Housewife

After witnessing the horrific murders of her sister and father, by her mother, young Holly (Clementine Piodatz) flees her home. Years later, adult Holly still suffers from the repercussions of that event. Now, married to a famous author, she finds herself drawn into an esoteric cult, when an ex-lover named Valerie reenters her life.

The cult is called ULM (Umbrella of Love and Mind) and is led by the enigmatic Bruce O'Hara (David Sakurai), who is part motivational speaker, part mystic, and part televangelist. O'Hara takes Holly on a "healing journey" that apparently alters her consciousness. It also traps her in a nightmare labyrinth filled with omens, visions, and death.

HOUSEWIFE gets points for being different, though it's not as palpably malevolent as Director Can Evrenol's first film, BASKIN. While the entire movie is bizarre, most of the horror is saved for the impressive, Lovecraftian finale...

Relentlessly average. Not scary enough to be a decent horror movie, and not much discernible humor to make the non-scary stuff funny.

There's a pretty hot threesome scene, but that's about it for fun.

Can Evrenol had already surprised me with his amazing BASKIN movie on 2016, so I was looking forward to seeing his newest title at the Lisbon International Horror Fest (MOTELX).

Housewife tells the story of a woman who was traumatized as a child after watching her mother kill her father and sister. This trauma obviously takes its toll on the character, growing up to become a disturbed, frail woman who, in spite of having a husband and friends, shows little signs of any true connection with people and lives inside her world, memories and (sick) fantasies.

After getting acquainted with a cult and becoming close to its leader, she has the opportunity to (sort of) go back to the horrific night and finally confront her demons.

Aesthetically I consider the movie a work of art. Its attention to detail, soundtrack and atmosphere build up the tension for an entire hour, certainly too much for some viewers, but I enjoyed it. After BASKIN, I knew what I was in for, so I waited for the shock and gore while appreciating (and trying to understand) the dream-like sequences of the plot.

As expected, it all comes together in the ending... but not quite. The movie leaves much to be figured out, including the presence of some characters (old lady), who I left without a clue of who they were and what exactly they were doing there. This, along with the movie's slow pace, can be frustrating (and certainly was for many viewers) and I'm afraid it's almost as if the director had to set the bar a little lower, if he wishes us mere mortals to get his point on future movies.

One final word about the acting, I considered it fine for the most part, but some complained that the characters showed a lack of connection that was only made worse by their attempt to speak in English. I didn't think this was necessarily bad. The lack of connection was there, but I actually think it contributed to the movie's atmosphere of being "barely awake". Also, the main actress was superb, in my opinion.

As in BASKIN, Housewife leaves us with that "WTF did I just watch" feeling. I heard the people behind me in the theater say that the director "needed to find Jesus", after the final sequence, which is truly disturbing.

If you are a David Lynch fan and enjoy a good, juicy, "tentacly" piece of gore, definitely watch this movie and try to figure it out. If you're not into movies that are "too intellectual" or require a great deal of deciphering, my advise is to stay away from it.

The movie starts well with what looks like an engaging and strong story, then gradually fades to the point of just wanting it to end as soon as possible.

Technically the film was fine, as was the acting as far as I am concerned - the story and the way it was told are the problem. All of a sudden it goes from being a logical progression into some kind of disjointed mess of editing that throws the viewer out of it, then desperately tries to win them back.

One to miss and/or forget.

Where to start? Well the acting is a good start - the acing in this film is SO bad its almost unwatchable. It actually became laughable at a point which was the only way I made it to the end. I ended up pretending it was a comedy I was laughing so much. The story is also completely forgettable and the direction portentous. The film has the same problems as the directors previous film, all style and no substance. I wouldn't be surprised if the film didn't have a screenplay its so awful in the the story telling department. The problem for me is the films the director is trying to mimic had style yes, but they also had a heart which is utterly missing from this film. I didn't care about any of the characters, what characters were there to care about? He is obviously a Fulci wannabe but he ends up more like Eli Roth - who no one wants to be. If it was made as a comedy, i would give it 4/5, but in reality its not so it's 1/5. His previous film did show promise but this is a real stinker. Someone get the air freshener.