Haunting in Connecticut (2009)

Cinefantastique Online 9 of 10
"The Haunting in Connecticut" is a film I had assumed would be another ridiculously overdone Hollywood production, along the lines of Jan de Bont's terrible remake of "The Haunting" (1999). Instead, to my surprise and delight, it is exactly the opposite: a beautifully crafted little gem of a movie that harks back to the more subtle and poetic ghost stories that have always defined the very best in the genre - Movies like "Jack Clayton's The Innocents" and "Robert Wise's The Haunting." As in both of those films, first time director Peter Cornwell seems to realize that in this area, as Christopher Lee points out, less is more. As a result, we have one of the scariest haunted house movies to grace the screen since "Poltergeist"...What is also especially remarkable about the film is the solid technical craft it displays, on what must have been a fairly limited budget by today's movie-making standards. I've certainly never heard of any of the behind-the-camera talent before, but they all contribute work that seems as if it were turned in by veteran Hollywood experts. For example, I could have easily mistaken the beautifully precise editing of Tom Elkins to be the work of Dede Allen. The moody and dark cinematography provided by Adam Swica, compares quite favorably to Freddie Francis's shadow play in "The Innocents." The set designs of Alicia Keywan make the house as memorable a character to the story as the much larger Gothic mansion designed by Elliot Scott for "The Haunting." Perhaps best of all, the score by Robert J. Kral wraps the entire production up in exactly the kind of lyrical quality needed, before abruptly switching gears to a sudden dissonance that will jolt viewers out of their seats. Since Kral studied under Jerry Goldsmith, it appears he has picked up some key ideas from the Maestro. - Lawrence French
 
Chicago Sun-Times 7 of 10
"The Haunting in Connecticut" isn't based on just any old true story. No, it's based on "the true story." That would be the case of the Snedeker family, who in the 1970s moved into a ghost-infested house in Southington, Conn., and had no end of distress. We know their story is true because it was vouched for by Ed and Lorraine Warren, paranormal sleuths who also backed up Bill Ramsey, a demonic werewolf who bit people; "The Amityville Horror," and the story of Jack and Janet Smurl, who inspired "The Haunting."...Matt, the Campbell's son, is dying of cancer and must be driven miles for his radiation treatments. Madsen makes an "executive decision" to buy a house in the distant town so Matt, with radiation burns and nausea, doesn't have to drive so far. If the movie has a flaw, and it does, it's too many Surprises. Every door, window, bedroom, hallway, staircase, basement area, attic and crawlspace is packed with Surprises, so that it's a rare event in the house that takes place normally. The Campbells are constantly being Surprised, so often they must be tuckered out at day's end from all of that running, jumping and standing real still...But I must not be too harsh, because Surprises are what a movie like this trades in. Koteas does a great job as the priest, who was not a ghostbuster in a Roman collar but a fellow radiation patient who never looked like he was confident good would win out in the end...So. A preposterous story, so many scares they threaten to grow monotonous, good acting and filmmaking credits and what else? Oh, what's with the ectoplasm? Didn't Houdini unmask that as a fraud? And didn't the Amazing Randi? And what's it doing still being treated as real in the true story? - Roger Ebert