|
||||||||||||||||||||
When a Stranger Calls - Review
Rated: PG-13 Distributor: Screen Gems Release Date: 2006-02-03 Starring: Camilla Bell, Tommy Flanagan, Tessa Thompson, Brian Geraghty, Clark Gregg, Derek de Lint, Kate Jennings Grant, David Denman, Athur Young, Madeline Carroll, Steve Eastin
Directed by Simon West
Produced by John Davis, Wyck Godfrey, Ken Lemberger
Written by Jake Wade Wall
Visit the movie's Official Site!
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider helmer Simon West steps into the PG-13 horror genre directors chair to deliver one of its weakest entries yet. It's the story of a teenage babysitter named Jill (Camilla Bell) tasked with hanging out at a lavish house in an isolated location and watching kids until their parents get back. She's not there long before she's frightened by a cat, and the creepy music starts there and never stops. But there's nothing to justify all the scary background sounds, as Jill wanders aimlessly through her employers' well appointed house doing nothing. Eventually, the phone rings and on the other end is a lot of heavy breathing. Jill hangs up, but it keeps ringing and so she keeps answering. Who is this creep on the other end of the phone? Is it her boyfriend? Her spazzo, party-whore girlfriend? Hold on, she's got to take a break to get scared by an icemaker. If you've seen any of the trailers, then it's not a spoiler to tell you that the strange caller is actually in her house. But the movie takes its time getting there, and to make up for it tries to find scares in the completely mundane existence of lavishly wealthy rural living. This type of in-house scaring has been done better, even recently, in movies like The Glass House and last year's Hostage. When a Stranger Calls brings nothing new to the table, and screws up a lot of the good stuff that's already been done before. Perhaps it seems old hat because this is a remake of a 1979 pseudo-thriller of the same name. The difference? That movie was at least rated R, allowing the possibility, however slim, of actually being scared by something. It also doesn't help that the premise of the 1979 film, is now a pop-culture cliché. The creepy prank caller secretly hiding inside the babysitter's house has been done, and done to death. If When a Stranger Calls didn't have anything new to heap on the premise, then what's the point of remaking it? The only conclusion to reach here is that Sony knows brain dead, shrieking, underage girls have disposable income and they want it. They'll get it, but not without boring everyone else.
Image Gallery for When a Stranger Calls
     Comment on “When a Stranger Calls”Note: This website is not meant for use by minors. The views expressed in the comments section below are not our own. This section is intended for discussion of the topic in the post above. Disagreement is encouraged, however comments which attack, insult, or threaten the author in a personal manner won't be published. Similarly, comments that we deem to be poorly worded, or wildly off topic will also not be approved and may be mocked. For free, uncensored, unfettered, and possibly dangerous discussion visit our forum.Leave a ReplyMAIN SITE NAVIGATION
HOME l ABOUT US l l SEARCH l MOVIE NEWS l MOVIE REVIEWS l MOVIE PREVIEWS l DVD REVIEWS l DVD NEWS l SOUNDTRACKS l FEATURES DATABASE l TELEVISION l MUSIC l GAMES l CELEBRITY l TECHNOLOGY l RSS 2.0 FEEDS l MESSAGE BOARDS l LIVE CHAT l SYNDICATE US l LINKS | CB STORE | MUNCH MONSTER This site is operated by Cinema Blend LLC. For advertising inquiries, contact Gorilla Nation. CinemaBlend.com is a private, independently owned website which is intended only as entertainment. The views expressed on this website may or may not reflect those of its owner. Don't take us too seriously. Made in Webta Labs 
|
|
May 6th, 2007 at 13:41
This was a stupid movie. I just saw it and the ending was what... 4 minutes? And ending to an hour and a half of yawns. Good movie.... NOT! Pathetic little girl, obviously stupid, cant hold a phone, doesnt know the kids names, Doesnt know what a kid looks like, doesnt know where the house is, shows face to killer, stays in the house, looks around amlessly and has bad responses to dead friends and gardeners isnt really my type. Mainly because i like good movies. And this, would never fall into the catagory of 'Good Movies'. If i was the actor, id soon call the man, ask him to come round and kill me. Bad things added:
-The lights dont turn on EVERY time she walks in.
-Her hair doesnt blow in the wind.
-Girl is a terrible actor.
-Parents give all these numbers yet everyone's phone is off and the police get to the house about 40 minutes later then expected.
-Girl walks around aimlessly for an hour.
-NO ONE but the police have good connection.
-The father tells the girl that she has a ban from the phone yet when she leaves he goes 'call me if you need me'
Coincidences
-The father ban's girl from phone and car even though shes baby sitting.
-All friends know the number of house.
-Girl doesnt know kids names.
-For about 3 hours in the movie the girl doesnt do anything but walk around the house and read about 4 words from her book.
-Doesnt check on kids till a complete stranger tells her too.
-The police say 'Stay calm, its ok' in one convosation and in another he yells 'GET OUT OF THE HOUSE!'
-The parents dont say thank you to the baby sitter or even pay her!
-Showing the killers face it took 3 minutes as he drove past.
- The police said whilst leaving her 'You'll be fine' and the next scence shes in a hospital.
-Terrible ending.
We all know it and im sorry for people who wasted their money, you were better off taping the add and replaying it over and over again.
The add was scarier the movie.
Truth hurts. Email me with all the ' God you suck' comments.
Thanks for nothing. Kat