was pretty bad, but I was more than engaged by the building horror.
then, suddenly, the movie completely loses its restraint and becomes a goofy gore fest with monsters that just might be action heroes.
I don't want to say anything else because I don't want to add spoilers. I'll just say that I love horror movies. It is my favorite genre. There are different levels of horror. There is true, psychological mind screws that get under the skin and stay there for days (my favorite kind). On the opposite end of the spectrum are these CGI, "thrill" driven, blood-and-gore-a-minute for people with no attention spans (my lease favorite kind). The latter has its place. No doubt. My only problem with this film is that it pretends, and many of the reviewers on here seem to be pretending, that it's the former.
I honestly feel like the victim of false advertising and I have a hard time believing the almost universal praise this movie received. I know my tastes lean a bit more towards the artsy and stylish (and old), but I cannot be THIS out of touch. For god's sake, I just watched Age of Ultron last night and enjoyed a lot of things about it.
then, suddenly, the movie completely loses its restraint and becomes a goofy gore fest with monsters that just might be action heroes.
I don't want to say anything else because I don't want to add spoilers. I'll just say that I love horror movies. It is my favorite genre. There are different levels of horror. There is true, psychological mind screws that get under the skin and stay there for days (my favorite kind). On the opposite end of the spectrum are these CGI, "thrill" driven, blood-and-gore-a-minute for people with no attention spans (my lease favorite kind). The latter has its place. No doubt. My only problem with this film is that it pretends, and many of the reviewers on here seem to be pretending, that it's the former.
I honestly feel like the victim of false advertising and I have a hard time believing the almost universal praise this movie received. I know my tastes lean a bit more towards the artsy and stylish (and old), but I cannot be THIS out of touch. For god's sake, I just watched Age of Ultron last night and enjoyed a lot of things about it.
- gedikreverdi
- Dec 5, 2020
- Permalink
Middle aged couple grieving the recent loss of their son move into a remote house, and find themselves caught between the evil in the basement and the nutters from the local town.
Swimming against the tide, I know, but I found this really poor. It opens with nice shots of the snowy landscape, then a couple driving to a destination - standard horror opening, but the dialogue has nothing. If you want to see how it's done with skill and imagination watch From the Dark (2014). We get to the destination, and it's '70s anti-colour co-ordination as the couple meets another middle aged couple, and the dialogue still has nothing.
It's about couples really - I think there are 5, if you include the basement dwellers. But the script does nothing with it. Satire of '70s swingers? No. Surely then it has a coherent, satisfying story? No. Ah, but it references '70s horror and has some cheesy gore. OK, but pfff.
Lots of sound-based attempts at jump scares. Feeble CGI. The ghosts look like they wandered off the set of The Fog.
Overall, bunch of middle aged actors get caught in juvenile misdemeanor. Community service all round.
ps. from the Ebert review: "Full disclosure: Mr. G. has a day job as a New-York-based movie publicist, and I've had friendly and rewarding exchanges with him in that context."
Swimming against the tide, I know, but I found this really poor. It opens with nice shots of the snowy landscape, then a couple driving to a destination - standard horror opening, but the dialogue has nothing. If you want to see how it's done with skill and imagination watch From the Dark (2014). We get to the destination, and it's '70s anti-colour co-ordination as the couple meets another middle aged couple, and the dialogue still has nothing.
It's about couples really - I think there are 5, if you include the basement dwellers. But the script does nothing with it. Satire of '70s swingers? No. Surely then it has a coherent, satisfying story? No. Ah, but it references '70s horror and has some cheesy gore. OK, but pfff.
Lots of sound-based attempts at jump scares. Feeble CGI. The ghosts look like they wandered off the set of The Fog.
Overall, bunch of middle aged actors get caught in juvenile misdemeanor. Community service all round.
ps. from the Ebert review: "Full disclosure: Mr. G. has a day job as a New-York-based movie publicist, and I've had friendly and rewarding exchanges with him in that context."
I was lucky enough to see this at a friends house last night, went into it blind, and oh boy what a nice surprise.Whilst yes, it's another haunted house movie, this brings something new to the table with a great climax to the film that really ramps it up.The performances from the whole cast are excellent,and the main four characters are likable and believable.The cinematography is excellent, and the whole film just has this authentic feel to it.I won't reveal anything of the storyline,as I think it's one of those films that's best enjoyed if you don't know too much about it,but as a seasoned horror fan,I found this one of the most refreshing films I've seen in years with some good tension and scares.I've seen some comments about 'B movie this, B movie that', but I didn't get that feeling at all, this had the feel of a 70's-80's classic horror.A little more character development of the villains would have made this even better, it could have stood another 10 minutes or more being added to the running time which would have allowed this.I'll be pre-ordering the Blu Ray as soon as possible,when there are so many horror films out there that shouldn't have even been released, this deserves my money and to be in my collection.
