La maledizione della Queen Mary

This is a movie begging to be recut. I actually think that if someone took the time to do that, they could get a decent movie out of it. For the most part, what ruins this movie is it's like someone filmed a bunch of scenes then slapped them together in a hurry with what they thought was an edgy jump from past to present and back again, when all they actually did was to completely lose the audience as there is no cohesion between the 2 timelines and the I was left asking "how did that happen?" or why'd he/she do that?" throughout the movie until the end, when there is the slightest of answers for the viewer, but I suspect most, unless actually in a theatre, had quit the movie half way through as I was tempted. This movie screams to be recut into a straight timeline with maybe a little flashing back or forward as that technique is overuse in general and in this film to the extreme. Acting was good, but dialogue between the couple in the present was very lacking. Cinematography was good except it looks like the camera was searching for something to shoot at times. If I had the time and equipment I think this could be recut into a decent movie.

When I sat down here in 2023 to watch the movie "Haunting of the Queen Mary", I had never actually heard about it. But I have to admit that I was immediately drawn in by the movie's cover/poster art, and the fact that it was a horror movie that I hadn't already seen.

Writers Gary Shore and Tom Vaughan, however, failed miserably to concoct a script and storyline that appealed much to me. The narrative in "Haunting of the Queen Mary" jumps back and forth between 1938 and the current day, however it utterly failed to make either of the two periods particularly interesting for the viewer. And the movie suffered terribly from an interior script and having characters that were as bland as tap water.

The jumping back and forth is done without much of any grace, and the end result is a rather confusing and messy heap of a narrative, and that ultimately made my interest in the movie wane with each passing minute. I have to say that I didn't figure out if there was a point to the narrative or not, and I ended up giving up on the ordeal before anything could be revealed; not that it mattered at that point.

The acting performances in "Haunting of the Queen Mary" were adequate, taking into consideration that the actors and actresses virtually had nothing worthwhile to work with and bring to the screen in terms of characters, dialogue and narrative contents.

Visually then "Haunting of the Queen Mary" was okay. I wasn't impressed with anything in particular, but the special effects were fair enough. And the few scenes of gore and mayhem made it semi-durable to sit through the boredom that is "Haunting of the Queen Mary". The ship itself and the interior of the vessel was actually quite nice, and that does count for something.

I gave up on the movie with just 30 minutes left to watch. But by then I just couldn't take any more of the boredom that directors Gary Shore and Rebecca Harris were bringing to the screen. And this is definitely not a movie that I will return to for a second time in order to finish watching it. I just simply don't care about the narrative or the characters in the movie.

My rating of "Haunting of the Queen Mary" lands on a three out of ten stars.

First off, the plot makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. I found the character motivations to be unbelievable. I still have no idea why any of the characters were on the ship in the first place and what exactly they were trying to accomplish. The film kept jumping between two storylines, one in 1938 and one in the present. There wasn't enough character development to really make the audience care about the fate of any of the main protagonists/antagonists in either narrative. By the end, it isn't clear how the two stories are supposed to be connected.

Obviously the films' writers were banking on the established ghost stories surrounding the Queen Mary (the lady in white, Jackie, the 1st class swimming pool, the HMS Curacoa, B-474 murder) but the problem is the depiction/references to these in the film do nothing to advance the plot.

I will give the film two stars for great cinematography, lighting, and visuals. There are a few nicely shot scenes showcasing interior spaces on the ship as well as a couple references to historical events involving the Queen Mary, but that doesn't make up for the really poor dialogue, incoherent narrative structure, and lack of character development.

I have no idea what I just watched. It was a confusing, disjointed mess. At the beginning it seemed to have the makings of a very interesting story. But all it did was get more and more confusing. I kinda get what they were trying to do with flashbacks, but there were too many, and they didnt explain anything. I was told to wait until the end of the movie and it will be all clear. Im pretty sure now the person who told me this had a stake in this movie, because when I got to the end it left me more confused than when i started. The costumes for that period where spot on, the acting was good. I suggest next time use a little more of your budget on script development.

The film is beautifully shot with great production design and atmosphere. The cinematography is excellent in places and you have to give them credit for sheer ambition. But that's where the positives end.

The screenplay is incredibly muddled and confusing and the story just fails to make any sense.

They try to weave in the past and present storylines together in a manner that they think is very clever but the two plot lines never mesh together and the end product is an incoherent mess.

Overall , the movie was like a fever dream where I was left admiring the beauty on the screen but scratching my head wondering what the hell is happening.