The Haunting in Connecticut (2009) User Reviews

Haunting in Connecticut keeps Casper in Wyoming

[MovieZoo · 7/10 · 27 March 2009]

I really did hesitate to see this movie because I had not seen many that have interested me since the days of Poltergeist - one exception being The Exorcism of Emily Rose. I loved both despite the obvious difference in style.

I found The Haunting In Connecticut disturbingly fun. It definitely had its own style which at times made me wonder when the signs of it bombing were going to appear. I think that was part of why I enjoyed it because it never did disappoint me. This mixture of reality and the supernatural kept me on the edge of my seat. Was it the trauma of cancer causing so much grief for this family or the chilling(yet burning), hidden secrets of the dead in this funeral home that kept expectations from settling on one aspect or the other? The fact is both were enough to draw attention away from the other while we try to make our own conclusions.

An innocent, everyday family deals with the possible, yet probable death of young Matt, who at times suffers excruciatingly from dealing with the unknown and death that he is convinced is his destiny. Squeezed between what is and may be real was enough, but then deal with the likes of a stranger who claims to be a reverend...c'mon, this is classic stuff. You can't take all this in without suffering a little, especially when the family itself starts to fall apart when they need to stick together.

While there are some questions that may not be answered, the story itself was more than satisfying. Special effects were kept to a minimum but used effectively and when needed. Acting was not Oscar worthy but good enough to make it all seem real. Fun when you want it and scary when you need it.

It's definitely a 7/10

In the Borderline of Two Worlds

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 26 July 2009]

Matt Campbell (Kyle Gallner) has a terminal cancer and is submitted to an experimental treatment in the St. Michael's Hospital Goatswood in Connecticut. The responsible for the trial, Dr. Brooks (D.W. Brown), advises that if Matt starts seeing things, he should drop the experiment. His religious mother Sara (Virginia Madsen) drives almost eight hours with her son since he has nausea and needs to vomit during the travel. She proposes her husband Peter (Martin Donovan), who had trouble with booze, to rent a house in Connecticut to be close to the hospital despite their second mortgage. Sara finds an old house with an affordable price and she questions the catch to the owner and he explains that the house has a history, since it was a funeral home in the past. Sara hides the truth from Peter and the family moves to the house. While in the treatment, Matt befriends Reverend Popescu (Elias Koteas), who has also cancer. When Matt has weird visions and nightmares from the past, he calls Popescu that tells him that an evil entity is trapped in the house and they are able to see him because they are in the borderline of the worlds of the living and the dead.

"The Haunting in Connecticut" is an above average movie of haunted house since it blends a very well developed family drama with spooky scenes of a ghost story. There are many realist situations like the bad financial situation of the Campbells that are usually forgotten in American movies. Further, there is a beautiful message of faith, and Sara truly believes that God works in a mysterious way. The drinking problem of Peter and how it affected the relationship with Sara is just glanced and could be better explored. I do not like the sensationalism that highlights on the cover of the DVD that the story is based on a true event since this movie is better than that. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Evocando Espíritos" ("Evoking Spirits")

Ultimately disappointing, even if I checked the closet an extra time

[Simon_Says_Movies · 7/10 · 1 June 2009]

2009. The year of the almost good horror film. Less then half way through this movie season we have had a whole wad of horror/slasher/thriller movies that have come so close yet haven't make the cut. Instead, so far we only have The Univited that can lay claims to being a solid entry, but lagging behind in the just-not-good-enough clan is Friday the 13th, My Bloody Valentine, The Last House on the Left and now The Haunting in Connecticut.

I have actually seen the Discovery Channel documentary of the same name and the movie is not exactly loyal, but does take numerous elements into consideration when crafting this consistently creepy but ultimately familiar ghost flick. I do enjoy a film that relies on atmosphere and character drama to build tension and a sense of dread over the Hostel philosophy that spend all your budget on fake blood is the best way to proceed. Yet, as with many fright flicks the director loses confidence in the audience to stay interested on atmosphere alone and perforates the story with boo moments and just enough clichés to make it forgettable.

Diagnosed with cancer, teenager Matt Campbell (Kyle Gallner) is suffering far more from the lengthy car rides to treatment then he is from his tragic disease. Taking charge, Matt's mother (Virginia Madsen) finds a rental property in Conneticut just a short trip from the clinic. Moving away from their hometown, Matt, his father (martin Donnovan), younger sister and brother (Sophi Knight and Ty Wood), cousin Wendy (Amanda Crew) and mother think that they have found a godsend in the old but charming property. But the home has ties to something far more satanic as strange occurrences begin to plague Matt. Is it his medication, or is something more sinister after the weakened teen?

