The House on Pine Street

If it's gonna be dumb at least make it fun. That's surely the unwritten rule of horror. But this bland and generic haunted house indie makes the fatal error of trying to keep a straight face throughout, however predictable the events and however skin-crawling the dialogue. It's restrained in its deployment of violence – but also, sadly, in terms of enjoyment.

Jennifer (Emily Goss) and Luke (Taylor Bottles) move into a big crumbling house in a sleepy Kansas suburb. She's seven months pregnant and reluctant. He urges her to give the place a go. They're soon visited by Jennifer's overbearing mother, Meredith (Cathy Barnett), whose presence seems to trigger memories in Jennifer of a previous breakdown. So when the house starts taunting 'n' haunting, the assumption is that Jennifer is simply on the turn again. Most of the horror (and accompanying tedium) emerges from the fear of not being believed, and the threat to mother and child.

It's a familiar setup: giving a chance to an instantly creepy house; one partner who's nervous and one who's patient; the forbidden room; the secret past; the strange staring neighbours. I was surprised when no one finds a box of old video tapes and newspaper cuttings. The 'Better Movie Checklist' looms large: The Omen (creepy child); Poltergeist (tossed furniture and a visiting psychic); The Shining (ambiguous twins); The Haunting (a chilling case of mistaken identity).

But more than anything there's the presence of Rosemary's Baby: motherhood anxiety seeps into the very fabric of the film; particularly its best scenes, between Jennifer and her scheming, possessive mother. There's a moment when Jennifer goes to her mum's house for solace, and they seem to slip back into roles that have existed since Jennifer's childhood. There's enough eerie tension here to suggest the story may be turning towards an intriguing third act. But that junction is promptly passed by.

The overarching problem is, the cinematic influences are great but where's the USP? The drama is rote, the plot is plodding, and the scares are imaginative only on a micro level: mouse traps triggered by an unknown force, or boxes inexplicably moving of their own accord. Like many a horror movie without an identity, it starts well enough, with some intriguing, subtle spookings. But alas, it becomes quickly clear, through formulaic plot beats and zombified dialogue ("There's no such thing as ghosts"), that this is a movie lacking a unique personality.

Speaking of which, Goss and Bottles put in a pair of performances which are adequate at best. Having far more fun are Barnett as the mother and Jim Korinke as the possibly-psychic Walter. The latter gets the best piece of bad dialogue: a WTF climactic speech about the forces of energy (or something) which is presumably meant to tie everything up, but which is so rambling and bizarre that you have to wonder if the actor himself knew what he was on about.

The photography has a pallid appearance, all autumn hues and naturalistic lighting, which only serves to highlight the unconvincing characters and jars with the laughable events. When Jennifer is being tossed around by the poltergeist, a different score would have made it comedy gold. But instead we get by-the-numbers ambient doom music connoting something much more horrifying than what we're actually seeing.

Remarkably, at the end I was left unsure as to whether a key character was meant to have died. The reactions of the other characters just seemed incongruent. I'm not sure if this was unforgivably poor writing and editing or whether I'd simply stopped caring by then. Either way it does nothing to endorse this very uninteresting and uninspired film.

After reading so many negative comments on the IMDb message board, I was very skeptical about watching this film at the local cinema. But I decided to go against all of the negativity and give this film a chance and I'm very glad I did so.

I was the only one in the entire theater (which is always a plus for me as I hate the annoying moviegoers using their cell phone or having a loud conversation with one another).

So this movie is not your run of the mill 'Horror' that Hollywood is churning out these days with the usual creature make ups and jump scares. For me, none of that is scary. It never makes me feel uneasy. It's rather just a cheap ploy to make the viewer jump the same way a child might do by hiding behind a corner and scream boo!.

This movie is a rather fresh take on the entire paranormal phenomenon and it lets the viewer decide what they think is taking place and whether or not it is real. The story made me connect with the protagonist, the husband and even the mother in law at the same time making me change my mind about each one of them throughout.

Of course it uses the typical "husband won't believe what the wife tells him" but it is used in a very clever way.

I do not want to give away too much but I thought It would be good to give my two cents on the review section and let people know that there was never a dull moment in the film for me. The shots were tasteful, the acting was very good and the 'horror' bits were unsettling without the use of cheap tactics.

At the end of the film, I was very pleased and I would recommend it to any true fans of the supernatural/psychological horror genre. Not recommended for fans of Jump Scare Horror. It's a solid 8/10.

It is not a masterpiece, but it's a great little film.

Eerie, atmospheric and at times genuinely unsettling, its a respectable addition to the haunted house genre. The movie is probably a little too long at just under two hours, but the viewers patience during the slow build up is rewarded with some chilling scenes, added to greatly by the movies creepy sound effects which are utilized extremely craftily. The lead actress, Emily Goss, does a fine job of portraying a tortured individual, akin to the mother in The Babadook, a very different type of haunted house flick. The film makers seem to have made the most of an obviously limited budget and for the most part avoid the usual clichés/tropes movies of a similar nature often surrender to.

So I can view this film differently than last night when watching it. The film is scary and I had to put the light on. Now I'm puzzled. The film has so many unanswered questions. Besides this, the characters were unrealistic and painful to watch. The pregnant main character was experiencing strange things going on. By the way everyone at the party was simply staring at her, if felt as though something darker was going on. Her constant outbursts was grating, especially when she was yelling at a toddler. Her aggression towards her guest was over the top. The way she yelled at the girls next door made her less sympathetic. And her uncaring husband was extremely dull and annoying. He also experienced weird things going on in the house but chose to say nothing. It seems to be a trend in American films lately to have so many plot holes and with unlikeable main characters.

The House on Pine street should be shown to any horror movie director as an example on how to make a good movie.

It's also an example of how a good story and good direction can take a movie with a low budget and make it excellent. You don't need a lot of special effects if the story is done right.

The scares are very subtle and don't even tip you off with scary music. I love movies like that, you actually have to pay attention. The acting was well done and the story left a lot for the viewer to interpret.

If you are a person that doesn't enjoy a movie where you may have to draw your own conclusions, this movie may not be for you. If you enjoy a movie that keeps you on your toes and makes you think about it, give this one a chance.