Cellar Door

John and Sera are looking for a fresh start after Sera miscarries. The pair struggle to find a house in their price range, but their luck changes when they're told to visit Emmett, a wealthy man in a beautiful house. Emmett offers the couple the house, on condition that they never go into the basement.

I thought this started off pretty well, I enjoyed the first half an hour or so, I loved the suspense and intrigue, that whole question of what's in the basement, unfortunately it tails off badly.

The second half of the film is poor, it just didn't fit, it went from being an intriguing thriller into a bizarre and clunky slog, I could almost believe the story of the cellar, the Alissa storyline....never in a million years.

What is going on with Laurence Fishburne, he seems to be signing up for the most random films, films that let's be honest, aren't quite at his level.

Jordana Brewster and Scott Speedman were both pretty good, they made a cute couple, they worked well together.

A decent start, shocking second half.

5/10.

Cellar Door just failed to deliver in my opinion. Even though there's a non-predictable twist it's still not good enough to stand out from the rest in the thriller genre. Director Vaughn Stein must be an avid television watcher as his movie is nothing more than a mediocre tv-movie copy. If you want to make a good movie you firstly need a good soundtrack, certainly not that typical tv-movie piano soundtrack. Just that alone makes your movie look cheap. Add to that some average acting and you have the perfect recipe for a movie that nobody will remember. I have no clue why Lawrence Fishburne would even think in participating even if he has a very small role. He's probably just a poster filler, a name that attracks an audience. I wouldn't waste your time with this one unless you like forgettable Sunday afternoon tv-movies.

I like a slow burner but there needs to be a payoff and here there simply isn't.

There's very little that is tense or exciting. The story goes nowhere really and gives us nothing new. The script is lazy and the result is some pretty tepid central performances. There is so much exposition there is no tension at all.

Laurence Fishburne is a highlight. He's engaging for the time he's onscreen.

I think the intention is for viewers to make their own conclusion, to leave the payoff to their own imaginations. The trouble is the movie just wasn't engaging enough for me to invest so I just left it feeling disappointed.

Following a loss young couple Sera and John decide to move out of the city. They find a town they like but every house they like is well out of their price range. They are just about to give up when they are shown another house. It is large, beautiful and over a hundred years old; the owner invites them to spend the night. When they wake up he has departed leaving a letter stating that they can have the house for nothing... the only condition is that they must never open the cellar door. If they do they lose the house. They agree to the terms and make themselves at home but it isn't long before the subject of what is behind the cellar door is raised, and just how would anybody know if they looked. Tensions rise further when a woman John had an affair with starts harassment proceedings against him at work.

This film turned out to be very different from what I expected. Instead of a horror it is a psychological thriller. Tensions rise nicely as John tries to keep his secrets from Sera and she is firm that they must not break the rule concerning the cellar door... just what can be down there that could demand it remains locked? Jordana Brewster and Scott Speedman are solid as Sera and John and Laurence Fishburne stands out as Emmett, the man giving them the house. The setting; both the house and surroundings give the film a good atmosphere. I can understand why many viewers are disappointed that one obvious question isn't answered but I quite liked that; it leaves the viewers free to have their own ideas. Overall I'd not call this a must see but if the like psychological thrillers it is worth a watch.

I cannot believe that I watched that movie twice. First at the beginning of November and today again. I watched it and thought: "Kind of familiar." Well, I continued to watch it.

After the movie wrapped up, I was like: "Dang, I watched it already."

It's how forgettable this movie is. Oh my God, I was so dumb wasting the same amount of time twice. It's a very bad movie. Forgettable, basically background noise. I wouldn't wonder if my troglodyte-brain sees that movie in the "what to watch"-list and I choose that movie again at the beginning of January.

It's really bad. And I cannot believe how dumb I am for watching it twice... 🙄