Director Peter Cornwell builds tension very well throughout the opening half of the film, peppering the atmosphere with terrifying visions from the eyes of Matt. Like most horror films however, things begin to dissolve in the latter portions as we are introduced to the token priest, the boo moments mount and we are subjected to silly flashbacks that do nothing to heighten the mood back to its original lofty footing. Thankfully some credibility is returned in a extremely creepy climax that will make you reconsider hiring a home inspector next time you look to move.

The performances, especially from Madsen and Gallner are quite solid and they keep things grounded as best they can as things go awry. But presenting its PG rating as more of a limitation than an opportunity to raise the bar ultimately left me fairly numb, even if I checked the closet an extra time the night after.

6.5 / 10.0

Read all my reviews at: http://www.simonsaysmovies.blogspot.com

No Ghosts Were Harmed In The Making Of This Film...

[azathothpwiggins · 12 February 2022]

In THE HAUNTING IN CONNECTICUT, the Campbell family moves into a former funeral home (!) in order to be closer to the doctor of their terminally ill son. They're unaware that their new home was once the site of unspeakable acts of necromancy.

Now, the former victims of these violations are out to make their presence known.

This movie exceeds expectations. The story is engaging, the characters are believable, and the ghouls are original. Virginia Madsen plays the tormented Mrs. Campbell with the perfect balance of familial love and growing terror. Kyle Gallner is Matt, who gets one of the most memorable scenes in this or any other supernatural tale!

Definitely worth a look...

Very enjoyable little horror flick- despite its flaws

[aidanratesmovies · 7/10 · 30 January 2022]

It has its familiar moments and a sprinkle of cliches, but The Haunting in Connecticut does prove to be a decent and quite interesting little haunted house film- feeling very reminiscent as well as inspired by The Amityville Horror. Personally I enjoyed this flick. Yeah, it has some melodramatic moments at times, but I was certainly never bored while watching it. The fact that this film has such low ratings, especially when compared to other anticipated flops like The Possession is quite alarming. The acting is pretty well done, namely from Virginia Madsen, Elias Koteas, and Kyle Gallner. The only one who isn't all that great is Martin Donovan as the father character, but he's hardly in the movie enough to make a difference- heck even the kid actors are decent in this film. The imagery throughout the movie is haunting and surreal, it crawls under your skin, and truly allows for the atmosphere to really shine throughout the film despite its more noticeable flaws. The cinematography is nice, and the story is pretty well paced, albeit a bit formulaic at times, but still enjoyable. In the end, I do not see why The Haunting in Connecticut deserves so much hate, and found it to be a rather decent little horror flick. It may have some similarities to horror films in the past, but its unique moments and inspired ones lend it to be a very entertaining and creepy film i'm glad I didn't pass on.

My Rating: 7.3/10.

As if slowly dying from cancer isn't bad enough yet

[Coventry · 5/10 · 14 October 2015]

