SINISTER opens with an intensely creepy sequence following an intricately planned mass hanging. Initially perplexing, we quickly discover its relevance. A true-crime writer, Ellison (Ethan Hawke), has moved his family into the house of the crime and it wont come as much surprise that inauspicious events begin to occur left, right and centre.

Foremost of these is the harrowing collection of home movies mysteriously placed in the attic. “Who left the tapes?”, “Who made the films?” mumbles Ellison as he surveys the grisly killings. Desperate for another big hit, the writer is sucked head first into the case to both the immediate and likely future detriment of his family. However, as the malevolent figure of Mr. Boogie (see what they did there) continually reappears, the supernatural begins to come to the fore.

To use a football truism for the first and last time, SINISTER is a game of two halves. Having promised so much with the malicious and tense first forty-five minutes, Scott Derrickson’s film finishes with a self-indulgent and crushingly disappointing home-stretch. At its best, SINISTER is an understated horror of ideas. The friction of individual greed and family welfare are intelligently put forward, and behind this are interesting probes into the consequences of viewing and making horror cinema, reminiscent of Cronenberg’s VIDEODROME.

The friction of individual greed and family welfare are intelligently put forward, and behind this are interesting probes into the consequences of viewing and making horror cinema…

However, as the film progresses these ideas become as blatant and unsubtle as Mr Boogie himself, far too often stated explicitly by Hawke and his surrounding characters. The creeping unease of the first act relies on a neat balance of restrained atmosphere contrasted to the brutal and meticulous murders, ghoulishly devoured by Ellison. Yet, the film’s latter section pigs out on CGI, cheap shocks and unexplained twists destroying the mood. Someone should clearly alert modern horror directors that an overuse of pale foundation and mascara does not constitute scary characters.

it’s only because the film promises so much that it ends in such disappointment.

However the biggest problem lies in perspective. The intelligent construction of our lead watching Super 8s allows an interesting viewpoint of both predator and future victim. We feel Ellison’s trepidation first-hand as the house bumps and creeks. We peer into the dark corners just as nervously as him. However, as we begin to see possessed children dancing around in slow motion unbeknownst to our protagonist, we are placed into a third person, away from the drama. Dramatic irony can be effective, but only in moderation and with immanency. This is augmented by the audience moving intellectually much faster than the dense detective. We are so far ahead of him in the mystery that we can’t appreciate his position through all the sighs and groans at generic clichés. It may sound harsh, but it’s only because the film promises so much that it ends in such disappointment. The higher you fly…

httpvh://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVaCOqYLZso