My thoughts on Burnt Offerings

I just finished reading the book Burnt Offerings today and am up for discussing it! I know I said in the last blog post that this one would be about Cedarburg, but I'm doing some research about the town and its buildings first. This time I will be adding a little history to my photos.

So, onto Burnt Offerings. How about that cover? It's intriguing, right?

My Burnt Offerings adventure began when I watched the movie version of it a month or so ago. I saw it being advertised on the Comet channel as a movie coming up. Do you guys get Comet? It's a channel that plays old B-movies and Sci-Fi stuff mostly. It's good for a laugh and the occasional scare. If you'd like to get a glimpse into the kind of channel I'm talking about here:

Comet TV schedule 

So, Comet did a somewhat funny ad for the movie version of Burnt Offerings and I was intrigued. I always like a good haunted house story. But Comet being Comet, they only said the movie would be playing some time that month without giving an exact date and time. So I ended up renting it from the library.

The first thing I noticed before watching Burnt Offerings was that an older Burgess Meredith and Bette Davis were in it! I went in to the movie expecting to enjoy watching them and they did not disappoint. They were both perfect in their roles. But beyond that, I had some issues with the stiff acting in this movie. Actually, I had issues with the movie in general. I don't want to give too much away, but I don't think I will by saying that Burnt Offerings was disjointed in parts and not believable to me. I don't expect to believe in every event in a supernatural thriller, but I need to believe in the characters. If I don't think a person would act like what I'm watching, or if I can't connect with the characters,  it's hard for me to get into the movie as it goes along. I cared about Bette Davis' character (Aunt Elizabeth) but that's about it.

Watch out Bette!

OK, really quickly and with no spoilers... A couple (Marian and Ben) their son David and Ben's Aunt Elizabeth are staying for a few months of the summer in what is basically a run down mansion. They were looking for a place to get away, so when they read an ad for this place, which is of course way, way, way out in the middle of nowhere, their interest was piqued.

When they go to check out this big house, they meet an eccentric couple of siblings, who they'll be renting it from. One of these siblings is played by Burgess Meredith, who is hamming up his four minutes in this film big time. It was a highlight.

These two siblings offer Marian and Ben the house for the summer at an unbelievable rate. However, Ben assumes there must be a catch! The catch is, Marian and Ben must look after Mrs. Allardyce, the siblings' mother.

They are told that they must bring Mrs. Allardyce meals of food on a tray and leave it outside her bedroom door three times per day, every day they are there. The siblings tell the couple that they probably won't see Mrs. Allardyce. They say she is a frail 85 year old and just keeps to herself. OK, here is my major complaint (of many) with this movie. Why, oh why, would this couple not ask to meet Mrs. Allardyce before accepting this offer? They're willing to sign on to spend a summer taking care of a giant house and an old lady they haven't met?

Yeah, that's the house.

Well, Marian and Ben take the offer and move in for the summer. Keeping this spoiler free, let's just say things do not go well. There is a supernatural bent to this, and taking care of "Mrs. Allardyce" is the bad idea it sounds like. I'll also say that I'm 50/50 on the end of the movie. There is one moment at the end that is super for a ghost story and gives me the creeps as I think of it now. But then there is a lot of gratuitous gore, that just leaves you asking "Why?"

I listened to the commentary on this DVD, mainly to give someone a chance to explain why they went the way they did with that ending. The commentary was done by the director, the producer, and Karen Black who played Marian. Karen Black was a nice sounding woman with some stories she remembered from filming this. Here's one that stood out: there's a moment when Oliver Reed, the man who plays her husband Ben in this, keeps turning her away from the camera. It happened again and again, so only the back of her head showed, while he faced the camera. She decided that he wanted to be the only one getting camera time! So, eventually Karen Black asked him to stop so the audience could see her as well and his response was to say nothing and angrily stomp off for some time. And here, I thought their fighting in this movie was an act!

Are we having fun yet?

One thing made clear over and over on the commentary was how the director, Dan Curtis and Karen Black thought the Burnt Offerings book was the most boring thing ever and that this movie was a vast improvement on it. They said they couldn't remember a bit of the book, except for the ending which leaves you wondering what even happened. Well, considering how much I disliked a good part of the end of their movie, I decided to give the book a go. I figured "It can't be worse!" Well, guess what? The book was a ton better! I actually found myself being angry at those on the DVD commentary because of the wrong idea they gave. We're all free to have a different opinion on a book, but why would Dan Curtis want to produce and direct a movie based on a book that he found so forgettable? And why would some dialogue in the book and movie match word for word, if he spaced the whole thing? I actually felt lied to by a DVD commentary, which is pretty strange.

Burnt Offerings the book, by Robert Marasco, was so much more detailed and sensical. I understood the characters and their motives. Events were explained and wrapped up in ways that weren't even attempted in the movie. I liked the characters more and cared about what would happen to them. And far from boring, it was the kind of book that kept me up late at night, quickly turning the pages. Oh, and the end was completely clear! Much more clear than the end of the movie! You even get an explanation for the title in the book. I can only think the people on that DVD commentary were on some kind of ego trip, saying their movie was so superior. After finishing the book today, I wanted to get a time machine so I could go back and somehow get involved with the movie production and make the movie more true to form!

So, meh on the movie, but I recommend reading the book! But just so you know, this isn't a cheer-fest. This story is dark, but it makes you think. It makes you think about materialism and the priority money/things are for some people. In that way, it was a good follow-up to reading Jaws for me. Another book from the 70s that is about materialism and money being some people's main goal, even above their family and friends. Come to think of it, in both stories, some people die because of one person's greed.

An interesting piece of trivia is that Stephen King loves this book. Burnt Offerings was published in 1973 and The Shining was published in 1977. That's something to keep in mind when you notice how much these two stories have in common! (I'm talking about the book version of the Shining more than the movie.) I think Stephen King was pretty heavily inspired! Actually, I just looked that up and read that he was admittedly inspired. The Shining is much scarier to me, though.

So, have any of you read or watched Burnt Offerings? Or maybe both? I'd like to discuss the differences between the two with you guys. Some people say Burnt Offerings was the scariest movie they'd ever seen. I was only scared by that one moment I liked at the end, but the book had me on the edge of my seat. I'd call it a supernatural thriller more than a horror novel, though.

Speaking of the book, I took a few photos inside of it, to take you guys on a trip down memory lane. Well, this first one will probably take you down memory lane. Looks like after 1990, the librarian was scanning the books instead of stamping them. Either that, or no one has checked this out since 1990! I'm trying to remember when they stopped stamping them. You know, I kind of miss the date stamp. It seemed official somehow. 😉

This second photo goes with an older set of memories. Look at all these suggestions for what you could find at the library!

Phonograph Records! I wonder what kind of Government Documents they're talking about. And Sheet Music! I think you can still order that through the library, actually.

As I said before, I'll be working on that Cedarburg post. I picked up a few books about that town and have been enjoying looking at pics of it from the Civil War times! It's mind-blowing to look at photos of buildings from the 1800s that look the same today. To think, I've stood where a horse and buggy can be seen in some of these photos. So, I'll be researching and writing and hope to be sharing that one soon!

Lock your doors. Bolt your windows. Blogging about The Fog:

So I finally got around to watching John Carpenter's The Fog after finding out about it in 2011! I noticed it had taken me six years to see it after linking my recent fog themed blog post to one I wrote in 2011. In that older blog post, I mentioned seeing a trailer for The Fog. To my surprise, I said back then that the trailer looked lame. I say I'm surprised because since then I got it in my mind that I wanted to see The Fog. Who knows. Sometimes a movie can appeal to you when it didn't before. Anyway, I'm glad I gave The Fog a chance, because it ended up being a pretty good old ghost movie.

I'm going to give a short review with my thoughts on the movie, and I'll try to keep it spoiler-free. That shouldn't be too difficult since The Fog rotates around a pretty basic theme. This is a classic ghost story of shadowy figures that have come back from the grave to exact revenge.