I made a deal with myself a long time ago that, whenever I would watch a horror movie of which I know from beforehand that I probably end up hating it, I would try to keep an open mind and avidly search for at least one positive aspect! This can be almost anything, except for gratuitous boobs on display (too easy), but I'm primarily hoping for at least one innovative plot aspect or surprising story twist. My expectations for "The Haunting in Connecticut" were set very low, because this production clearly features a number of clichéd elements that I dislike the most: paranormal entities in an abandoned house, supposedly based on a true story (yeah, right…), probably copious amounts fake scares and predictable "boo!"-moments and an overload of irritating PG-13 approved digital effects. Yes, the film does feature all the above mentioned stuff, but to my surprise it was still relatively easy to find the innovative plot aspect! To my knowledge and unless if I'm overlooking a certain title – which is always possible with more than 3.500 reviewed horror movies - "The Haunting in Connecticut" is the first movie I've seen that makes a connection between terminal illness and being a paranormal medium. The protagonist, teenager Matt Campbell, suffers from a deadly form of metastatic cancer, and the fact that he continuously balances on the edge of life and death apparently makes him more receptive for paranormal activities. It's definitely not a world- shocking new twist to the ghost-movie sub-genre, but at least I found it acceptable. Since Matt can't physically handle the long car trips between their house and the specialized cancer clinic, his devoted mother Sara rents an extra house in Connecticut. The family can hardly finance this, but they stumble upon a large house that is very cheap due to its past as a funeral home with a macabre history. Matt immediately begins to see nightmarish things, like corpses with strange carvings all over and their eyelids cut off. Together with his older sister and a local priest, also a cancer patient, they dig up the house's history and discover that the original mortician – Mr. Aickman – also used the basement to organize séances. His young assistant Jonah was an exceptional medium who even produced ectoplasm, but one of the séances went horribly wrong and killed all participants including Aickman. Jonah's restless soul, as well as those of hundred others, are still inside the house and now manifest themselves through Matt. Poor kid… As if dying from cancer and struggling through sickening special treatments isn't miserable enough already, he also has to face malevolent Connecticut ghosts! I didn't make any efforts to find out elements of the script are truthful and what others are fictionalized (the latter probably counts for 99%), but at least I can honestly state that this was one of the least annoying haunted-houses/paranormal entities movies that I watched since the new Millennium. I admit I'm a sucker for spooky old photographs and atmospheric black/white flashbacks set in the 1920s/1930s period, so "The Haunting in Connecticut" gains a couple of extra points for featuring this, and the special effects were adequate too. The film has a more than decent cast, with the lovely Virginia Madsen ("Candyman") as the concerned mother and Elias Koteas as the helpful priest. There's a sequel already, set in Georgia this time, and another one upcoming set in New York. After that I assume there will be 47 more of these movies, one for each state.

Improved by the Family Drama

[nashw82 · 7/10 · 23 February 2021]

While on the surface this is a pretty standard supernatural unsatisfied ghost horror film, it is elevated by good writing and family drama. By also focusing on a family's battle with cancer and dealing with the alcohlism the story has more depth than others of this subgenre. Kyle Gallner delivers a good performance as the cancer ridden teen, and the setting and the visuals build a genuine sense of creepiness.

Follows the basic structure of a haunted house movie.

[Aaron1375 · 5/10 · 31 March 2009]

Basically this movie is like a more gruesome haunted house tale than the original Amityville or a less gruesome haunted house tale than the Amityville remake. However, the movie most certainly follows the flow of those two movies. I would have actually given this movie a six, but they kept trying to make out like this story was pure fact and that rather ticked me off, I mean what do they take me for a moron. I know a bit about the story it is taken from and there are so many differences it is pathetic. I realize that you have to add some stuff or the movie is going to be kind of boring, heck I am even for embellishing the story to the degree this one did, but do not have the this serious voice over telling me how this is true and have the writing at the end tell an out right lie. So what is the story you ask? Well a teenage boy has cancer and his mother is having to drive him a great distance quite often for a special treatment. Mother decides to find a place to rent closer to the place the son gets treatments so he does not have to endure the long drive in pain and vomiting. Of course, the family's financial situation is not to good so when the house with the history comes up for rent you know our family is going to make that their new stomping ground. So spooky reflections and such start to take place as well as strange visions and we even have a reverend enter the picture to give our youth guidance. So yes, the typical haunted house formula is here. Add in a pointless stretch of film where the father drinks and you have your movie, though I am betting that part of the film is actually true, but they changed so much around why not just omit that part all together as it really did not bring anything to the film. So I say add some more scares, perhaps a little gore, do not try to pass off the movie as being a reenactment or something and this film might have been really good...just like a lot of horror movies it is usually might have is it not?

Horror Grounded in Reality is Back, Finally!

[steelydwill · 9/10 · 24 March 2009]

I'm sure it helped that I was in the right mood and the right atmosphere when I saw this movie at a midnight screening at South by Southwest, but The Haunting in Connecticut was a horror movie that really struck a chord with me.

I'm a longtime fan of this genre, getting acquainted with all the old classics and cult films through USA Saturday Night Horror when I was young, and continuing to see and love newer ones, such as The Ring, throughout college. However, when I go on a rant about the current state of horror movies, I tell people that today's movies make you heighten your sense of disbelief too much in order to be scared – I call it "fantasy horror." There aren't enough movies like The Exorcist anymore where it absolutely feels real, like something that has always existed but you've just been lucky enough to avoid.

I loved The Haunting in Connecticut, because it is much closer to reality horror than fantasy, and I suppose that's because it's based on a true story. It just doesn't feel like it came straight out of someone's imagination. It was the kind of movie where, not only did I find myself wondering about the true story of the Snedeker family, but when I went to sleep that night, I couldn't help pondering the history of my own home and its previous tenants. If you're the type of person who loves horror movies, I assume that's the exact creepy way you want them to resonate.

Besides the background story, one of the other reasons I think this movie worked was because of the performance of Kyle Gallner. This young man plays a much more complex (and believable) protagonist than most of the ones I've seen in horror films lately, as his character, Matt, has a very familiar (and scary in its own right) disease that makes him question whether the haunting is real, or a symptom of his sickness. I venture to say that his character could have made an interesting movie even BEFORE the paranormal activity starts, but Gallner was exceptional in this role, and I think we'll still be talking about "the boy in The Haunting in Connecticut," 10 years from now.

So for true horror movie fans, I definitely recommend checking this one out. Sometimes there's nothing wrong with a horror movie based completely in fantasyland, like Nightmare on Elm Street, but the creepiest horror usually has a dose of reality. This film will scare you, it will make you think and it will leave a lasting impression.

Very Good

[kirstenlynch · 7/10 · 8 February 2021]

It's a "Keeps you guessing while scared," kind of a movie. We really liked it.

pad the volume

[jacenknet · 2/10 · 25 February 2020]

Let talk about what horror movies have come down to for a second now....crap...well at least the Hollywood horror movies that think a crap movie can be saved with name actors. Then add a horrid use of CGI in every scene thought of that could have been done (and better mind you) in real life. Then add the simple OVERUSE of jump scare crap (so many scenes would have been actually scary if i could have watched them without a 9 volume increase piano crash noise). And pretty much your stuck with this movie which is a excellent example of when a studio gets a horrid movie and has to make it look good in the preview edit just so somebody goes out and sees it.

Creepy

[kelly-gaudreau · 7/10 · 4 November 2021]

A creepy film with enough jump scares to make it a great movie to watch on Halloween. Creepy, Creepy, Creepy, Creepy. Ok here is some more creepy, creepy, creepy.

comedy in connecticut

[jwilkerson999 · 1/10 · 5 April 2009]

Open your wallet. Take out a ten dollar bill. Rip it in half. This is how I felt after watching this movie. Take my advice. DO NOT SEE IT!!!

Going in to this movie, I had decided that it was going to be cheap and predictable, but fun anyways. I am not the cynical movie critic who blasts movies on their typical themes or plot lines, but this one left me stunned. I cannot believe that the casting, screenplay, and special effects on any Hollywood movie could be so terribly amiss.

Casting. In truth, this entire movie was impossible to believe because the acting was so pathetic. The mother seemed completely out of her league, rattling off transparent lines that were shallow but were made to be serious. The possessed boy had the same constipated look on his face the entire time, but his acting was not entirely to blame. Do not even get me started on the reverend. He was absolutely ridiculous. During every single one of his lines, I started laughing.

Plot. The ghost boy, Jonah, is a medium for seances conducted by an evil man who tries to augment his power by making him throw up a liquidy substance that is said to be the power of the dead. This death vomit is intended to be frightening. So he haunts the house, along with other dead people, for a reason that is to say the least, ambiguous and abstruse. A shaky, hurried plot is matched with horrid special effects to create the ultimate farce. If you find a burn victim flashing on the screen thirty times behind a character terrifying, then this is the movie for you.

Please do not waste your money. I go to the movies a lot, and I have learned to appreciate movies with little substance that still offer entertainment. This movie was not even able to attain that stature. Save your money, go rent something better.

Not a bad horror film

[bkoganbing · 6/10 · 6 December 2011]

I hope that people who see The Haunting In Connecticut aren't put off from buying home just because it was a funeral parlor at one time. In fact back in the day it was common enough for undertakers to live on the premises. Of course not all of them were involved in all the occult stuff that the former owner of this place where the Campbell family has moved into.

Virginia Madsen, Martin Donovan and their kids have purchased an old funeral parlor in Connecticut and are moving there. Moving there because their oldest son Kyle Gallner is undergoing cancer treatments. That's bad enough, but Gallner is also psychic and when they move into their new home he starts seeing all kinds of apparitions and manifesting some truly frightful things.

The former owner of the funeral home used the dead and also used an adolescent kid who was also psychic as a medium and that kid who disappeared under mysterious circumstances. It's quite a story when all is revealed.

