When a Stranger Calls
|
List Price: Our Price: $2.49 You Save: $12.45 (83%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $0.63 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of When a Stranger Calls
Movie Review: scary movie
Summary: 5 Stars
haven't seen it yet-daughter babysits and loves suspense-gift for her and she loves it!Movie Review: A High-Quality Horror Thriller That Hits The Right Notes
Summary: 4 Stars
While not on the same level as 1993's "When A Stranger Calls Back", this remake of the original 1979 "When A Stranger Calls" is actually a superior remake to what was already a good movie. Both previous movies had the entire thrust of this new film in their first twenty minutes or so: the young babysitter menaced by sinister phonecalls. After its first portion, the '79 original developed into more of a police detective story than a horror movie, and did a pretty nice job of it; it dragged a couple of times and had some trouble regaining its suspense element, but overall it was a good show. It's '93 sequel, after those awesome initial 20 minutes, continued along on more twisted paths and ended up as one of the scariest movies of all time. This remake expands the opening portion from the earlier entries to fill most of its running time, and does it well enough not to hit the snag you get when you see a too-drawn-out movie and think 'that could have been really great if it had been just a segment in an anthology.'
Horror and suspense movies are often set in an envirornment of 'old' - the old cabin in the woods, an old abandoned house now shunned by neighbors, the grand old castle atop one of England's hills. This kind of setting can take on a good spooky feel very quickly under the right conditions. In the new When A Stranger Calls the movie heads in the opposite direction: a sleek, ultra-modern, hi-tech home that must cost as much as a small village. Everything's wired up to a state-of-the-art security system, there's a deluxe 'guest house' on the property (not to mention half a forest), the lights in the rooms turn themselves on and off as sensors detect when someone enters or leaves the room. If you're like me and have always found something a little disquieting in hi-tech homes that seem to be designed to be smarter than those who live in them, you might agree that they're off to a good start with this type of setting. Now with a house like this, there are certain things that probably wouldn't be as believable or effective if they tried to do them with a stalker, and other, new, possibilities opened up. "When A Stranger Calls" succeeds in avoiding the former and hitting the latter.
With the babysitter, Jill, alone in the house for a long time and things turning more sinister by gradual steps, it's essential to have a great atmosphere to carry the film, and it's essential that the protagonist be interesting and likable. Great production, a gorgeous setting of the aforementioned forest that surrounds the house, and a nice old-fashioned, spooky windstorm provide the atmosphere, and talented lead player Camille Belle does a fine job making her character a good anchor for the movie.
In the 'iffy' department is the initial police response to events in the movie, which doesn't seem realistic. Another angle of the movie has gotten a lot more flak though, and I'd like to put my two cents in on why I don't think the angle was a bad or unrealistic one. I don't think this will give anything away, but since some of it does happen in the latter parts of the movie, I'll put my standard disclaimer on now.
* WARNING: POSSIBLE SEMI-SPOILERS AHEAD *
In a nutshell, there seems to be a school of thought that the movie sinks itself because there are a couple of clear instances where Jill could have gooten out of the house and off the property but doesn't. I think a point is missed in that arguement: it's obvious that she Can leave on at least two separate occasions, yes. But on both occasions, fleeing the house would have meant leaving the young children she was babysitting alone in the house with a psychopath. This kind of thing has happened in a couple of other horror movies, and I think it has a great effect when a character is physically able to get out of harm's way but opts to stay for the sake of another character. Of course, when this kind of thing happens, it's usually perceived as a shortcoming by the professional critics. The 'she should have just gotten out of the house' arguement is one of a number of reasons frequently brought out to show how supposedly 'stupid'[sic] horror movies are. I'll resist the urge to address specific points concerning other unjustly maligned movies, but the answer to a supposed shortcoming is often (not always; some horror movies admittedly do have good-sized holes in sense or believability, the same as some movies of any other 'genre' or grouping) readily evident if you just think about how the situation in a given movie would appear to a given character. "When A Stranger Calls" is highly engaging, a lot smarter than critics will ever give it credit for, and genuinely scary (although nowhere near as terrifying as the 1993 movie). Good performances all around, including the child actors. Recommended.
