Really, where's the logic? A wealthy American woman finds a burned door in the woods and how the last homeless woman drags her to her home. The nurse keeps us from starving! After such a plot twist, the whole film loses intrigue and turns into garbage, although the title and the first minutes of the film inspired something optimistic. Then more. As usual, with the appearance of a foreign object in the house begin to happen mystical things. A dead girl from The Call appears and wanders around, scaring the public. As it turns out, behind the door lies evil, feeding on the souls of children. Just like that, because baby showers are a delicacy for him. And now, when the son of the owners disappears behind the door, a strange medium appears, which caused evil to be defeated.
Throughout the second half of the film, we watch the duel of the medium and the forces of evil taking place in the night forest at a cozy table. It must be said that the psychic is quite charismatic and can be in line with the mediums from the Ghost and Poltergeist. So plus the movie. Probably the only one. The atmosphere of the film is quite scary, until there is obvious plagiarism from The Call and Poltergeist. A little atmosphere is saved by a mystery with the name of the guard, but exactly until the moment when the guard begins to respond in a high female voice. If it were a parody, it would be funny. But no. As a result, we have a strange mix with a swing at a place in history, but in fact the idea dies in plagiarism and illogicality of action.
1 in 10
Ball for the nigger, and he was tired of playing. Lotman at one time did a study that Russian fairy tales differ from Western ones in that in our culture Ivan Durak eventually cheats Devil and does not fulfill his obligations under the contract. In Western folklore, it is forbidden to break a contract. This difference is expected to have a significant impact on the economies of countries.
The best open door in my memory was only Stephen King. His book saga, The Dark Tower, is teeming with portals to other worlds that open with the turn of a pen. How wonderful it would be to take the plot of this stupid debut from the head of nouneim Billy Chase Gofort, to shrug off the “water” and emptiness, to leave only the essence and put in King’s head, so that he, like in the good old days, wrote a frightening story, which definitely does not need special effects. But we live in a world of evil, obscurantism and ugliness, where the potential of a suitable idea is destroyed at the root with amazing ease, and the unimaginable weight is a constant lot of creators of mostly good works.
Imagine turning on the TV ten years ago and hitting the three hundred and six hundred and nine hundred midnight channel, where the screening is usually interrupted by a church advertisement against masturbation. You will see the same thing here. It's not even the catastrophic laziness of the entire crew. Laziness is when you repeatedly fall asleep, but at the time of gas release you make a small effort, push and at least give out a presence on the site. The guys involved here are more in need of rescue. Everyone except a woman with a flashback and a black psychic: the first just got into the wrong movie and clearly underestimated her acting abilities, and the second staged such a clown that he gave birth to a new phobia about communicating with too understanding hearing impaired people. The rest need to inject something – if not adrenaline, then at least some sugar to restore energy. Perhaps that’s why it’s so illogical to punish a child for being bullied at school. Or, God forgive me, picking up some damn door out of some goddamn forest. Or talk on a phone put upside down to your ear. A person who feels good will surely wonder if everything is going right.
Most of all, the operator needs rescue. Having fixed the camera on a tripod, he then runs away, then produces a monstrously slow panorama or zoom, literally millimetric, as if trying to tell us something. For example: “Save me, I am paralyzed!” It seems that what is happening not in the plot itself, but in its creation is much more interesting than the whistling of a grief-family around an interior object. Who needs it anyway? One and a half hours of obscurantism, over which nothing was tried, they did not even try. You think it'll be scary? We have comedy rather than horror. But you still think it'll be funny? Not every parody is amusing. But is this the parody we are used to? No, because the creators did not expect to give birth to either a parody or a comedy, but they so spoiled the potential of horror, putting serious eyebrows to a crack in the forehead that the film simply does not have a single chance to join any genre.
There are failures: here I tried to do normally, but screwed up. It's harder. He believed that you were doing great things, forbade himself to turn it into a joke, but stood still, drooling. I have nothing against Billy Chase Gofort, because I’m not at heart who he is, but I would sincerely like to know whether Door in the Woods was conceived as a prank or Billy was hoping to make a movie. What does the movie look like in Gofort’s view? After all, “The Door in the Woods” can not even be called a tresh: for tresh, inventive tin is not enough (sorry, that is, it does not exist at all). It's a knee-jerk misunderstanding that doesn't have a budget for special effects, it doesn't matter, Michael Bay lives on the other street. It turned out to be nothing even for excessive twitching of wrinkles on the faces in the frame. Or to hire a more lively camera engine. Or ... (the illumination of death is like) ... Stop! Bingo! One hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars is the cost of the door? Okay, now I get it. No more questions.
I would never have been interested in this film without its title and description. I have to admit, it sounds very interesting, and gives something similar to the works of Stephen King.
Unfortunately, after watching the film, there was a disgusting feeling of ruined potential, because something really interesting could turn out, and it turned out some second-rate craft, which managed to call a horror film.
A painfully illogical plot, not the best disclosure of some characters, a terrible disclosure of the motives of this most evil spirit, to which almost the entire plot of the film is devoted, a disgusting second part of the film, in particular the final ' monologue' with a demon.
The main illogicality is that this very door from the woods at all wanted to drag to their home. Yes, they showed that a woman likes to make various crafts from wood, likes to cut and similar things. But even against the background of this explanation, the fact that a seemingly more or less prosperous family with money to live, dragged home some unknown door, which is also hung with chains, which also stands in the middle of the forest! If the main character is fond of any occult and magical theme, then she, accordingly, must understand that something is wrong with this very door in the forest!