Young Gallner carries this film, he gives a winning and sincere performance of a kid just not in control of all that's around him. There's another good performance by a minister played by Elias Koteas who has some idea of what's going on, but he too makes an almost fatal error for the Campbell family.

I'm not usually drawn to these films, but The Haunting In Connecticut is not a bad one for this genre.

If you go thinking this is based on a true story, you will be disappointed

[ghchamp96 · 1/10 · 31 March 2009]

I was looking forward to seeing this movie for weeks. Every time I would see a commercial for it, I would point at the TV and tell my husband I wanted to see it. I had watched the Discovery Channel program about the haunting, and I loved it. I came out of the movie theater VERY disappointed. The biggest flaw in this movie is that a logical reason is given for about 90% of the paranormal activity that occurred. The family's son has cancer, and he is on an experimental treatment. The experimental treatment causes visual and auditory hallucinations, and the son is the only one that sees the paranormal activity. So, when they son starts seeing things, he thinks it is a side effect of the medication and doesn't tell his mother. The writers attempt to explain why the son is the only person that sees the ghosts in the house later, but it just seems like a cover up to try and make the story believable. The other part of the story I found disappointing I actually discovered AFTER I had seen the movie. I started researching online and discovered that this movie is loosely, and I mean VERY loosely, based on a true story. There's a very interesting interview with the author of the book that the movie is based on at this website: http://www.horrorbound.com/readarticle.php?article_id=61. Anyone planning to go see this movie thinking that they are seeing a true story should really read this interview first.

Do not understand the bad reviews!

[SexiLoverGirl320 · 8/10 · 15 July 2009]

So before I watch any movie I come here to see what it is about and what other people thought of it. I came here to see about The Haunting in Conneticut, and most of the reviews I seen were bad. I wasn't looking forward to this movie because of it, but I had a chance to watch it at a friend's house, and I was completely amazed by what people thought about it.

Now I am not going to say it was the best haunting movie ever because it wasn't, but the movie as a whole was pretty good. The acting was good, it made you feel for the characters in the movie (espically the boy), it was definitely different as far as the plot, and even though the scary moments weren't terrifying, there were plenty of them to keep me interested.

This movie has a lot of what you would call assumed and interpreted stuff in it. I'd bet a lot of that got cut, so it is up to the user to interpret and assume what they were going for. Maybe some people aren't smart enough to do that and need the in your face drama/horror to be satisfied. I love movies that make you think, and also movies that someone else said...a reality movie. These other movies like nightmare on elm street and all those coming back from the dead killing people for 10 plus movies are just fantasy. Some would argue hauntings are also, but I do not agree. Maybe not to the extent of the movies, but I do believe in real hauntings. The movie people have to make it interesting and I am not one to bash them for it :) Overall, The Haunting in Conneticut is a good movie. I will not tell you what happens :) but I will tell you that do not always listen to what other people think. This movie was well acted, had some very innovative scenes, the plot itself while not completely different from other movies was made it's own and I do not think it deserves the bad reviews it got. I enjoyed it.

One last thing before I go. People who watch movies just to pick them apart have no business writing reviews for it. Critics have their job for a reason, so leave it to them to defile a movie. Sit there and enjoy the movie. That's it. You do not have to sit there and try to guess what happens next. You do not have to pick apart the acting and how bad you think they are. I understand when the movie really is crap, I've seen a lot of those too, but if you have seen so many movies and can't sit there and watch a movie and enjoy it for what it is then keep your opinions to yourself!

Total Crap

[screett · 1/10 · 4 April 2009]

This was the typical Hollywood horror movie. The methods are cheesy. The characters are dull and the actors are terrible. The title should have been "A Boring Haunting in Connecticut." Try as you may to stay focused on the movie. It was so boring that I found myself falling asleep. It was very disappointing especially since it strayed so far from the real story. It was not scary at all unless you're a teenage girl. Look up the truth behind the real story. Don't believe that this crap was true. I'm glad I didn't pay to see it. Now I remember why I hate Hollywood. The popcorn was good though, so the night wasn't all bad.

See the Discovery Channel special. It's better and more believable.