In fact, this movie so fits that classic format that it actually starts with a man telling a ghost story to a group of children around a campfire. John Houseman plays the older, man-of-the-sea type and he's perfect for the role. You get the whole premise of why there would be ghosts laid out right away and in that dramatic, campfire manner.

This is one of those movies that has several side plots going at once. So you get to know separate characters and every few minutes you see what they're going through. All the plots relate to events that are happening at the same time.

This movie was made in 1979 and you can see it. There are phones with cords, actual records being played, and radio is a big deal. Also there are situations that while not impossible today, just wouldn't be that common. Like the little boy wandering around on the beach by himself or the casual hitchhiking.

The Fog isn't predictable as far as who the ghosts go after. Well, they're going after everyone, but I mean who they manage to get. Several of the victims were people I liked, while a few annoying characters got through the movie just fine. So it was seemingly random enough in that way.

The Fog isn't going to keep you up at night or give you nightmares, but it's a good, spooky film. John Carpenter says on the commentary that it isn't all that scary by today's standards, but he got lots of letters back in the day telling him not to make scary movies like this. He also mentions that he was asked to make the movie more scary after a preview screening, so pretty much all the jump scares or ghost attacks were added in last minute. I think that might lend to why some of them don't make sense, but that's OK.

The Fog is bizarrely enough Rated R. I have no idea why! There's no drugs, sex, swearing, or anything R-worthy. What violence is there is mostly done in silhouette form in the fog. So I can only guess it was Rated R for being scary? (Scary for its day, in someone's opinion)

I just checked and The Exorcist came out in 1973. That was a million times more scary than this! So, it's not like people didn't know what scary was in the 70s. I don't know... The R Rating is as mysterious as this fog.

Anyway, I do recommend The Fog. It has that classic ghost story feel, and some pretty cool special effects for back in the day. I appreciate those special effects, because I know everything took a lot more work and creative thinking before computers. I watched on the DVD's special features how people were walking around on the set with fog machines, shooting this stuff around. And they had lots of backlit dry ice going, drifting around black plastic. The plastic looked like a landscape. It works!

There are some big names in this movie. Jamie Lee Curtis, her mother Janet Leigh, Adrienne Barbeau, and Hal Halbrook. Jamie Lee Curtis is the casual hitchhiker who has the bad luck of hitchhiking through this town. Although, she does get a boyfriend instantly. So I guess her luck isn't 100% bad.

Janet Leigh is some sort of public official in town. Funny enough in the commentary, they couldn't seem to remember if she was the town mayor or a real estate agent! But she's important enough to be giving a speech for the town's 100th anniversary.

Adrienne Barbeau has the cool looking job of being a radio disc jockey for the night owls. Her show broadcasts from a lighthouse that's in a very remote location. She says groovy things like "Ahoy mateys" in her sultry radio voice.

As I say, it looks like a cool job in a cool location, except that it happens to be right where the fog is rolling in. This is the light house, which as Adrienne says in the commentary had 365 stairs leading down to it or something like that. She couldn't remember, but there were a lot. Realistically, if you were out there alone at night, it probably would be scary.

Hal Halbrook plays Father Malone. He did well in his role. I was hanging on everything he said. If I had to give an award for best acting in The Fog, it would go to him.

It turns out there were several trailers and teaser trailers for The Fog. Some of them are not that great, so that might be why I thought it looked lame in 2011. But this one I really like:

Do any of you remember seeing The Fog? I also saw that there was a remake in 2005. I'm not sure if I want to see it since Horror remakes are usually not my thing. I can't think of one good one offhand! I don't mean sequels, but those movies where 30 years later someone redoes it. I just watched a trailer for the 2005 movie, and nope, I'm still not feelin' it.

I'm open to any other classic old ghost movie suggestions you have!

Conjuring up a scary movie night

After reading an endless amount of positive reviews, I have finally watched The Conjuring!  This in is thanks to Melody who kindly sent me a copy of the movie. I can't believe it took me this long to watch The Conjuring because ghost movies are my favorite kind of horror movie, and I've followed the story of Ed and Lorraine Warren for years. 

