Orphan: First Kill

One of the most underrated horror films of the 2000s is Orphan (2009). Many horror fans will probably agree that the 2000s wasn't exactly the best decade for the genre, but there were some brilliant exceptions here and there (The Descent (2005) and REC (2007) always stand out, for example). It surprises me that Orphan has been mostly forgotten by the masses, because it really is an exceptional piece of work. It's tense, the performances are all solid, and the twist is so fantastic that it boggles the mind that it isn't talked about more often. Nevertheless, Orphan: First Kill, a prequel film that nobody asked for, is here to reintroduce Esther (Fuhrman) into the public consciousness. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't sceptical when I read that this film would be a prequel. Considering how Esther's true nature was revealed in the original's masterful third-act twist (I won't spoil it here), a great deal of tension has already been eliminated from any future storylines involving this antagonist. To my surprise, however, David Coggeshall manages to throw a few curveballs into the film's narrative to keep us on our toes, but regardless of a pretty ludicrous plot twist and some decent splatter, Orphan: First Kill doesn't measure up to the strengths of the original.

On the plus side, Isabelle Fuhrman slips back into the role of Esther effortlessly, and the filmmakers utilise some neat film trickery to withhold the illusion that she is supposed to be a thirteen-year-old girl. Fuhrman is twenty-five now, so it was always going to be a challenge to trick the audience into believing her portrayal of Esther as we once did back when she was the same age as the character. Arguably, this was one of the most important aspects of the film to get right, and I'm glad to say the filmmakers succeeded. The performances are decent enough and Julia Stiles works well alongside Fuhrman to create a unique dynamic that I wasn't anticipating. Where the film falters is a lack of genuine suspense, and the key twist here is, whilst intriguing, quite far-fetched. It doesn't pack the same punch as the original and the script changes gears so fast and so often that it never gives its ideas time to breathe. It's almost as if the filmmakers were uncomfortably conscious of the fact that the film's best trick has already been played in the original. In the end, Orphan: First Kill is a perfectly fine yet unnecessary horror film. A prequel to the original film was never going to hit in the same way, but for what it is, it's alright. Isabelle Fuhrman is once again a strong screen presence and there are some fun kills, but ultimately the film left me wondering if it really needed to exist in the first place.

I don't know what to think of this movie. I want to love it as I did the first one but the girl doesn't look like a kid anymore. And the parents don't even see it's not her? Strange. Do the film makers have kids? You can easily tell it's not your kid.

What about the accent? 4 years was enough to get a strong accent?

It's all too unbelievable, I rated higher because of the first one and I want them too make more of these kind of movies.

The movie would be really great if she actually looked like a child. At best she can pass for 16. Nowhere near 9.

As we know the first part is amazing and chilling, I think I personally expected a lot from this part. Esther's background, where she came from were portrayed good but the main story is not that well constructed, it is too easy to guess and is not that suspenseful. For the first part I was at the edge of my seat but this, not at all satisfied.

We can watch it for fun but do not expect much when compared to the first part. Some scenes felt like they were cut off too fast, more story about ester's background could have been interesting. The cast was fine, everybody did their role as supposed to.

After the first movie " The Orphan " I was quite eager to know about the beginning of Esther, how she came up to be who she is- you know the stuffs you have in a origin film. But this doesn't seem to be like that at all.

First of all, the movie doesnt even begin from the beginning in Esther's perspective. She was shown to be in a mental hospital and doctors mention her to be the most dangerous patient ever (we dont know why and how she was called that). Why should we not know why she was a dangerous patient? It was the "first kill" after all.

I often had the feeling of her not being a mental patient but just a killer who likes to kill, at least at the first. I am also ignoring all the small inconsistencies that were spread throughout the film.

One of the film's strongest aspects is the outstanding performance by Isabelle Fuhrman as Esther. Fuhrman effortlessly embodies the complex and chilling nature of the character, showcasing her acting range and making Esther both captivating and unsettling to watch. Her portrayal adds depth and intensity to the film, making it worth seeing for her performance alone.

The prequel attempts to delve deeper into Esther's past, providing a backstory that sheds light on her twisted psyche. This exploration adds layers to the character, giving viewers a better understanding of her motivations. The psychological elements add intrigue and elevate the film beyond a simple slasher flick.

Orphan First Kill manages to create moments of genuine suspense and tension. Some scenes are expertly crafted, building up the anticipation and delivering chilling payoffs. These moments keep viewers on the edge of their seats, adding an undeniable thrill to the viewing experience.

On the other hand, the film suffers from pacing issues that hinder its overall impact. The narrative feels uneven, with certain scenes dragging on and others feeling rushed. This inconsistency disrupts the flow of the story, preventing full immersion in the plot and dampening the impact of key moments.

Despite Isabelle Fuhrman's compelling performance, the script fails to fully develop Esther's character. While the prequel attempts to provide depth, it falls short of delivering a truly nuanced exploration of her motivations. This missed opportunity leaves a sense of unfulfilled potential and prevents the film from reaching its full emotional and psychological impact.

The cinematography and production design are serviceable but fail to stand out. While they effectively contribute to the eerie atmosphere, they lack the visual flair and creativity that could have elevated the film to new heights.