- rocknrelics
- Jun 16, 2015
- Permalink
In the cold, wintry fields of New England, a lonely old house wakes up every thirty years - and demands a sacrifice.
Let's face it: Barbara Crampton delivers one of her stronger performances, whereas the male lead delivers his lines in a very stunted way. He shall not even be named here. But good on Crampton! Far too many "horror icons" feel the need to phone in their performances, thinking their name on the poster is all that matters. And while it is true that Crampton's name does sell, she adds a great deal of value to her name here, in what may be her best work since the Stuart Gordon years.
We also have a fun role for Larry Fessenden, who really deserves to have a little fun. Has any other creative genius launched more great independent filmmakers in the last decade? I would guess not.
Let's face it: Barbara Crampton delivers one of her stronger performances, whereas the male lead delivers his lines in a very stunted way. He shall not even be named here. But good on Crampton! Far too many "horror icons" feel the need to phone in their performances, thinking their name on the poster is all that matters. And while it is true that Crampton's name does sell, she adds a great deal of value to her name here, in what may be her best work since the Stuart Gordon years.
We also have a fun role for Larry Fessenden, who really deserves to have a little fun. Has any other creative genius launched more great independent filmmakers in the last decade? I would guess not.
- KineticSeoul
- Jul 30, 2015
- Permalink
I love horror that takes place around houses, conjures presence and unleashes energy. It's the gust of motion I'm after, the familiar geography thrown asunder by metaphysical winds that lift walls. Blood can be there or not, for me it's inhabiting something that is changed in the course, shown to be no thing, illusory, a prank of our investment in the idea of solid reality.
And this is horror that moves fast, dwells and conjures with some purity. Oh the parts are all familiar; old house with a presence in the basement, a bereaved couple moving in, small New England town harboring a secret. Some have likened it to a b-movie of old as if that were a bad thing, in fact that's part of the whole appeal. Not that it pays homage to movies of old as if they should be enshrined in our estimation but that it taps into a kind of energy we've forgotten.
You wouldn't be amiss of thinking of it with Fulci in mind, in those brief years when he could cut portals through his own murk. It's that type of lumbering energy that assuredly emanates from below, stands outside doors and makes floors creak before washing with blood. It knowingly mines that legacy but short of forcing it to be a certain type of film.
And this is horror that moves fast, dwells and conjures with some purity. Oh the parts are all familiar; old house with a presence in the basement, a bereaved couple moving in, small New England town harboring a secret. Some have likened it to a b-movie of old as if that were a bad thing, in fact that's part of the whole appeal. Not that it pays homage to movies of old as if they should be enshrined in our estimation but that it taps into a kind of energy we've forgotten.
You wouldn't be amiss of thinking of it with Fulci in mind, in those brief years when he could cut portals through his own murk. It's that type of lumbering energy that assuredly emanates from below, stands outside doors and makes floors creak before washing with blood. It knowingly mines that legacy but short of forcing it to be a certain type of film.
- chaos-rampant
- Oct 30, 2015
- Permalink
- subliminalkidx
- Mar 9, 2016
- Permalink
To those people saying this is old school horror well I can't agree. Old school horror never took ages for anything to happen. In a movie that's only an hour and 20 minutes long extended shots of scenery and, in a couple of instances, a boiler are just trying to push a running time that clearly didn't have enough story to fill.
Look a picture frame is broken so obviously it's the supernatural. Give me a break.
Look a picture frame is broken so obviously it's the supernatural. Give me a break.
- Dodge-Zombie
- Jun 16, 2022
- Permalink
I think the "throwback" quality of the film was done well. The opening scene with the Mercedes was reminiscent of the Night of the Living Dead. The story moved at a nice pace without unfolding too quickly. The crazy hippie friends reminded me of the Amityville Horror from the 60s with Helen Shaver. So many things went right with the film and they pulled it off while giving up some hardcore gore. I think some of the acting (and dodging) the sticky bits wasn't so much an act. I don't think there was a wall left unscathed. Solid film. Entertaining and curious. Wouldn't make me keep the night light on, but I feel they were going for another sense with this piece. Dark Sky is making some clever choices and I see the work paying off from film to film. It is always great to see a group do well when they apparently care about the horror genre.
