Hide and Seek

Maybe Robert De Niro's doctor in Godsend (2004) went to the same medical school of horrors as his Dr. David Callaway in Hide and Seek, this year's De Niro toss away film, from which he deposits his considerable paycheck along with cash from Meet the Fockers. Why he doesn't concentrate his fortune and connections (as Clint Eastwood does) to craft an artful small film that would allow his acting gifts is the only mystery for me from his prolific but arguably spotty career.

Young Emily Callaway (Dakota Fanning) has lost her mother (Amy Irving) to suicide. Psychologist dad moves her to an older, rambling house in the woods in upstate New York to start a new life. Not new are the abundant clichés of the horror film: the suspicious neighbors, whom director John Polson makes as creepy as possible; the questionable sheriff; the doors leading to scares; the mutilated dolls; Emily's imaginary friend, Charlie, who appears to be causing numberless offenses in the house; and knives placed as objects of intrinsic interest; and a vulnerable girl friend, Elizabeth (Elisabeth Shue). I stopped counting, for the film is one extended cliché after another.

The interest for serious filmgoers might be the depiction of the psychological stat after a loss to suicide. Whatever the term might be such as "post-traumatic stress disorder syndrome," the film does a credible job showing how difficult it is for Emily to lead a normal life after the loss of her mother (and for her father as well). While there are echoes of Stephen King (The Shining's "Here's Johnny" comes to mind) and Hitchcock (think shower scene), there is no comparison in quality with those classics. The audience at the preview enjoyed some of the stock shock moments behind the many closed doors. Hide and Seek will titillate horror fans but disappoint discerning film buffs, who look for some believable edge and innovation.

Milton in Paradise Lost expressed the descent from happiness to despair: "Farewell happy fields, Where joy forever dwells: hail, horrors!" Hide and Seek is not a classic horror film; it is a classic underachiever.

Widower David and his daughter Emily leave the big city for the country after the tragic death of the Misses. Due to the fate of her mother Emily is going through a tough patch, one might say she has some issues when weird things like mutilated dolls and dead animals appear. But the clincher is her new found "imaginary" friend Charlie. As Charlie asserts himself more and more, darker things start to happen and we all know what that means.

Not a horrible film but the script is horribly clichéd. I enjoyed myself but not quite the way the filmmakers had in mind. My friend and I traded quips back in forth as if we were at our own MST3K party or something. I noticed many others in the audience doing the same so we weren't alone. DeNiro was solid if a bit restrained. Fanning is a pretty good actress for a ten year old. She held her ground with DeNiro and even bested him several times. Hell she barely blinked for the first 45 minutes of the film. The direction wasn't spectacular, not overly flashy but didn't need to be. The script…ahh the script is where the film skids into a tailspin. A veritable Frankenstein's Monster of plots, devices and red herrings that served other films well but became a tepid pool here.

Disappointing but not a total waste of time if you can forgive its shortcomings.

After the suicide of his wife (Amy Irving), David Callaway (Robert De Niro) takes his mentally disturbed 9-year-old daughter, Emily (Dakota Fanning) to a new home in the country in upstate New York. Instead of getting better, Emily begins to withdraw further, and she announces to her father that she has a new imaginary friend named "Charlie." At first, her father sees Charlie as a way for Emily to express her feelings. Then a series of vicious acts such as menacing writings appearing on the bathroom walls, and other mysterious occurrences start happening around the house. David blames Emily for doing them, but Emily says that Charlie did it. But is Charlie imaginary? You'd have to ask Emily, who is the only one who can see Charlie. Charlie may actually be both real and very dangerous. The movie is well crafted and suspenseful with a great cast. For a thriller, I did jump a few times. The ending was a little disappointing, but not unpredictable. (20th Century Fox, Run time 1:40, Rated R)(8/10)

Movie Buffs (snobs) will not be surprised by the stereotypical Hollywood ending, but the movie is not too bad throughout. Dakota Fanning puts on the typical scary little girl show to a above average level, and the cinematic action will make you squirm in your seat a few times. Therefore this movie isn't one that I would say you definitely need to see, but if you have some time to waste its a pretty good time. Also it gets bonus points for being a good date movie. The absolute worst thing about this movie is its lack of humor, though the dark overtones are necessary for a true horror movie there needs to be an element of humor(saving The Exorcist), even the Ring had its moments at the beginning with the two girls in the bedroom, this movie has no humor which makes us feel very little for the characters. This is the major downfall, but its still worth a viewing.

I'm not the greatest figurer out of plot twists, and I didn't figure this one out. If you did, then I can see that there would have been an air of disappointment over that aspect of the film. I didn't so, plot-wise, I had no problem with enjoying the movie.

I thought the ending was fine.

And, as usual, I thought Dakota Fanning was quite remarkable, holding the screen with an assurance well beyond her years (although I find her manner in the "Making of.." documentaries worryingly un-childlike).

I did have some other problems, though.

De Niro's character must have been the worst psychologist in the world, given his complete inability to apply any of his knowledge to dealing with his daughter's problem in any constructive way (and, yes, I know "That's because blah blah blah", but it's still a distraction when you're sitting there watching him to fail utterly to exercise a shred of competence.

I failed to understand some of the child's motivation for her actions and attitudes vis-a-vis Charlie and Dad, especially given the nature of the twist.

Elisabeth Shue and Famke Janssen - nice to see them, even if only briefly.

And De Niro - not your finest hour, Bob. Carry on like this, and Norton and Depp will be fighting over the "Greatest Living Screen Actor" crown, while you watch from the wings.

My score of 7 is a point or two higher than it would otherwise have been, solely on the strength of Dakota Fanning's performance.