A very well-made film with solid writing and powerful acting

[Red_Identity · 9 April 2009]

If you are looking for a horror film to entertain you, look away. I was pleasantly surprised at The Haunting in Connecticut. I expected it to be just another horror story, and while it is a ghost story, I do not think it really succeeded at scaring us. It did have the usual scares and bumps, and they are well done, but we have already seen all of the possible things to scare us. That is why I think the film might get hate. But instead of just focusing on the ghosts, I found myself really invested with the characters. The screenplay is very well written, it plays out a little bit like a family drama. There is the son with cancer, and I felt that the story really was strong in that aspect. Virginia Madsen is very powerful as the mother, and Kyle Gallner is very effective as Matt Campbell, the son with cancer. I found the acting in this film to be probably it's strongest aspect. There were a lot of scenes I did not care for, mostly the scenes trying to lead scares and goosebumps. Some of them did work, however, thanks to the genius editing. The editing was very creative and added to the suspense, even when the actual scary moments were really not scary. What I mean is if the film was just trying to be a very scary, very suspenseful film, than it really did not do justice all that much. However, what I really liked about it was the very well developed characters, the realistic simplicity between the family, the tension between the son and the rest of his family who were really scared of him. Not to mention the really strong acting. That is why I think the film is worth seeing, and why I found myself really liking it. Usually, films like this have a lot of gore, a lot of clichés, and a lot of bad acting and writing, but have 'entertainment' for the young people. That is why this film is the opposite. It is not very clichéd, besides the obvious scares, and is a strong film, mostly when it depends on the normality. It did not scare me, but it sure provoked emotion and a powerful ending.

A Nutshell Review: The Haunting in Connecticut

[DICK STEEL · 6/10 · 9 July 2009]

"Based on a true story". I've now begun to take things with a pinch of salt, because those five words more often than not just tries to give a horror film some street cred, trying to deflect some knuckles of familiarity by claiming that it's something experienced versus something dreamt up. I have one of my own too (that happened to someone else), which is based on a creepy mirror bought from Thailand being hung in a room, and thereafter a child continuously claiming that she sees a man standing by the window licking an ice cream every night. while the mom didn't and couldn't see anything, she got freaked out nonetheless. This stopped when the mirror got covered up and locked in a cupboard.

But there you go, a premise of a horror film in itself, involving a home, a parent, a kid and a (benign) ghostly apparition. The House in Connecticut follows those like Amityville Horror, Psycho, Poltegeist and the likes, even shades of The Shining too if you please. It's centered upon a house which is dirt cheap in rent, but only because of the things that go bump in the night, given its dark and ugly past which Sara Campbell (Virginia Madsen) decides to take no heed of, in order to house their family close to the hospital where cancer-stricken son Matt (Kyle Gallner) has to undergo frequent therapy.

For starters, the film has a relatively strong introduction, where once you got by the rather creepy opening credits, you're introduced to the family proper. After all, it's a story about a family's ordeal (remember those 5 words?) with the supernatural, which initially got you suspecting whether it's all in Matt's hallucinating mind since he's under some strong medication, and of all places decide to make the basement into his room, complete with the set from Hostel with macabre tools complementing the decor.

But what I like about the film, is how it plays up on beliefs, such as children being able to see and somewhat interact with their "invisible friends", or for those at the brink of death given an ability to see extra things within their field of vision, since they're only a stone's throw away to the other side. In fact, this aspect plays up a lot more as the film goes on, since the potential exorcist, Reverend Popescu (Elias Koteas) happens to be Matt's fellow patient, and serves as consultant to piece together the teenager's findings of newspaper clippings, photographs, and well-preserved body parts.

Like all decent horror films, this one comes with the requisite backstory which provides the rationale why the place has additional inhabitants, suffice to say that it's a reminder never to tempt fate or play with fire, and to pick your choice of homes carefully, never one that used to be a mortuary for example. But while the family angle was off the blocks in a strong start, it whimpered toward the end by bringing in a wasteful tangent dealing with Peter Campbell's (Martin Donovan) inability to handle mounting debt pressures that his family now find themselves in.

Technically, the film scored an ace, utilizing a full repertoire of sudden movements and appearances, extreme close ups, smoke and mirrors, banging doors and flashing lights to great effect. While these may not be something that's not already clichéd, and in truth being innovative and original is getting extremely tough, these tried and tested moments still worked somehow under Peter Cornwell's direction in building anticipation, just waiting for something expected to happen became part of the fun.

The Haunting in Connecticut is yet another creepy house story that's fortunately still slightly above average, where the fun factor would come with watching this with a full house of squeamish teenagers who would scream at just anything that moves.

