Echi mortali

(A) The Sixth Sense and Stir of Echoes must have been the two movies of '99 that I enjoyed the most. Both had good scripts and stories; they were interesting, mysterious, dark, weird -- those are my kinds of movies! They are also a proof that the mysteriousness of ghosts is something we will never tire of or not think to be intriguing.

Stir of Echoes was somewhat similar to Sixth Sense but it was also in many was DIFFERENT. First of all, it (SOE) is dealing with hypnosis and has a more 'criminal' as well as supernatural theme.

This movie is spectacular and the reason it was not recognized as such, is because it was released just a few weeks after The Sixth Sense - a movie which had already satisfied the audience with its supernatural theme. And because The Sixth Sense was such a hit, Stir of Echoes was shoved aside and didn't get the recognition it deserved. Don't get me wrong! I loved Sixth Sense, but this movie is also very good and if you liked The Sixth Sense, I highly recommend you see it!

In 1999, the media was in a frenzy about a new film that used real things to terrify and excite its audience. Stir Of Echoes was not it. Partly due to the studio's financial difficulties, Stir Of Echoes came and went by itself, unsung and unappreciated. Which goes to show that recognition in the Hollywood system does not go to innovators or the best storytellers. It is all about marketability, and while Stir Of Echoes had this, the companies involved in making or distributing it did not seem to want to spend the cash involved in taking advantage. Either that or Artisan and Fox decided to use it as their tax write-off for that year.

I have not read the novel by Richard Matheson, so I cannot comment on how faithfully the film follows its source. But that is irrelevant. When compared to its more big-name competitor, at least Stir Of Echoes has the courtesy to acknowledge its source. The film updates the story to a more modern era, thus saving a few dollars, since period pieces are expensive to make. In fact, the dramatic angle of the film keeps it rather cheap, since effects shots are few and far between. Not to mention the effects that do appear are fairly simple in nature. Indeed, Stir Of Echoes only cost about thirteen million to make, according to estimates. Which makes it all the more peculiar that Fox was unwilling to invest a little more effort in publicising the film.

Kevin Bacon is in fine, fine form as the film's central hero, a regular guy called Tom Witzky. Kathryn Erbe is also in great form as his wife, Maggie. Illeana Douglas is decidedly odd as his sister-in-law, Lisa. But the real surprise here is child performer Zachary David Cope. After the pretender, that pile of sachaarine garbage called The Sixth Sense, child stars had such a bad reputation that Zachary deserves a medal for portraying such a genuinely likable, layered character. Indeed, director David Koepp took one hell of a risk by placing so much of the responsibility for the plot on his shoulders. That it pays off is a testament not only to the strength of Zachary David Cope's performance, but to the strength of the material he was given. Indeed, all the best scenes in Stir Of Echoes involve interaction between Zachary, Kathryn, and Kevin.

I do think this film has its faults. Chief among them is that the story needed another ten minutes to properly develop. Plot threads like the group of psychics, a member of which helps put Kathryn Erbe's character on the path of greater understanding, needed better resolution. One moment, Maggie is asking this policeman why her husband is obsessed with a scene of memories to the exclusion of his job. The next moment, not only are details like the job forgotten, so too is the group and the policeman. Smoothing out intricate plot points such as this would have helped the story no end.

In the end, however, Stir Of Echoes is proof that the artistic work one does not hear about may just be the one that has more merit. If nothing else, it is worth watching to see a small ensemble cast that excels. Even small performances like Liza Weil's demonstrate a sense of dramatic flair that has long fled most of the rest of Hollywood. It is for this reason that I gave Stir Of Echoes an eight out of ten. It is worth watching just to see how badly misdirected the hype machine often is.

Actually, I found this movie more satisfying than "Sixth sense". It doesn't have a stunning payoff like "sixth sense" (what film does?), but until the, in some ways hasty, conclusion, it's well made, scary and, since I have a knowledge of occult things through a good friend, rather believable. Kevin Bacon is credible in his part and so do Illeana Douglas. Kathryn Erbe however is stuck with nothing to do for large chunks of the movie. Effectively and atmosphericly shot, with some effective jolts that made me jump. To some, the conclusion may be a little simple and drawn-out, but I thought it was satisfying and filled to the brim with suspense. I find that the digging in the cellar/garden is a nice build-up for the finale, not that it goes on forever as a previous reviewer stated. It's only one thing that bothers me about the ending, and it is that too little is explained and a few threads of the story are totally abandoned. But that's only a minor complaint. For the most part, this is a creepy, interesting, well-made, scary and well played little thriller.

Stir of Echoes is a very good horror thriller in the traditional sense. It's the story of a guy who gets hypnotised and develops precognitive psychic abilities which he can't control.

Kevin Bacon is excellent and shows he can be a leading man, while the rest of the cast performs well. Sets, special effects and cinematography are all very good - nothing flashy but solid.

It has shocks and suspense, especially in the first half, and although it could be accused of being a little clichéd, it never strays too far into the 'seen it all before' category.

The second half of the film turns into a more traditional thriller but still holds up well, unlike similarly themed movies such as 'What Lies Beneath.' This is because it is pleasingly short, lasting around 90 minutes (the correct length for a film of this type). There are some plot strands that aren't explained, but this can be forgiven because of the film's running time.

Although not mind blowing, it has a decent payoff at the end and left me satisfied that I'd just watched a good movie. Not a great one, but a good one. Pick this one up cheap on DVD.

When I review a movie I don't go into plot; you can read that anywhere. I'm a screenwriter myself so I tend to write about idiosyncratic things that you'd not look for, but your mind sees. The film has a fresh story, is beautifully lit, artistically shot, and is worth the watch. In the trivia section, one of the contributors has it exactly correct: what they would do is slow the film speed down as much as possible and have the actress walk as normally as she can. Then they speed the film up to regular speed and all the little mannerisms come out in an eerie sort of ghostly ethereal way. It's not used much - Hitchcock would have loved this technique. Lots of fortuitous things happen, like when Bacon kicks a bucket through a window which was accidental but Bacon had the presence of mind to stay in character thus the shot made the movie. The direction was better than average the acting better than average. Ileana Douglas is always good Bacon is usually good or Erbe is underrated and too seldom cast so you had the makings already of a film that you knew had potential. Add the weird twist and Jennifer Morrison, AKA Doctor Cameron from the show "House", and you have a movie that is great to watch on a rainy Sunday afternoon. I recommend it.