For those who aren't familiar with the Warrens, they were a couple who actively investigated many haunted places and possessed people. I believe I read that they had over 10,000 investigations. Ed was a demonologist and Lorraine was/is a psychic medium. After hearing Lorraine interviewed on several podcasts, it was cool to see her portrayed in movie form. I have absolutely no complaints about the actress (Vera Farmiga) who played Lorraine. In my opinion, she looked and sounded really similar to the real deal. She also radiated the kindness that came through in Lorraine's interviews. I can't speak as much for the actor who played Ed, because I've heard more of Lorraine's voice. I can say that he didn't look all that similar to the real Ed. You might recognize that actor (Patrick Wilson) as the same man who played the father in the Insidious movies. I liked him better in this role. He came across as more kind and patient, but then he wasn't possessed in this movie.

I found a really entertaining page of pictures comparing the actors to the real people in the story. Those who have seen The Conjuring are going to be interested in this:

Reel vs. Real Faces of The Conjuring

There's a lot of interesting trivia under those pictures that's worth reading. There are also photos of the house where this actually happened. The house constructed for the movie seemed to be more the director, James Wan's vision than reality. It had some similarities to the Insidious house. That's one of the things about The Conjuring - if you like James Wan's style, you'll like the movie. You'll also notice a pattern. There is a recognizable flow to the action. He knows how to build tension and you'll notice that you have to wait a while for the action. Not that I'm complaining! I think a lot of nervous tension and quiet moments help to produce bigger scares. In fact, my few complaints about the movie involve the scary spirits/demons when they finally do show up! After writing reviews for Insidious and The Woman in Black, I'm noticing that pattern with myself. I'm spooked by the quiet creaking of doors and hints of shadows in the corner of a room, but I'm not too impressed with some bloody, hollow eyed thing leaping out. There was probably another group of people watching The Conjuring who said "Finally!" when the leaping occurred, but I thought the entities were a little over the top. That and why was the ghost of a woman who died shortly after childbirth portrayed as an elderly hag? I guess some might say that it was a demonic entity that chose to show itself in the creepiest way possible. Or maybe she went really prematurely gray...

Aside from those few complaints, I really enjoyed The Conjuring! I'll get into describing the plot in a hopefully non-spoiling way. The movie starts with a snippet of the Annabelle story. Those who know about the Warrens are all too familiar with Annabelle, but for everyone else: Annabelle is a doll. She looked like this in real life:

...and like this in the movie:

You can read more about her here:

About Annabelle

It's an interesting read!

Long story short, Annabelle comes with a few issues. You might think she was possessed, although the Warrens explain that she's more of a conduit for a demon who'd rather possess a human. Annabelle has a small role in the beginning of the movie, which I think was a way of introducing the audience to the Warrens and what they do.

The movie takes turns introducing us to the Warrens and introducing us to the Perrons. The Perrons are a nice family comprised of two parents and five girls. The Perrons move into a new home, knowing nothing about the previous owners or history of the land. The house is of course haunted. The story takes place in the 1970s, and there's a pretty good soundtrack of groovy old 70s songs sprinkled throughout. Someone spent a lot of time collecting 70s decor and clothes for this movie! 

Like Insidious, the stage is set with us watching a fun, pleasant family go about their daily lives. Little things happen here and there, but the family excuses them away. A door squeaks open? It's an old house. One of the girls bumps her head into a dresser repeatedly in the night? She has a pattern of sleepwalking. Carolyn, the mother in the family wakes up with more and more giant bruises on her body every day? It's an iron deficiency. The list goes on and on. After a point, the events become too much to ignore.

I won't give away too many more of these events, because I don't want to spoil the scary bits. The scary bits are for the most part worth waiting for. The timing is perfect. Lets just say that by the time the house has become a chaotic mess of paranormal activity, Carolyn Perron decides to get help. She attends one of Ed and Lorraine Warren's lectures. What's neat is the appearance of the real Lorraine in the audience! I wonder what it was like for Lorraine to watch the actress who was portraying her up on that stage. After the lecture, Carolyn explains to the Warrens that her house is violently haunted. They eventually agree to come over and take a look.

