Ghosts Don't Exist

Meet the Principals

Brett Wilson: Chief ghost hunter. Not, in my view, a likable lead; has a serious "cold spot" inside him. The movie shows him to be disloyal, selfish, and ruthless; and I would guess also "egotistical" though this trait is more subtle. Well there's no rule that says you must like the lead character in every film. As long as there are interesting doings, f!!ck them!

Jennifer Hughes: A team member. Brunette built like a Olive Oyl who has been having an affair with our chief GH. Seems a little too needy and dependent on him to me. Does well in the field as long as there is no possibility of running into any real ghosts. Otherwise, she often looks like she's about to pee her pants. Needs to grow up.

David Sherman: Ghost debunker. Main adversary of our chief GH. Doesn't seem to be as passionate or proactive as his counterpart; hovers in the background with a laid back cynical style (no doubt aided by his handy bottle of schnapps). He seems tired, though; possibly of having to prove over again and again that there are no such things as ghosts. --Or possibly, tired of not finding any real evidence yet.

Ritchie Lyons: A team member. The class clown, I guess. Though he never said much that was amusing. One of those with issues (old man was an alcoholic). So jovial and smiling on the outside but an unhappy kid on the inside. That aside, he functions normally enough setting up equipment and helping to monitoring this or that.

This movie is a Ghost Horror-Mystery. Since the mystery part is whether or not there are any actual ghosts, the mystery is also whether or not this is really a horror movie. A ghost hunter with a TV series, still haunted by his wife's death and plagued by guilt, decides to take one last crack at it before he quits. This he does partly under duress (fear of being sued over his contractual agreement) and partly because the man who called him to investigate this last case, a Mr. Travis Gardner, seemed like he might be genuine; had information about his wife that was not commonly known.

Originally, the ghost hunting team included Wilson's wife, Wilson, and the 2 listed above. So there were 4. And now there are 3. This last case was out in the country some place. It's a long drive, but the 3 (Wilson, Jennifer, and Richie), eventually get there. The house itself is nothing spectacular but it has a spectacular history. Seems it was once a funeral home and the undertaker at the time managed to convince people that their dear departed were "lonely" on the other side and "needed them". Well how do you solve this problem? You kill yourself, of course, so you can join them. So mass suicides occurred. What is one to think, dear reader? That the funeral director was very charismatic and persuasive? --Or that the people who listened to him were seriously stupid?

Anyway, as soon as the team get's to Travis Gardner's place for this last venture, David Sherman shows up (the debunking guy). The team, of course, is not pleased to see him. He explains apologetically that he too was invited. They basically said "The hell with it!" and go into the house on the bidding of a sickly-looking Travis Gardner. Inside, Gardner sits there, his plump grey bearded face perspiry and an old woman's shawl about his shoulders. His demeanor is odd (get acting lessons,dude); he's staring off into space somewhere (possibly looking for acting tips); won't answer direct questions directly (maybe he forgot his lines). The GH team and the debunker were getting ready to leave when the old bastard did something extraordinary that got their complete attention.

I thought this movie was an interesting mystery despite the very bad acting of one cast member and the unlikeable lead character. I'm a big horror fan so the best mystery is a ghost or horror mystery. So, are there really ghosts in this place, or not. We are treated to sounds, sightings, phenomenon that evidence --what? The GH team and the Debunker would like to know. By this time they've got all their ghost hunting equipment set up and are tracking readings on portable radios of some kind. So lastly (Praise the lord! Boloxxxi is about to shut the hell up!), not a bad mystery and I liked the way everyone's personal issue (guilt, hate, fear, regret, etc) tied into and was used by the ghost "idea" of the film. I give this a strong 5*s. Love, Boloxxxi.

I just got back from the preview of this film and what struck me as interesting is that the during whole ride home, a good 45 minute trip, I did nothing but discuss the movie with my wife. And as I sit down to write this, she mentions how she is worried about having nightmares - a very good sign as far as Horror/Suspense films go.

I had high expectations for this movie. I understood the level of effort, skill, and collaboration that was involved and was pretty sure it would turn out to be a decent flick. Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised that Ghosts Don't Exist actually exceeded my expectations in many ways.

The level of production quality is evident throughout the film and all of the elements in GDE are very well-executed, thanks to a talented cast and crew. The cinematography and musical score really stood out as exceptional, and worked perfectly to emphasize the overall mood. But, in my opinion, what defines GDE is in the original storyline and how well it is both directed and portrayed by the actors.

There are some very tense and unnerving moments throughout the movie, but GDE doesn't rely on shock tactics to scare you. The film is definitely creepy, but in a tasteful way. At the same time, it's still a horror flick at heart, and has just enough violence and blood to do the trick. I would consider GDE to be a perfect balance of elements for this genre.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie quite a bit and thought it was a huge achievement by 19th and Wilson, as well as an incredible collaborative effort by everyone involved.

I just watched the movie, and it was just boring. The acting was bad. There wasn't anything scary about the movie. I really really like movies that this is trying to be but it fails. The acting was some of the worse. It makes no sense. I had to rewind scenes and watch them again and still it made no sense.

The editing was VERY choppy. The movie seemed to just drag on and on. It took what could have been a really great concept and dropped the ball very early on.

By the end I was only enjoying the movie to make fun of, in between yelling at the movie about how stupid the characters were acting.

Look: if you're going to make a low budget movie:

1. Snappy dialog/script. None here. 2. Lighting: lighting is your friend. Either there was too much, or too little. The one minute long scene in the basement with total blackness was suspense-less. 3. Show, don't tell. Scenes where characters were huddled over a monitor. "Ooh, look at that!" Care to share with the audience. 4. Pacing. PACING!!!!! EDIT YOUR FOOTAGE! 5. Ever heard of blocking scenes? 6. Clearly, one of the characters in the movie is the HOUSE - like in The Shining, or the Amityville horror. So, why not go to some effort and find a house that has a sinister aspect? Gothic Revival, dilapidated late 19th/early 20thc - instead of what looks like an average home with vinyl siding! 7. Motivation: something other than "they've all lost people in their past and have ISSUES". Ugh. 8. At least ONE likable character? Someone for the audience to identify with? They're called "protagonists". The lead was not likable. 9. Close-ups are your friend. 10. Dialog that serves no purpose? Cut it. Silence is scarier than stupid dialog. What did Beckett say? "Every word is like an unnecessary stain on silence and nothingness."

Anyway, save yourself a ruined evening, and avoid this film. Try the original "The Haunting" from 1963 if you want to see how this is REALLY done.

This film in my opinion and those that watched with me, unfortunately fails On most levels

Of Basic film making. Story, sound, editing, lighting all need to review the basics again before embarking on any more film projects. The film at best comes across as unbalanced, random and bumpy. We were lost as far as the story goes and the tension is dissolved due to a lack of long, unemotional cuts which dissolve any attempt to build up some sort of thrill or drama. I will at least give credit to the fact that the production seems to have been funded enough to make a film as big as this one based on the endless list if credits that run when it finally ends. I know this might come across as bitter but we did give it a chance and struggled through to the end in hopes of something remotely scary, but in the end it is 2 hours we will never get back.