Movie Review: AWESOME!!! HIGH TENSION, TERROR, THRILLS & CHILLS
Summary: 4 Stars
My father in law brought this DVD back from the USA with him... I had seen the original and was looking forward to seeing what the new director was able to do with "material" that was now old and overdone. The "prank caller" has been parodied over and over again with the likes of scream and scary movie... but when "When a Stranger Calls" originally came out it was "terrifying"... so what could Simon West possibly have done to make this "Original"... a lot!!!
The opening is awesome and grabs you immediately. Quick, flashy images, loud sound, phones ringing, screams... and fast forward to a police officer at the scene of a crime. He tells the "wise old investigator" that 2 kids were killed but no weapon was used. The investigator then walks into the kids bedroom and is levelled by what he sees. You then see about 6 body bags come out of the house, but only 2 kids were killed. You then realise they are in pieces!
What I loved about this film was the amount of tension it was able to build up and carry through the film without having to use "disturbing images" or "buckets of blood and guts"... in fact by today's standards it's almost impossible for a movie to get away without at least one gory scene... this movie has none.
The true terror and horror comes in the form of a Spectacular Mansion on an isolated road on the banks of a lake. It's state of the art, huge glass windows, open plan to the extreme.
The babysitter (Jill Johnson) comes over, meets the Mandrakis's and they leave, and she's all alone with the kids upstairs sleeping. The house is so state of the art, that she's unable to even work out the 4 remote controls and what they turn on!
The night turns dark and gloomy, the wind picks up and all of a sudden the weather seems to turn the night alive... branches scrape the windows... doors and floorboards creak...
One very clever tool the Director uses is that although the phone rings all the time, you only ever hear "The Strangers" voice 3 times... and that adds to the tension... a great deal is left to the imagination in that regard. I think had you heard "him" all the time, the tension would have been reduced.
Add to this a few other elements, including a cheating boyfriend, a bitchy best friend who cheated with the boyfriend, a dad who's grounded Jill from using the phone, trying to reconcile her relationship and all the elements are in place for a clever story.
The director really plays the "smart card" with using an unknown yet attractive cast, and uses the "technology era" to his advantage... cell-phones, caller ID, rooms that illuminate when you walk into them, alarm systems that "go-off" for no reason... and you have 85 minutes of non-stop on the edge of your seat thriller.
Camilla Belle is excellent in the roll. An unasuming teenager, naive and sporty, she's very attractive but doesn't flaunt it... she's has a strong character and stong morals... and that adds to highten the terror with what she is about to contend with through the "4 hours" the Mandrakis's are at dinner and a movie. You really feel for her and she portrays exactly what the "average" teen would go through and how they would react - not what "dumb teens" do in the big Blockbuster Horror flick.
I loved the fact that this film had as much "kick" as the R Rated Slasher films that get churned out every weekend... it's only got a PG-13 rating but I'm glad to see that brains and clever direction outway 20 inch knives hacking away at teenage flesh. The Stranger is spectacularly creepy and his arrival picks up the rev counter... he's just a "sicko" who likes to play "cat and mouse games" with his unsuspecting prey. He reminded me of a "Michael Myers" type... hiding in the shadows. You never see his face or features until the final "drive by" scene (which must be one of the most haunting images I've ever encountered). He's really tall and big but at the same time swift and agile!
I really hope that West decides to remake the sequel "When a Stranger calls Back" and weaves his magic for a second time!
Expect loads of hair standing up on the back of your neck, shocks and jumps.
Interestingly enough the credits bill "The Stranger" and "The Strangers Voice" as two different people, but the voice is unmistakable and creepy - that of Lance Henriksen.
This is a GREAT FILM, and well worth a spot in your collection!
Movie Review: Good Build up, Faulty Ending. 68 out of 100.
Summary: 4 Stars
Before I start my review, please note that I am not comparing this movie to the 1979 version. I see a trend on these reviews to hammer this movie with negative reviews because it wasn't the same as the 1979 version. Things get better with age, and we all want our era to be better, right? Well, the positive reviews seem to be from younger folks who haven't seen the first movie. So...I am reviewing this movie on the only grounds it should be reviewed, and that is: how good was it?
The first hour of When a Stranger Calls was wonderful. The buildup was intense, and Camilla Belle made you feel the fear and terror of Jill Johnson quite well. I thought the acting was way above par for a movie of this type.
I can't say I recall a movie in the last twenty years that had me checking every background shadow, and studying silhouettes waiting for them to move. When a Stranger Calls did this to me, and I enjoyed every minute of it...or should I say I enjoyed the first 60 minutes of it?
Spoilers below...
After the first hour the movie collapsed quite fast. Things that were foreshadowed never really came to fruition. Jill Johnson was a runner, and you expected a scene in which she sprinted away from the killer. Never happened. Also, Jill's on-again-off-again boyfriend never made an appearance at the home. Another surprise was that the cat didn't play a creepy role after the first 20 minutes. The only purpose of foreshadowing in this movie was to trick the viewer. I didn't like being tricked.
Anyway, the end went by quick. I was disappointed by this. It still was a great flick, any well worth watching, but the end could have help us in suspense for at least 10-15 more minutes. I wanted more scenes after the killer was revealed. Sadly, this didn't happen. Bam. Boom. Bing. Killer, a few small chases, and its over.
Also, the ending scene at the hospital screamed "we don't know how to end this movie without a cheesy cliche" so we'll just made up something cheesier.
I liked When a Stranger Calls, but it could have been much better. Many of the aspects were better than the 1979 version, except for the end.
Total Score (out of 100) = 68
37 (out of 50). Enjoyment. A rating based on my overall enjoyment of the film.
8 (out of 10). Acting. How good was the acting?
8 (out of 10). Immersion. Did the movie suck me into the story?
8 (out of 10). Intangibles. Special effects. Movie pace. Is the movie forgettable, or something you will talk about and remember for weeks? Years?
6 (out of 10). Must see. Is this movie worth seeing/renting?
1 (out of 10). Must buy. Is this movie a must buy/purchase?
Movie Review: "Have You Checked the Children?"
Summary: 4 Stars
This movie, based on a classic urban legend about someone being inside the house making scary phonecalls, dates back many years. In this remake of the 1979 classic starring Carol Kane, Camilla Belle takes on the role of Jill Johnson and faces the urban legend head-on.
Jill has ran up a tremendous amount of money on her cell phone bill. As such, Jill's father tells her she must earn money to pay back for her overused minutes. So, she decides to babysit for a wealthy doctor and his wife. Jill is already in a bad mood after being told that she has lost her car and phone privileges for a month, so she's hoping for a quiet night when she arrives at the house.
Everything seems pretty normal at first. The kids are already in bed, having been battling the flu, the fridge is fully stocked, there's a wide-screen tv, and a remote control fireplace. Jill settles in for an uneventful night. However, that soon changes as the phone begins to ring. Jill answers, but no one is on the other end. Believing it was a prank, she disregards it. But soon, it happens again. Then again. Then again. By now, Jill has become very nervous and upset, especially when the caller asks if she has checked on the children.
Immediately, she rushes to the bedroom. To her relief, she finds them safe, but by now she's totally freaked out. She decides to call the police, but they tell her that they can't do too much to help her, but they will monitor the phone lines and keep in touch. She's also told to keep the caller on the line for at least 60 seconds so they can trace the origin of the call.
Unsurprisingly, the caller calls back, and Jill does her best to keep him on the line. Upon hanging up, the police call back to let her know that the calls are coming from inside the house. Stunned, Jill rushes to collect the children and get them safely out of the house, but they encounter the caller himself. Now begins a chase to survive. Will Jill and the children survive, or will the caller catch them?
This is a pretty good rendition of the earlier film. However, I felt Carol Kane did a better job as Jill. The earlier film was more suspenseful than this version as well. However, this movie is still scary and loaded with suspense. I thought Camilla Belle does a pretty good job as Jill. But,at only 87 minutes in length, a lot of the story is cut short. I believe the movie would have been better if it would have been longer and the chase between Jill, the children, and the caller could have been developed a little bit better. Still, this movie is worth watching, especially if you saw the original film from 1979.