Connect with us

Editorials

‘Stir of Echoes’ is an Affecting Ghost Story with an Incredible Kevin Bacon Performance [Formative Fears]

Published

on

Formative Fears is a column that explores how horror scared us from an early age, or how the genre contextualizes youthful phobias and trauma. From memories of things that went bump in the night, to adolescent anxieties made real through the use of monsters and mayhem, this series expresses what it felt like to be a frightened child – and what still scares us well into adulthood.

Does it hurt to be dead?

Stir of Echoes has been overshadowed by The Sixth Sense ever since their timely releases in 1999. While they both share an element of children communicating with the dead, the surface similarities end there. Director David Koepp based his more plot-oriented yet equally affecting screenplay on a Richard Matheson novel first published in 1958. Beyond the basic plot of a boy possessing second sight, Stir of Echoes is more concerned with the child’s father coming into his own extrasensory gifts. Still, the scheduling was unfortunate and people were quick to write Koepp’s movie off as unoriginal. Audiences who gave the film a chance, however, experienced one of the decade’s best ghost stories.

To any outsider, five-year-old Jake Witzky is an average kid. He’s recently moved to a blue-collared neighborhood in Chicago where nothing unseemly ever happens. Lately, Jake spends most of his time lost in another world; within earshot, he’s often caught talking to people who aren’t really there. With their arguing more than usual, Jake’s mother and father can only assume their son has created an imaginary friend to play with. It’s just the opposite, though, because Jake isn’t retreating into himself so he can cope with the stress at home or from the move – in fact, he’s reaching out to someone who’s no longer of the living.

Children in touch with the supernatural did not begin with either The Sixth Sense or Stir of Echoes, but Haley Joel Osment’s iconic role popularized a trope that spilled over into future films. Jake (Zachary David Cope), who is a few years younger than someone like Cole Sear, is eerily calm when talking to his spectral playmate; he shows little signs of fear because his new friend simply doesn’t pose a threat to him. In other films where kids are psychic or connected to another world beyond ours, they’re essentially written like adults in children’s bodies; they are precocious and unusually mature. On the contrary, Jake feels authentic thanks to Cope’s natural performance; Koepp did well to listen to the advice of Steven Spielberg who told him not to hold very young actors to the script and to let them surprise you.

After Jake’s father Tom (Kevin Bacon) is revealed to be another “receiver,” the movie focuses on his journey to understanding a new and uncanny ability. It’s a reversal of roles where now the child looks after the parent. Prior to his dormant gift being triggered, Tom makes an unfeigned confession that endears him to anyone who has ever felt disappointed by their own adulthood. He feebly states he’s happy with how his life turned out upon learning his wife Maggie (Kathryn Erbe) is pregnant again; in the same breath, he shows his pathos by telling her, “I didn’t expect to be so, I don’t know, ordinary.” Soon after, Tom’s quiet prayer for more meaning in his existence is answered when his sister-in-law Lisa (Illeana Douglas) hypnotizes him. What should have been an amusing party trick is really a wondrous experience for Tom.

Tom becomes restless and verily spooked in the days that follow his hypnosis. On top of seeing ghastly visions with no discernible explanation in sight, Tom is visited by what he believes to be a teenage girl’s ghost (Jennifer Morrison). In the meantime, Maggie is understandably worried; her husband is having what looks to be a mental breakdown, and she’s feeling like an outsider in her own family. Her frustration only grows when Tom asks Lisa to close the mystical door she opened. Rather than ending this whole nightmare and returning to his otherwise uneventful life, Tom acts on the ghost’s ominous request.

As Tom relentlessly yields to the spirit’s cryptic demand – he digs up his rental home’s backyard and basement – Koepp has us take a hard look at what could be happening in our own supposedly safe neighborhoods. Tom is reminded time and time again that his family moved to an area full of “decent” people. By uncovering the sad origin of his ghostly visitor, though, Tom exposes an ugliness that stains the very ground he walks on every day; he discovers a loose thread waiting to be pulled. Stir of Echoes is as true to form as any other horror movie that uses the supernatural to reveal awful truths about the real world. It’s here we see characters who believe themselves to be good, therefore so are their actions. This neighborhood’s presumed decency is the result of people doing very bad things to keep a false notion in place.

Just as impetus for change regularly comes from tragedy, a terrible secret here incidentally inspires personal growth for some and peace for others. A downhearted man finds a new direction and becomes a better husband and father in the process; a wakeful spirit wronged in life is freed from her own anguish and saves others from suffering the same fate down the line. In relation to the supernatural being afforded more benevolence than in other similar narratives, Kevin Bacon once said of Stir of Echoes, “I would like to assume that a ghost would not necessarily have to be all bad.” This along with the director’s belief that a ghost story can be “reassuring” – the idea of an afterlife as comforting as opposed to scary – is why this movie still resonates years later.

Had David Koepp’s movie been released at an earlier time, maybe its fate would have been different. Regardless, his approach to the source material is deft; he finds a healthy balance between cinematic spookery and compelling character work. Among a set of talented actors, Kevin Bacon shines as the everyman looking for something bigger and better. This is easily one of his finest and most charismatic performances to date. 

Stir of Echoes is not scary in the traditional sense of the word, but it is haunting. Whether it be a family traversing the uncertainties of life, a child catching a glimpse of the harsh reality he’s aging into, or a person losing everything in an instance because of human nature’s darkside, the film understands anxiety stemming from the unknowable. What puts a discouraged mind at ease, though, is realizing that even if we’re no longer in it, this messy world still remembers and hears us. It seems like the least someone can ever do, but to a troubled soul looking for a little help, listening can mean everything.

Paul Lê is a Texas-based, Tomato approved critic at Bloody Disgusting, Dread Central, and Tales from the Paulside.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading