Aaron Spelling, wanting to cash in on the slasher craze of the 80s, developed this passable little thriller concerning a family moving into a new home following the death of their eldest daughter. The surviving younger sister begins experiencing visitations from the dead one, and various tragedies occur around the house. Is it a creepy entity at work, or someone else?
Most of the people that know this film (myself included) are going on their memories of it as children. Unfortunately, this muddles a modern day reception of it, as for the first time in 20 years, I viewed it last night. After a frustratingly redundant opening (girl screams in the night, annoyed dad comes running in), it finally drags into the plot. You really realize how underdeveloped the story is and how much more effective it could've been if put into better hands.
OK, SPOILER TIME...
More pressing issues arise, such as: is it really the dead sister, or a hallucination causing the younger sister to act out? If not, why is the dead sister --- who is seen in flashback teasing the living one --- so hell-bent on being "together" with her? What is her motivation for killing off the whole family? What's with the foreboding house address including "666" when it's never fully utilized? Is the final shot really the dead kid, or another delusion of the schizo daughter's imagination? The unanswered questions make for a great deal of aggrevation.
The cast works well, but what would you expect from Weaver and Harper? Though Weaver's mixture of the boozin'/grieving/giggling father is a bit uneven, and Harper pretty much takes a backseat to the kids. Especially Ignico, who basically has to carry the whole thing. Her scenes with the pyschologist have a pleasant humor, as she smart-mouths her way through them.
In the end, this is nothing more than a batch of bizarre, bloodless scenes trying to carry a ghostly throwback-type spook show. Pieces of it work at times, but on the whole, it's lacking. And the shock ending (complete with freeze frame on "Executive Producer Aaron Spelling") was a little too easy, though the back lighting made for a good final jolt.
Most of the people that know this film (myself included) are going on their memories of it as children. Unfortunately, this muddles a modern day reception of it, as for the first time in 20 years, I viewed it last night. After a frustratingly redundant opening (girl screams in the night, annoyed dad comes running in), it finally drags into the plot. You really realize how underdeveloped the story is and how much more effective it could've been if put into better hands.
OK, SPOILER TIME...
More pressing issues arise, such as: is it really the dead sister, or a hallucination causing the younger sister to act out? If not, why is the dead sister --- who is seen in flashback teasing the living one --- so hell-bent on being "together" with her? What is her motivation for killing off the whole family? What's with the foreboding house address including "666" when it's never fully utilized? Is the final shot really the dead kid, or another delusion of the schizo daughter's imagination? The unanswered questions make for a great deal of aggrevation.
The cast works well, but what would you expect from Weaver and Harper? Though Weaver's mixture of the boozin'/grieving/giggling father is a bit uneven, and Harper pretty much takes a backseat to the kids. Especially Ignico, who basically has to carry the whole thing. Her scenes with the pyschologist have a pleasant humor, as she smart-mouths her way through them.
In the end, this is nothing more than a batch of bizarre, bloodless scenes trying to carry a ghostly throwback-type spook show. Pieces of it work at times, but on the whole, it's lacking. And the shock ending (complete with freeze frame on "Executive Producer Aaron Spelling") was a little too easy, though the back lighting made for a good final jolt.