|
Synopsis:
 1408 is the story of Mike Enslin, a
writer/investigator of paranormal activities who pens
multiple docudrama books about his encounters with
places who are supposedly haunted. His latest book
needs a good closing chapter and after receiving an
intriguing postcard in the mail, he sets his sites on
a room at the Dolphin Hotel, room 1408. This room is
the site of multiple deaths and off limits to the
public. Samuel L Jackson plays Gerald Olin, the hotel
manager who is the token character to warn the lead
about the dangers that may ensue should he choose to
sleep in the room for a night. No one has lasted more
than an hour, he warns. Eeewww...scaaaary!
The Freak's
Rating: B- :
1408 has all the thrills and chills you'd expect.
The storyline is intriguing and the lead character
semi-engaging (though his backstory is pretty lame
and predictable). I'll admit, when the first scares
start coming, my blood got pumping and I became
excited about being scared. I think after the first
couple scares I even paused and asked Jen if she was
sure she didn't want to watch it. The trouble is
that the scares weren't jolting and were
very inconsistent. Most times I didn't jump at all.
Many of them were recycled from many great horror
movies past. How many times can you we see a
transparent ghost and still be frightened? The
movie's one original attempt at a scary character is
completely unexplained and out of place. Watch for
it, you can't miss it. If you understand it, please
let me know. That isn't to say that there is no
originality here, just not enough to call it unique
(as some filmgoers have). UPDATE - Just saw the
director's cut of the film...nothing lost. In fact
the alternate ending was MUCH worse.
No big-screen adaptation of a Stephen King book will
equal The Shining. Nothing will come close to
Christine, Cujo or Misery. The best you can hope for
is an equivalent to Shadowwalkers, and 1408 at least
beats that one. 1408 is worth checking out, and I
may watch it a time or two more.
Angie's
Rating: C : I have to admit, in a
deserted theater with a jumpy movie buddy
this movie seemed a lot more suspenseful.
(sp?) So when I walked out I was a little
more satisfied with the experience, but
don't get me wrong I still didn't want to
see it again. Also, I did not read the
short story by S.K. I'm glad I didn't since
it probably would have made the review a
little worse from me. I think this movie
works because John Cusak (sp?) is the usual
suspect in anything romantic and
heartwarming. Automatically the audience
wants him to live and feels his misery.
Also the scariest part is something I could
not ever figure out why they put in the
movie in the first place... it made no
sense. Overall, it's not one that I would
recommend you rent or buy, I just don't have
strong feelings one way or another.
Although, if you have read the short story,
I have heard that people "hated" the
movie.
Scott C's
Rating: C : Once again, something gets
lost in translation from the Stephen King
short story (from which this is adapted) to
the big screen. I can't fault John Cusack
for not saving this movie, quite the
contrary, it was one of his more enjoyable
performances recently in my opinion. I feel
it's hard for a screenwriter to capture that
quality of fear that only a reader can
produce in his/her own mind after reading a
King novel/short story.
Sebastian's
Rating: B : let's not forget this is
just a horror movie here. i didn't see this
in cinema's, and i didn't expect anything
from this movie. however, its not something
that will make me scared of hotels for the
rest of my life... but it did scare me in
the movie. i jumped a few times then and
there and i enjoyed watching it. i saw the
directors cut and i didn't think it was too
bad. i was glad too see for once a "better"
horror movie these days... cause im quite
sick of these violent B starred zombie
movies. i probably will see it again in the
future. |