Through Lorraine's psychic abilities and a lot of research, the Warrens deduce what has infested the house. After reading the real history of the place, I was surprised to learn that they actually went light on the ghosts in this movie! Although, if every ghost/event was mentioned this movie would have probably gotten confusing and long winded. Without giving away too many details, I'll just say that a lot is explained, there is a possession, and all hell breaks loose. I've seen a handful of exorcism movies, and this exorcism was handled quite differently. I liked how it was directed. Man, is it scary.

I thought The Conjuring did the Warrens justice. Without being too familiar with the women who grew up in the house, I'm going to guess it did them justice too. I read that all five of them had a part in getting the details right. If you visit the site I linked to earlier, you'll see a photo of every woman who grew up in that house sitting with the girl who played them in the movie. It's fascinating. I wonder if the sisters felt tense watching the movie or if it was healing in some way to get their experiences out there. I can't imagine going through that family's experience.

This movie could be good start to a long discussion. It makes you think about what causes these events. Is it a negative spirit? A haunting? Residual activity from terrible events in the past? A demon? The movie makes you consider the power of faith on negative forces. Ed Warren is forced by the desperate circumstances to perform an exorcism rite, despite not having done so before. He is familiar with the process, but he is not a priest. He does however have a strong faith in God and positive energy. An interesting piece of trivia is that Ed Warren went on to become the only non-clerical demonologist recognized by The Vatican.

Thinking about Ed Warren's exorcism moment in the movie raised another question for me - Could someone who is familiar with, but not formally trained in, performing exorcisms be capable of cleansing a person/place/object? Or taking it a step further, could someone who is incredibly positive but not part of an organized religion successfully exorcise a negative entity/demon? It's food for thought. I'm asking you to consider the possibility of demons and possessions to answer these questions. I've seen some video of and heard some stories about people who were so physically out of control and speaking in languages they never knew, that I had to at least consider that possession exists. I find exorcism stories interesting, and the more of them I hear the more possible possession sounds. At least, I can't think of any better explanation for these events and behavior!

By the way, in The Conjuring the Warrens keep a souvenir from the house and add it to the occult museum they keep in their house. Annabelle the doll lives in a locked case in the museum too. The occult museum really does exist. Here the real Lorraine gives a tour of it:

There'll be scary ghost stories and tales of the glories of Christmases long, long ago!

Merry Christmas everyone!

Tonight's blog post is a celebration of Christmas Eve as it would have been celebrated in the early to mid 1800s. Telling ghost stories was a Christmas Eve tradition at that time. I learned this in the process of the Christmas card and story/poem exchange I planned this year.

I hadn't been aware of the ghost story tradition, aside from that part of the Andy Williams song "It's the Most Wonderful Time of the Year".

There'll be scary ghost stories
And tales of the glories
Of Christmases long, long ago 

I learned a lot more in the process of this exchange.  While looking for a poem to share, I learned a new one. The title of the poem I chose is "Haunted Houses" and it was written by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. I've read the poem to myself several times, because I like it so much. That and I wanted to analyze it. I'm wondering how I'd never read it before!

I also practiced cutting snowflakes for the exchange and learned some new designs, like this cobweb:

Yay! I did it!

Cutting these took a lot of practice! This tutorial and video helped:



You might want to stop and start the video as you try the steps. I decided to cut curves along the outside of my webs after I was done.

On to the Christmas Eve reading!

Longfellow wrote "Haunted Houses" in 1852 so it is in line with the time ghost stories were shared for Christmas. Perhaps someone even read this poem aloud to their friends and family on Christmas Eve long, long ago. I'm going to read it for you now. I made another recording like the one I posted for Halloween. Like last time, you'll only hear me. Come sit by the virtual fire and pretend that it's 1852. Help yourself to some roasted chestnuts and hot cider. I'm going to read you a little poetry!