There are quite a few things going for this movie that attracted me to it and should have added up to a movie that I loved. First, I'm a big fan of Clive Barker. I love his aesthetic. I love the mythology that he creates in his works. I feel like his vision pulls the curtain back on Hell's fiery gates, just a bit, and creates these wonderful, demonic fairy tales full of infernal imagery. The subject matter also intrigues me. Like all geeks with a penchant for the fantastic, I enjoy magic and illusion, but even more I like movies and books that explore that thin line between illusion and magic and the possibility that perhaps there is real magic. Of course, it's not a far stretch from that sort of magic into occult territory, either. As a horror movie lover, I have a natural affinity for things dealing with dark magic, as well. The combination of all of these could have created something that I would have put up there as an instant classic, but sadly this movie is completely forgettable.
This is probably the least "Barker-ish" of any Barker adaptation I have seen. What I mean by that is that it is mostly devoid of any of that aesthetic that I was speaking of earlier. Movies like HELLRAISER, NIGHTBREED or CANDYMAN all feel like part of a large mythos, like all of them could have existed in the same world. There are very similar visual strands in those movies, even though one of them wasn't even directed by Barker. This movie is largely lacking any of that imagery. Except for the prologue and climax, we rarely get anything diabolical. It feels like it could have been the work of any old horror writer. While some may praise for deviating from his norm, this isn't what I come to the House of Barker for.
Even the actual magic in the movie is somewhat of a letdown. I really enjoyed the centerpiece scene where Swann is killed during his magic show. I wanted to see more of that sort of thing. They spend a lot of time talking about how these characters had crossed the line from illusion to real magic, but they seemed to know two tricks, levitation and fire. I'd at least expect enough effects to give me a true sense of power. Hell, even Harry Potter had better tricks than this.
Those were my expectations, though, so it's maybe not fair to judge this movie by how much it met those expectations. The real problem is that this movie just goes nowhere. It sets us up with a great opening scene, full of action and effects that seemed like this could turn into something memorable, but it dies quickly, mired down in a half-baked detective noir that is as predictable as it is uninteresting. Some part of that blame lies in Scott Bakula who's just not believable in this role, at all. He's supposed to be a hardened PI with one foot in the world of the occult, almost a John Constantine (comic books) type figure. Instead, Bakula just can't shake his wholesome image. Even when he swears it feels like elementary school kids trying out a word for the first time. Then, they inject a phony romance angle that just feels crammed in an insincere.
There are some great effects shots that still work very well and then there are some real doozys, like the CGI polygons that look so very dated 20 years later. What I saw is the Director's cut, which was probably more of a mistake because it was just too long and in need of editing.
If you've never seen anything by Barker before, do yourself a favor and go watch HELLRAISER. If you want a great movie about pushing magic to its' edge, watch Christopher Nolan's THE PRESTIGE.
This is probably the least "Barker-ish" of any Barker adaptation I have seen. What I mean by that is that it is mostly devoid of any of that aesthetic that I was speaking of earlier. Movies like HELLRAISER, NIGHTBREED or CANDYMAN all feel like part of a large mythos, like all of them could have existed in the same world. There are very similar visual strands in those movies, even though one of them wasn't even directed by Barker. This movie is largely lacking any of that imagery. Except for the prologue and climax, we rarely get anything diabolical. It feels like it could have been the work of any old horror writer. While some may praise for deviating from his norm, this isn't what I come to the House of Barker for.
Even the actual magic in the movie is somewhat of a letdown. I really enjoyed the centerpiece scene where Swann is killed during his magic show. I wanted to see more of that sort of thing. They spend a lot of time talking about how these characters had crossed the line from illusion to real magic, but they seemed to know two tricks, levitation and fire. I'd at least expect enough effects to give me a true sense of power. Hell, even Harry Potter had better tricks than this.
Those were my expectations, though, so it's maybe not fair to judge this movie by how much it met those expectations. The real problem is that this movie just goes nowhere. It sets us up with a great opening scene, full of action and effects that seemed like this could turn into something memorable, but it dies quickly, mired down in a half-baked detective noir that is as predictable as it is uninteresting. Some part of that blame lies in Scott Bakula who's just not believable in this role, at all. He's supposed to be a hardened PI with one foot in the world of the occult, almost a John Constantine (comic books) type figure. Instead, Bakula just can't shake his wholesome image. Even when he swears it feels like elementary school kids trying out a word for the first time. Then, they inject a phony romance angle that just feels crammed in an insincere.
There are some great effects shots that still work very well and then there are some real doozys, like the CGI polygons that look so very dated 20 years later. What I saw is the Director's cut, which was probably more of a mistake because it was just too long and in need of editing.
If you've never seen anything by Barker before, do yourself a favor and go watch HELLRAISER. If you want a great movie about pushing magic to its' edge, watch Christopher Nolan's THE PRESTIGE.