By Nia Edwards-Behi
We Are Still Here is Ted Geoghegan’s directorial debut and it’s a film that demonstrates some considerable strengths. It’s clear that Geoghegan’s a man with respect for the horror genre as the film offers a haunted house narrative with a degree of intelligence and reverence that it doesn’t always receive. Anne (Barbara Crampton) and Paul (Andrew Sensenig) move into a new house in rural, snow-bound New England to heal and start anew following the sudden death of their son. It’s not long before the couple receives an ominous welcome from their neighbour Dave (Monte Markham) and Anne feels a presence in the house. Believing this to be the spirit of her son trying to make contact, she invites her friends May (Lisa Marie) and Jacob (Larry Fessenden), who are both mediums, to try and get to the root of things. Soon enough it becomes apparent that the presence in the house is not as friendly as Anne might have hoped, and neither are the neighbours.
We’ve often pondered, here at Brutal as Hell, the pros and cons of having particular expectations about a film before seeing it. Perhaps we’ve made our minds up that a film’s going to be terrible before seeing it, or we’ve been so excited for a film that it’s ended up an absolute disappointment. There are all sorts of shades in between, and one of those shades is comparing a film to either another film or to the work of a filmmaker. There’s nothing more off-putting to me than seeing a film hailed as ‘the new’ whatever, or a director as the new someone-else, rather than their own person. Things are not always so extreme, and sometimes just a mention of something can plant a seed of expectation that changes the kilter of one’s appreciation of a film. As such, then, I’m frustrated to say I didn’t enjoy We Are Still Here as much as I think it technically deserved. It’s illogical, I know, but having seen the name Lucio Fulci described as an influence and a comparison in other writing about the film (and I had made sure not to read into too much detail about it!) the film I got was not the film I was expecting.
Now, that’s a criticism of my own faculties, rather than that of the film. There certainly are things that I disliked about the film, or rather that I thought were weaker than the whole, but overall the film is very well made. Geoghegan’s camerawork is delightful, especially when it quite subtly assumes a POV of whatever ghosts or ghouls inhabit the house Anne and Paul have moved into. Crampton and Sensenig are wonderful as the central couple, and my god it’s refreshing to have a middle-aged couple at the centre of their film, and a couple who have lost a grown-up child at that. These little differences in the generic set up make a world of difference and demonstrate the thought that’s been put into the scenario. The horror stuff is extremely well done too – there are a few more jump scares than I think the film needed, but otherwise it builds tension wonderfully and features really great ghost make-up work. The gore, when it comes, is entertaining and brilliantly done, but perhaps not quite in-line with the tone of the rest of the film.
I think that’s where the film fell flat for me. There’s a lot of character stuff in this film, and while for the most part it works, for me May and Jacob made it tedious. I didn’t care for their characters, finding them neither wholly compelling or believable (like Anne and Paul) nor larger-than-life enough to be real comic relief. Instead they were just that annoying level of kooky that made me a bit bored whenever they were one screen. It also doesn’t help that I’ve reached the point where the casting of Larry Fessenden is in itself a bit of a distraction, as it feels like I’ve seen him in a million films this year already. Whenever May and Jacob were on screen, then, I felt like I was somewhat taken out of the film. For all its character stuff, then, the gore at the film’s climax, goes all out, but while Fulci’s gore is lingered on adoringly, the fast editing of We Are Still Here gave proceedings a very different feel. I don’t think Fulci ever spent so much care and attention on his characters, either, so it’s almost like the filmmakers’ priorities are in reverse. That’s as close as I can get to the reason for my overall underwhelmed response to the film.
While the narrative has enough twists to keep it engaging, it’s also quite slight. I can’t help but feel had I enjoyed the scenes with May and Jacob more, this slightness wouldn’t have been quite so noticeable, but as such I was yearning for a bit more meat to proceedings. I’m aware it doesn’t make much sense for me to say that a film which is technically better than a lot of Fulci’s output isn’t as good as the film its drawing a lot of inspiration from – The House by the Cemetery – but that’s ultimately how I felt upon watching the film. As such, I would actually heartily recommend We Are Still Here, which, despite my misgivings, is an impressive debut, but I would urge you all to push Lucio Fulci as far away from your minds as possible!
We Are Still Here is available in the UK for digital download on 12th October, and DVD on 19th October, from Studiocanal. (A Blu-ray edition is available exclusively from The Hut.)