Movie vs True Story

[Proboarder2712 · 5/10 · 27 March 2009]

This movie was a great Hollywood story. However the movie killed the true story of what happened. A Haunting on Discovery ran an episode called "A Haunting in Connticut."(notice thediffernce in the titles) The movie "The Haunting in Conneticut" completely distorted the true story. It was worth the money to go see and definitely made me jump a couple times. I would recommend You Tubeing the story after you've seen the movie to better understand what really happened. I believe every one looking for a REAL scary story, would really enjoy this. Definitely worth the money to see in theaters as long as you know the true story. This is the link to get the more accurate version.I truly hope this doesn't get me banned but take out the spaces and this is the link to the true story. ENJOY:) "http:// maineghosts.lefora. com/2009/03 /04/a-haunting-in- conneticut-discovery -channel-release /page1/"

Better than I expected

[filipemanuelneto · 7/10 · 18 November 2017]

I'm getting convinced that horror cinema has been so exploited that it's getting more difficult to do something new or original. This movie reinforces that thought a little bit because it doesn't bring anything new but still works well enough. The screenplay is based on another case of haunting studied by Ed and Lorraine Warren, as well as other films like "Conjuring" or "Amityville Horror". But as in these films, this script has little reality and immense imagination for dramatic effects (well... truth about the actual case portrayed in this film is still controversial today). Despite this and the abundant use of clichés that we are tired of seeing in other films, it works, causing some scares and, above all, a pleasant feeling of discomfort and tension. The script is easy to describe: in order to be closer to the hospital where their child is treating cancer, a family moves to a new home in Connecticut. However, the house they decide to rent was used in the past as a funeral parlor, and there were also spiritist sessions and black magic.

The family drama is very well introduced at the beginning of the film and is being developed in conjunction with the beginning of the strange events in the house, so we never get the feeling that everything was just a pretext to introduce a friendly family in a diabolical house ready to kill them all. In the middle of the movie we feel like we are very close to the end ... and that would probably be true if this movie were like many others, where the whole story is just a pretext for a mind-boggling journey of predictable scares in a weird house. It's not like this here... when we think it's all over, things really start to get interesting. The end of the movie makes use of a plot twist but it's not really shocking or unpredictable. Concerning the actors, I have to say that I hardly know them... Kyle Gallner is a good actor and shows talent, although he is still very young. Elias Koteas was also quite competent.

Please, Hollywood, give us some real horror!

[thankyou-the_venum · 4/10 · 4 April 2009]

Ever since I saw the trailer, I knew I'd hate this one. The basic plot is that a teen cancer patient moves closer to the hospital where he's treated, accidentally into a haunted house, that's where the crazy stuff happens. This does seem appealing, and I was hoping for a film that would give genuine scares, and play with your head. Instead, we get an over-hyped piece of Hollywood garbage that relies on predictable jump scares to frighten its audience. Ten years ago, this would have been acceptable, but, in 2009, we have a plethora of horrors that give real scares and this one just doesn't cut it. You're not getting any Oscar winning performances here, but the acting wasn't horrible. Kyle Gallner probably gave the most memorable performance, as he shows that a slow build up to insanity doesn't have to be acted in a clichéd way. Other than that though there was nothing spectacular, and no one actually made me care about them - I truly didn't care what the eventual fate of these people was, and, in a film like this where you're obviously supposed to, that's not a good thing. The music for the film was pretty great, and in parts was actually exciting, I unwillingly got dragged to the edge of my seat because of it, but was then pulled right back when the tense atmosphere was ruined by yet another poorly executed jumpy moment. So, all in all, this is a so-so film that will, depressingly, be loved by many dull brained movie-goers who'll be forced into liking this because they jumped a lot. Hollyood, stop crapping this stuff out onto our screens. Make us care about our protagonist, please. And to you reading this. Don't watch it, and if you already have, find a shoulder to cry on, and wallow in self pity as you contemplate suicide for wasting 100 minutes on this cinematic envisioning of pure awful.

