Being scared is not fun for everybody. The horror movies genre has its addicts and fans, but also its haters or people who just avoid watching. I believe that with ‘Sinister‘ directed by Scott Derrickson in 2012 we face one of those cases of a film that spectators who love or at least can live with the genre will like, while people who dislike horror movies would better be advised to skip it.
The story in ‘Sinister‘ fits into one of the most used patterns. A family which seems ‘normative’ by all criteria moves into a new house. It will soon be clear that the family is not that normative (the father makes a living from writing about sordid true crime stories) and that the house is also marked by having been a crime scene in the past. What is different in this film is that the fight between sanity and horror, between the tentative to explain things by logic and the powers of darkness is well described and the gradual fall in fear that happens in almost any good horror film is described in a credible manner. There is logic in what happens on screen, but this is the logic of horror films, and the viewers need to accept the rules in order to enjoy.
What I liked. ‘Sinister‘ follows the rules of the horror movies and the script graduates well the slow transition between ‘normal’ and ‘horror’. Ethan Hawke gives a good performance of the writer trying to rationalize what happens to him and to his family and fights the occult with the wrong tools. The use of 16mm film to bring back the crimes of the past is a nice idea, and never has a box with film reels looked so frightening. Much of the film action takes place deep in the night, and the cinematography is adequate.
What I liked less. I am always uneasy with kids in horror movies. I guess, however that this is part of the typical scripts in the genre or sub-genre. I also found the other characters and especially the wife (Juliet Rylance) too schematic.
Fans of the genre will probably love this film. Most of the other, better chose something else.