Not the best disclosure of the character of a black shaman in a white suit, and a hat Crocodile Dundee. They gave a very superficial idea that they hired this psychic shaman with the help of an ordinary poster. But as the film progresses, this character appears several times, and from the very threshold he is aware of what is happening in the house of the main characters.
The transformation of a husband from an unbeliever into all these ' fairy tales' a psychic into a person sitting still and listening to spells is shown very poorly. So he just started to believe and that's it, there's no transitional phase of anything.
The terrible revelation of the evil spirit’s motives is that it is not clear why he kidnaps children. He is evil, therefore he kidnaps, but why is he evil?
For comparison, take not the best film with the participation of Nicholas Cage- 'The Gates of Darkness'. A similar concept, there is something evil that kidnaps children, as the plot reveals both the history of evil and its motives.
In the case of 'The Door in the Woods' a small story of the house in which this very door stood is revealed. But they do not really make it clear what caused the appearance of this evil spirit. If you tried to create mystery - it did not work, it turned out just a huge understatement and a hole in the plot, which the audience has to think up themselves.
The final scene, about 15-20 (!!!) minutes, looks incredibly stupid. The dialogue of a black psychic with an evil spirit looks incredibly dull and uninteresting, this is probably the worst moment and, to put it mildly, not the best film. Dialogue looks bad primarily because it creates a feeling that the psychic is talking to himself, because we simply do not give the slightest hint of what the evil spirit is saying.
Then begins an incredibly stupid moment with 'Ouigi Board' where the main character from memory, lipstick, draws on the board all the letters in the right order, and creates a kind of artisan copy of the board.
It says the finale should surprise. But it didn't cause any "Wow-Effect" & #39;. I just saw him, said OK, exhaled with relief that this movie was finally over, and went about my business.
Nothing can be said about acting. There is nothing particularly remarkable, nothing particularly disgusting or remarkable. In general, it becomes all the same to the acting game, when you realize how crazy are the events that occur on the screen.
It is also unclear why this film is classified in the genre '. One, two really scary moments, everything you see in this movie. And frightening is an exaggeration. Such ' Scarecrows' you've seen thousands of times in other more popular films. They are no longer surprising.
Bottom line: A good idea could turn out something like a good gloomy story, which would scare with its atmosphere and aggravation of the situation, would press on the nerves of the viewer. And it turned out, unfortunately, only a second-rate film, with ridiculous disclosures of evil motives, superficial disclosure of some characters, ridiculous second part of the film, and illogical actions of the characters. The film can not even be classified as a genre ' Horrors'. So if you are a sophisticated lover of tickling nerves, there is nothing to catch, you will only be disappointed and waste time.
3 out of 10
The title "Door in the Woods" was clearly meant to evoke an association with "The Cabin in the Woods" and, accordingly, attract viewers. However, between the “Hut” and the “Door” – a chasm in all respects.
The story. A family settles in a new place: a working husband (Snell), a wife (Matus), prone to mysticism and spending money on esotericists, and a child student of junior classes. One day, walking through the forest, they see a freestanding door, wrapped in chains, with a huge lock. Having installed the door of the house and removed the chains, they open the door to the otherworldly.
The plot is striking lack of logic. First of all, the main character. If you believe and are fond of all the supernatural and otherworldly, then why do you not surprise the door of a creepy kind with chains in the forest and why take it home, paint it red and install it in the house?
In addition to the above, a long part of screen time is devoted to communication with the otherworldly specialist performed by S.J. Jones. However, his dialogues with the otherworldly are of no interest, since for the viewer they sound like a monologue (we cannot hear what they say there.). As a result, it looks rather ridiculous on the screen.
In general, the film is not the best representative of mystical thrillers.
3 out of 10
A year before this film, a horror movie with the same name was released, where children find a door in the forest, open it, a bloodthirsty monster comes out of there, fight it until they are driven back in. “Door in the Woods” by Billy Gofort is completely different, frightening not with computer graphics, but with its realism. Yes, the standardity of the plot has not gone anywhere: the child is kidnapped by evil forces, and the parents are trying to extract him, but the production toolkit deserves applause. The originality of this horror is that it is told in the language of modern esotericists.
Mystical literature of all kinds has so flooded the book market that it has even displaced sentimental novels from the shelves. Therefore, lately everyone will probably be familiar with the paraphernalia of out-of-body experiments of Castaneda, Blavatsky, Mainrink and others: alphabet boards, knocking on the table, automatic writing, tarot cards, etc., etc., etc., etc. We are so used to them that when we look at them, we forget which side of the universe they are connected with. And then Gofort gives us a surprise, making these things really creepy, which I think they should be.
Of the advantages, it is also worth noting the unusual approach to the antagonist of the picture. In ordinary horror films, they do not bother with prescribing evil characters. For example, in the above mentioned film. Evil in horror is Evil. Some monster or evil spirit who has certain rules of conduct and the only motivation is “because he is evil.” In Gofort, the main villain has a goal, for it he manipulates people and for it he does some things in our world. It’s great from a dramatic point of view, but I just wanted to point out the minus of the picture – this side of the script is not worked out enough. Yes, it is, this is what distinguishes it from other horror stories, however, when we realize this, then with our viewer’s mind we understand the enormous potential of such a concept and expect from the plot the corresponding scope. After all, so many plot twists can be invented, so many scraps to invent... But no. The ambitious evil spirit is limited to down-to-earth career lusts, and instead of interesting worked-out characters in the film, we are waiting for the standard family of “immigrants looking for their place in the world”, as in any indie thriller before and after “Door in the Woods”. Therefore, the first third of the film will have to suffer the boring banality of acquaintance with those whom we will not empathize with, and after that plunge into the ingenuity of the director, who gave us an unusual and exciting spectacle.