Review: "The Haunting in Connecticut"

[sdlewis-3 · 7/10 · 5 April 2009]

As a disclaimer, I'm going to say that I generally do not enjoy the "horror" genre. Well, the horror genre of today, I suppose. I could go on for hours about how movies aren't really very scary anymore, in the sense that I get scared. There are no more Alfred Hitchcock's in the film industry. But that post is for another day. The Haunting in Connecticut, apparently based on a true story (but what horror movie isn't anymore?), gave me every single reason to hate it. It threw every horror cliché (i.e., following strange and scary noises into a dark basement), it gave some cheap thrills (i.e., "people" randomly walking/standing somewhere in the house and only the audience sees them), and it has characters who happen to be randomly brilliant and understand the reason for all of these "occurrences." For the majority of the first half of the film, I was laughing. Granted, I jumped once or twice, but that's what cheap thrills do: you jump, then you forget about them. There's no lasting effect - no lasting fear. Still, despite all of these reasons to completely bash this film, I thoroughly enjoyed it. All the way home, I racked my brain (whilst deliberately driving past a graveyard to prove to my friend that the movie did not scare me) as to why I actually liked the movie, and I came to this conclusion: it all lies within the acting. This is not your standard teen slasher flick (See: When a Stranger Calls or the remake of Halloween) with terrible acting but ridiculously good-looking females. This time around, the actors actually act, which is a concept unknown to most in the horror genre. The fact that it's well-acted made me create more of a connection with the characters rather than view them as ridiculous, expendable and altogether deserving of the terrible fate they would get. Gallner leads the way as a teenager stricken with cancer and the real centerpiece of the supernatural happenings. Madsen does a stand-up job as the mother trying to come to terms with her son's ultimate demise. Koteas plays a preacher who happens to understand what's going on within the house. Yes, the characters are cliché, but the actors make the characters believable and worthy of your sympathy. So again, the acting makes the movie in this one. Now, as I said before, this is not your typical horror movie of today. It's more of a psychological thriller along the lines of The Number 23, in which Madsen also starred. So if you're looking for a chance to see some blood and guts and relentless sex, this isn't for you. You should probably go watch the remakes of Friday the 13th or The Last House on the Left. They'll probably appeal to you so much more.

Fails to deliver some real frights

[morkulv_athferion · 4/10 · 2 July 2009]

I admit that I like the idea behind this movie, and I like what the creators were going for. However, in the end this movie delivers quite poorly. Its not the worst movie I've seen, but it is very typical modern horror-thriller stuff, and because of that it doesn't stand out that much. The film starts off very well while introducing us to the main-characters. The acting is boring to say the least. Its not horrible in terms of acting or over the top, but I feel that the actors could have put much more soul into their roles, especially seeing how this movie is supposed to be based on real experiences.

In about 15 minutes into the film it starts to turn into another The Amityville Horror clone, which sucks since the set-up was quite good and the atmosphere was alright. From that moment on you can pretty much guess what is going to happen really. Unless you haven't seen any horror-movie for at least a decade or something you will probably be as bored out of your mind like I was during this film. It just gets so cliché; the music starts getting louder, and louder, the camera starts getting closer and... BOO!! Some random zombie-ghost guy appears out of nowhere. I think in this day in age these cheap tricks are getting a bit insulting towards horror-fans to be honest. I would have rather seen the movie focus more on the atmosphere because I thought that was one of the few things it had going for.

Another thing; why is it that these kind of movies also always have to end on a religious note these days? I hated it in I Am Legend, and I still hate it. Thats the most terrible way to end a movie, "because god wanted it". The person who wrote the script should actually try and come up with something believable and a satisfying ending.

If you like horror-movies, then you can skip this because you won't miss a thing. Everything in this movie has been done in another and done better. This is just one horror-cliché after another piled on each other, and it gets dull very quickly.

Truly scary and not in a predictable way

[brunoncosta · 9/10 · 14 July 2009]

I have to vote 9 out of 10 for this one! I really don't get impressed that easily with horror movies and I wasn't really excited to see this one ... it was just another night with another horror movie..

But then ... I was amazed with the director's geniality and the way he can scare us when we least expect.

It kind of reminds me of movies like The Exorcism of Emily Rose but in a good way ... it's dark, it's cool and a nice movie to watch if you want to be amazed with a movie. You really get the nerves on during the movie and it plays you well. As for the acting, it is quite obvious but all in all it's not that bad. You can really see the effort to make it look real. The soundtrack has its way through your brain not getting that much annoying and keeping you awake in case you're watching it at a late time. Although it is really difficult to fall asleep cause you often get a surprise or two ... and people pop out of nowhere... That's the good part! Enjoy it ;-)