- joeywilderjustiss
- Jun 8, 2015
- Permalink
- thelastblogontheleft
- Nov 26, 2016
- Permalink
I didn't know much about this going in... I just liked the poster and the name. I don't watch previews these days, they give to much away. Anyway, I had not expectations so I couldn't be disappointed... but it was surprisingly good. Sure, it's obviously made on a small budget... but in my opinion most of the better horror films are. This is your basic spookhouse movie layered on top of... something else. A clever combination of subgenres I think.
I particularly liked that most of the characters were NOT horny teenagers. The motivations of the characters required older actors and that's a nice change of pace. Also, they weren't particularly glamorous... the people, the cars, the house... all look pretty ordinary. This might have been due to the small budget but if so thank goodness for low-budget horror.
The script and the acting were decent... nothing to distractingly bad. Though I don't get why the creepy town leader guy would tell the family the backstory of the house if he wanted them to stay so badly (who would want to live in an old mortuary?).
The only real weakness of the movie is what, for me, were comical amounts of gore. There is no subtlety to the kills... and people just explode like their cardboard boxes full of fruit punch. It seems like a big chunk of the budget must have been spent on the gore FX when really going with less overt FX would have been less ridiculous and probably cost less.
Still, I quite enjoyed it and it gave me some fun ideas for our next game of Call of Cthulhu.
I particularly liked that most of the characters were NOT horny teenagers. The motivations of the characters required older actors and that's a nice change of pace. Also, they weren't particularly glamorous... the people, the cars, the house... all look pretty ordinary. This might have been due to the small budget but if so thank goodness for low-budget horror.
The script and the acting were decent... nothing to distractingly bad. Though I don't get why the creepy town leader guy would tell the family the backstory of the house if he wanted them to stay so badly (who would want to live in an old mortuary?).
The only real weakness of the movie is what, for me, were comical amounts of gore. There is no subtlety to the kills... and people just explode like their cardboard boxes full of fruit punch. It seems like a big chunk of the budget must have been spent on the gore FX when really going with less overt FX would have been less ridiculous and probably cost less.
Still, I quite enjoyed it and it gave me some fun ideas for our next game of Call of Cthulhu.
- venusboys3
- Sep 22, 2015
- Permalink
Overall the film disappointed me, but its one of those indie horror films that does certain things so well it kinda sticks with you. I enjoyed it but didn't blow me away like I wanted it to. I liken it that movie
"I Am a Ghost (2012)" -If you liked this go watch that.
On the pro side of things they did an amazing job emulating the atmosphere of a 70's era horror film. I really could not seem to pick out any modern day features. On the whole that seems hard to do, but the benefit is you don't have to get wrapped up in ex machina like cellphones not working for no particular reason etc. When the house creaks and utilities fail it all fits together nicely. Lots of creepiness and edginess. The OST was great.
On the Cons side of things the acting was just wooden over the top and cringe worthy. The problem is Im certain this was on purpose. A couple of actors I recall are experienced and I wasn't buying their delivery. It was very purposely scripted to be like 70s horror. It doesn't work and you end up just trudging your way through exasperatingly bad dialog to keep enjoying the rest of it. I liked that they kept the plot inferred through conversation but suddenly for no good reason they monologue a big chunk of the story midway through. It was dumb and unnecessary. Ruined the suspense for me. Lastly the "monsters" were shown too much and the gore lightened the tension so much all the creepiness was sucked out of it in the last act.
Its a solid b+ for concept and design. It sits at a 5.8 and that sounds about right to me. If they'd worked the script a little better and or tighten up the special effects this could have been a solid 7.
"I Am a Ghost (2012)" -If you liked this go watch that.
On the pro side of things they did an amazing job emulating the atmosphere of a 70's era horror film. I really could not seem to pick out any modern day features. On the whole that seems hard to do, but the benefit is you don't have to get wrapped up in ex machina like cellphones not working for no particular reason etc. When the house creaks and utilities fail it all fits together nicely. Lots of creepiness and edginess. The OST was great.
On the Cons side of things the acting was just wooden over the top and cringe worthy. The problem is Im certain this was on purpose. A couple of actors I recall are experienced and I wasn't buying their delivery. It was very purposely scripted to be like 70s horror. It doesn't work and you end up just trudging your way through exasperatingly bad dialog to keep enjoying the rest of it. I liked that they kept the plot inferred through conversation but suddenly for no good reason they monologue a big chunk of the story midway through. It was dumb and unnecessary. Ruined the suspense for me. Lastly the "monsters" were shown too much and the gore lightened the tension so much all the creepiness was sucked out of it in the last act.
Its a solid b+ for concept and design. It sits at a 5.8 and that sounds about right to me. If they'd worked the script a little better and or tighten up the special effects this could have been a solid 7.
- just_in_case
- Sep 19, 2015
- Permalink
I am admittedly not a big fan of Lucio Fulci AKA The Godfather of Gore. He made some good films(Zombi 2 and City of the living Dead) but I am not a fan of his House by the Cemetery. I still liked his way of developing atmosphere although he torpedoed it himself by putting gratuitous gore and illogical sequences though it was part of his charm. So, when I heard of We Are Still Here and how it's a tribute to Fulci's films, I was intrigued if not too hopeful. Fortunately, it turned out to be a wonderful surprise.
The best part about this movie apart from the creepy atmosphere and the beautiful ice-covered New England scenery is the very good performances by nearly everyone in the cast, especially Barbara Crampton, Andrew Sensenig and the extremely creepy Monte Markham. Larry Fessenden is on hand to provide a bit of ham which he does with glee. The film much like Fulci's post-Zombi 2 films, ultimately explodes in a gore-drenched frenzy though this one still keeps sight of it's central characters. It is also surprisingly well-paced and doesn't sag in the middle like others of it's genre.
It's true that the story isn't original but the acting, direction and effects are so strong that they make up for it. I will even be audacious enough to say that this might be a better horror film than It Follows which despite stronger scares, stagnated in the middle. The director, Geoghegan seems very promising and I will eagerly await his next feature.
Altamente Raccomandato!
The best part about this movie apart from the creepy atmosphere and the beautiful ice-covered New England scenery is the very good performances by nearly everyone in the cast, especially Barbara Crampton, Andrew Sensenig and the extremely creepy Monte Markham. Larry Fessenden is on hand to provide a bit of ham which he does with glee. The film much like Fulci's post-Zombi 2 films, ultimately explodes in a gore-drenched frenzy though this one still keeps sight of it's central characters. It is also surprisingly well-paced and doesn't sag in the middle like others of it's genre.
It's true that the story isn't original but the acting, direction and effects are so strong that they make up for it. I will even be audacious enough to say that this might be a better horror film than It Follows which despite stronger scares, stagnated in the middle. The director, Geoghegan seems very promising and I will eagerly await his next feature.
Altamente Raccomandato!
- stencilman
- Jun 19, 2015
- Permalink
I really wanted to get into this film for Halloween. I thought it would be a new classic horror film I missed but I was mostly wrong. There are some great effects, scares and atmosphere in We Are Still Here. Also these ghosts don't mess around, they kill and do it in brutal ways. I felt like I was watching a ghost slasher film at times.
That's the positive stuff. Here's the negative:
1. I disliked the cast, especially the main couple. 2. Some of the acting just isn't good. 3. The ending is all over the place. 4. The house wasn't scary or very unique.
I recommend this as a rental. I wouldn't watch it again though.
That's the positive stuff. Here's the negative:
1. I disliked the cast, especially the main couple. 2. Some of the acting just isn't good. 3. The ending is all over the place. 4. The house wasn't scary or very unique.
I recommend this as a rental. I wouldn't watch it again though.
- adamoctranspo
- Oct 17, 2018
- Permalink
Although haunted house flicks are ten a penny these days, the genre can occasionally throw out a decent attempt and WE ARE STILL HERE is one such film. It's a deliberately old-fashioned piece - apparently inspired by the works of Lucio Fulci - which sees a grieving couple move into a chilly old home only to discover that both the house and the townsfolk are hiding some dark secrets.
This is traditional, low key stuff for the most part, although it builds to a powerhouse climax which is jaw-dropping stuff. The ghost material is rather creepy and the only thing I didn't care for much were the séance sequences, which are too familiar to work very well these days (although they do allow for the presence of cult actors Larry Fessenden and Lisa Marie).
An all-grown-up Barbara Crampton (of RE-ANIMATOR infamy) is a good choice for the role of the protagonist, and the production as a whole has a minimalist feel which really works. The chilly New York landscape is brought to life like never before, and if by the end it is all very predictable, you can't deny that it packs a punch nonetheless.
This is traditional, low key stuff for the most part, although it builds to a powerhouse climax which is jaw-dropping stuff. The ghost material is rather creepy and the only thing I didn't care for much were the séance sequences, which are too familiar to work very well these days (although they do allow for the presence of cult actors Larry Fessenden and Lisa Marie).
An all-grown-up Barbara Crampton (of RE-ANIMATOR infamy) is a good choice for the role of the protagonist, and the production as a whole has a minimalist feel which really works. The chilly New York landscape is brought to life like never before, and if by the end it is all very predictable, you can't deny that it packs a punch nonetheless.
- Leofwine_draca
- Dec 30, 2015
- Permalink